very disingenuous IMO.

Bluey hopes other teams suffers with injuries means exactly the same as Bluey hopes other players get injuries.

He was as guilty as Clarke of whatever it is you lot are getting your knickers in a twist over and he has a greater responsibility than Clarke to the game and the players who play it.

To lambaste Clarke and Defend Bluey is the height of one club hypocrisy IMO.

Just accept that rugby players and ex rugby players are not that bright and sometimes say injudicious things. Don't get your knickers in a twist about it. Relax, cheer for Wigan tonight and hope Saints choose Warrington. The best way for Mr Clark to suffer at the hands of any Rugby Gods is yet another GF elimination defeat at the hands of Leeds. And, if not, then who gives a tuppeny ? Not me, I have a life.

You sure you're qualified to make judgments about that? Still having visions of Phil Daly appearing before you?

I must say I did wonder what all the fuss was about with Clarke's article. Some people need to get a grip.

Clarkey first eh.

You've lost me now.

The notion that Phil Clarke is somehow one of the 'big daft lads' brigade is an interesting concept but not one I entirely follow.

no it doesnt, thats why they are two different sentences with different words and everything

one means to hope the abstract concept of a 'team' suffers in a sporting context

One is to believe that an horrendous injury to an individual fellow human being is the result of divine retribution.

Clarkes idiocy is the kind of nonsense you expect to hear somewhere like the Westboro Baptist Church, Bluey just poorly chose his words. There is no choice of words that would make Clarkes belief anymore palatable.

In fact, if you look up blueys quote you will find it actually says

"It's just the way it goes and we're not going to use injuries as an excuse for our position in the table.
It's part and parcel of the season and other clubs will go through this too hopefully"

It is clear that he is referring to the team dropping points because of injury, and that his hope is other teams drop points because of the injuries which are "part and parcel of the season" not that there are any injuries over and above what would be expected.

do you think it is acceptable view that should go unchallenged that Mcguire 'deserved' his injury as retribution for breaking the rules?

would you feel the same if the same was applied to James Donaldson? even Ian Knott?

Frankly i find his viewpoint too ridiculous to be truly offensive, like the nutjobs who blame the gays for everything from war to flooding, more laughable than anything. But we are on a forum for RL, this guy is a public face of RL, im not sure we should be marching on parliament or anything but theres nowt wrong with a bit of venting of the board

I didn't like that post when I wrote it. It's rubbish.
I had typed a longer more detailed appraisal of how I thought that Phil Clarke was the one who had probably lost all grip on reality and had been frothing for days before he wrote the article (and had probably calmed down quite a bit). I was also going to say that if he had been "BigPhil_Warrior" just another member of RLfans, he would have gone completely bat$h!t all week on these forums calling for the death penalty for McGuire, Bluey and probably Ryan Bailey (why not?).

But I didn't.

Give over. Clarke is bang out of order. People suggesting otherwise are talking b*llocks frankly and are in the 1% minority. I think you'll find most of the Rhinos team won't take kindly to his comments

Clarke's is a d!ck, always has been always will be...!

Maybe Angela Powers needs to get a leash on him...

If you ignore the fact that these "teams" consist of individual players then you might have a point, a tenuous one but a point.

However, these "teams" do consist of individual players who Bluey is "hopeful" will suffer their share of injuries. His "sin" is worse than Clarke's IMO and it's massive hypocrisy to get your knickers in a twist over Clarke and defend Bluey on a technicality.

Clarke is right, Mcguire cheated. Don't know what the problem is to be honest.

Get a grip FFS.

Why? i disagree with your premise but putting that to one side for a moment I would still find it much much more offensive to say that a player deserved an injury than to hope a player is injured so you can win competitions.

even with your (imo incorrect) reading of Blueys statement, bore no ill will to any individual he simply wanted to win, and though insensitive would be simple self-interest.

Clarke believed that as an individual Mcguire deserved a potentially career threatening injury as retribution for his actions.

Will be interesting to see if Phil Clarke ventures over to the southstand for his on-field "expert" analysis prior to kick off on saturday week.