Ryan Hudson, wasn't a known drug cheat when we signed him, big difference, to signing him when it's well known that he cheated with performances enhancers.
Ryan Hudson, wasn't a known drug cheat until we signed him, big difference, to signing him when it's well known that he cheated with performances enhancers.
Errr, No. Ryan Hudson was not known to be a drug cheat when we signed him. That's all there is to it. You signed him full well knowing he was a drug cheat, and that's all there is to that.
Errr, No. Ryan Hudson was not known to be a drug cheat when we signed him. That's all there is to it. You signed him full well knowing he was a drug cheat, and that's all there is to that.
You signed him and then he became a drug cheat, coincidence?
Last edited by pyeman on Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I wouldn't bother reading this bit, there is nothing interesting, witty or insightful down here, just this collection of boring words explaining that you really are wasting your time browsing this signature in the vain and futile hope that there will be a nugget, nay, a veritable goldmine of witticisms or divine philosophy. In reality, all you're going to get is disappointment, a sense of hopelessness and a random word.
Errr, No. Ryan Hudson was not known to be a drug cheat when we signed him. That's all there is to it. You signed him full well knowing he was a drug cheat, and that's all there is to that.
If we give you a gold star and tell you that you are king of the internet, will you go away?
You signed him and then he became a drug cheat, coincidence?
No, we signed him in faith that he wasn't, and fired him when we became aware he was. You signed him to play for you with full knowledge that he was a cheat, same as you did with Chambers.
No, we signed him in faith that he wasn't, and fired him when we became aware he was. You signed him to play for you with full knowledge that he was a cheat, same as you did with Chambers.
And with 1 past-tense word in bold, the case is closed.
No, we signed him in faith that he wasn't, and fired him when we became aware he was. You signed him to play for you with full knowledge that he was a cheat, same as you did with Chambers.
The only club he has been caught taking drugs at is bradford. When he played for us the first time (and wakey) there was no problem, then he played for you (a team with a history of cheating, ie salary cap) and was caught cheating. He serves his time and then plays for hudds and cas (whilst being one of the most regularly tested men in rl) and there is no problem.
So to recap- in two spells at cas, as well as one at hudds and wakey, no cheating.
The only club he has been caught taking drugs at is bradford. When he played for us the first time (and wakey) there was no problem, then he played for you (a team with a history of cheating, ie salary cap) and was caught cheating. He serves his time and then plays for hudds and cas (whilst being one of the most regularly tested men in rl) and there is no problem.
So to recap- in two spells at cas, as well as one at hudds and wakey, no cheating.
One spell at bulls, cheating.
The club he's at when he's caught cheating has nothing to do with it though, it's not a clubs fault a player has decided to cheat the game.
or are you suggesting the Bulls encouraged Hudson to take performances enhancing drugs?
At the end of the day, we cut him when he was caught, you signed a known drug cheat, aswell as offering opportunity to an other
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...