I'll tell you Damo, he's wrong as per usual. David makes wild assertions but never backs them up. His worst (and most unforgivable) was when he said Jayne Tomlinson was faking her cancer. Just don't get on the wrong side of him, that's all I can say.

Anyway, I digress. ALL OVER the board would suggest on every thread rather than starting the one thread like I have done.

Like I say, wild assertions.

It's the key contextual difference between what Clarke questioningly said and what McClennan disgustingly and pointedly said.

The problem for those who cry wolf too often is they are never believed when they are telling the truth.

PERHAPS and HOPEFULLY, McGuire will think twice next time about ordering a stretcher when there's fook all wrong with him like he did at Wembley last month, eh?

Are you really so clueless about rugby that you think McGuire will have ordered the stretcher?

Your comments about McGuire "faking injuries" are far more insidious than Mclennan's comments.

I suspect Geoff's knowledge of the English language is limited to reading the address's on the mail he's delivering, whilst Danny is simply a very immature plonker, in the best Del Boy tradition.

Simples.

Are they more insidious than Clarke's?

Clarke's are fine. Keith's were the most insidious (and he was proven very wrong, sadly) then Mclennan's were the next worse.

Is it perhaps part of your agenda to omit key words and quotations in your responses?

I said [iconsecutively[/i ordered words and the [iappropriate[/i interpretation thereof.

Your confirmed inability to apply any requisite form of appropriate interpretational skills fit neatly alongside your inability to accurately read and respond directly what others have actually wrote.

If you're going to post in such a pompous manner it should have been "[ihave actually written[/i"

HTH

Are you suggesting McGuire wasn't faking it at Wembley?

The order of the words, whether consecutive or not, is secondary to context and meaning when interpreting the meaning of the statement. It can in fact, in a lot of cases be irrelevant.

the fact you use the word appropriate is irrelevant and your focus on it is nonsense

It is perhaps part of your agenda that you have failed to answer why prefacing a statement with an uncertain adverb removes the potential for offence.

I'm not a fanatic and perhaps not even a good supporter these days (compared to my past)....but some on here do seem interested only in parading their majestic self perceived superiority over everbody else. (RL often takes a back seat).

Perhaps [ithey[/i are these "gods of rugby" often now spoken of.... and are now irritated at their cruel dispensing of justice been questioned.

However, ALL gods are superstitious figments of our imagination: they will dissipate and hold no real power if you ignore their dogma.

P.s. McClennan was imbecilic in his reaction: should have waited.

He commands no respect anyway for his persistent inability to drop Diskin (and Kirke) ...and promote Ambler, with Buderus of course promoted to the full 80 mins.