Why would Michael Mcguire comment on something Phil Clarke said about Danny Mcguire?

I just like to draw attention my dignified silence on the relative morality of the bombing of Dresden and other things i had no vested interest in.

Sinfield's turn to chelp away at detractors [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/super_league/leeds/9017390.stmhere[/url

Not sure that "well tough" as a barb aimed at Leeds's detractors qualifies as 'chelping' or 'hitting out at detractors' all good for publicity

As for Phil Clarke's comments...just plain small minded and silly, not really worth getting too steamed up about IMHO

Michael Maguire (as opposed to Michael McGuire) hasn't commented on Danny McGuire (as opposed to Danny Maguire) either.

Please do try to contextually keep up.

If you'd bothered listening to the audio, the "Kevin Sinfield hits back at detractors" headline comes from the interviewer's lead "Some people from the outside are bored of Leeds Rhinos being in the Grand Final...".

Sinfield said that that's understandable, and that's how it felt when he was growing up when Wigan were in the CC final every year, but that it feels different from the inside, and that there are a lot of Leeds-born lads in the camp who are delighted to be in the position where others don't want them to get to the Grand Final because they've been there too much.

So that's what constitutes "chelping away". Do carry on though.

And the context was McClennans comment on Clarkes comment on Mcguire,

Not Mcguire's action. It seems you have changed the context because you see how irrelevant your comparison Michael Maguire was



Any idea why a uncertain adverb removes potential for offence yet?

Try telling the McClennan, Peacock and a host of other Leeds players twittering on about it.

These communal knee-jerk reactions to Clarke's comments are embarrassing.

Phil Clarke by plenty.

Players and coaching staff have more reason to get annoyed as the comments are aimed directly at their personal mate and colleague. If you deconstruct Clarke's witterings the notion he is proposing - that McGuire's career threatening injury is divine justice for an act of pretty minor 'cheating' (it wasn't cheating it was a foul - cheating implies a more considered, less spontaneous act) - then you have to wonder what the eejit Clarke would consider 'justice' for a more major act of real and systematic cheating? Like for example breaking the salary cap? If a club were to do that then all their playing staff and administrators should get the bubonic plague perhaps? As I say not worth getting exercised by...

The context was my comment on Maguire's lack of comment on McGuire's action which generated McClennan's chelping comments on Clarke's comments on the aforementioned McGuire action.



Perhaps the humorous troll nature of Clarke's comments cannot possibly be taken seriously by anyone apart from ts undergoing a sense of humour bypass.

I was aware Phil Clarke was trolling the first time I read his article.

I fully expected a bunch of ts to be foaming at the mouth and chomping upon it.

What I didn't expect was the same ted reaction from the Leeds coach, the England captain and sundry other players on Twitter.

Phil Clarke must be

LMAO at McClennan getting involved.

Has anyone mentioned his comments earlier on in the season to him yet?

With each post you edge further and further towards your previous incarnation.

How long is it going to be before we get the odd ‘Shag’?


BTW