Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 11:52 am  

There have been so many "done deals" claimed regarding Brierley and Leeds which have all proven to be in fact to be wrong that anything is now possible. First it was a "done deal" that he would sign for Leeds if Leigh did not get promoted and when this didn't happen the goal posts moved a bit one way then the other. I lost interest when "the horses mouth" claimed Leeds had signed him last year yet loaned him back to Leigh until 2017 with presumably a post dated cheque to avoid the salary cap?

If this is still the current claim? If the latest leaks from the Brierley camp are to work would it mean a re-loan deal from Leigh or that Leeds will loan him back to ourselves now?

Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:32 pm  

I think there is a little pack of posters who will scrape the bottom any barrel for excuses. But have now moved from their little boyband branding of knownothings to the affectionately named Frostiesbitches. The uncalled for posts at him for just giving information I am sure won't be forgotten, regardless of what transpires, and that is regardless of where Brierley ends up.

Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 5:07 pm  

Gotcha wrote:

I think there is a little pack of posters who will scrape the bottom any barrel for excuses. But have now moved from their little boyband branding of knownothings to the affectionately named Frostiesbitches. The uncalled for posts at him for just giving information I am sure won't be forgotten, regardless of what transpires, and that is regardless of where Brierley ends up.

Nothing wrong with him giving stories he's heard......I just didn't realise we were duty bound to believe them or not question them even when the original story (we'd get him if Leigh didn't get promoted) was one of the most obviously unrealistic rumours I've ever heard on hear yet he kept insisting me and others who doubted him were definitely wrong and then has continually failed to answer the question of why did the original deal change.

Unlike what has been claimed, no one has called him liar. No one has said he's made it up. Just highlighting how some people shouldn't believe every story they hear because then you end up with silly claims like Westerman signing to give Clark lifts over to Warrington and they usually then try and blame the club for their story not happening rather than accept it wasn't true to begin with and that their source could ever possibly be wrong.

Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 5:54 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Nothing wrong with him giving stories he's heard......I just didn't realise we were duty bound to believe them or not question them even when the original story (we'd get him if Leigh didn't get promoted) was one of the most obviously unrealistic rumours I've ever heard on hear yet he kept insisting me and others who doubted him were definitely wrong and then has continually failed to answer the question of why did the original deal change.

Unlike what has been claimed, no one has called him liar. No one has said he's made it up. Just highlighting how some people shouldn't believe every story they hear because then you end up with silly claims like Westerman signing to give Clark lifts over to Warrington and they usually then try and blame the club for their story not happening rather than accept it wasn't true to begin with and that their source could ever possibly be wrong.

and then you and go and prove it again with your last point. Don't feel out of the loop, it isn't your fault,

Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:21 pm  

Gotcha wrote:

:lol: and then you and go and prove it again with your last point. Don't feel out of the loop, it isn't your fault,

Yeah I really wish I was in the loop that claimed Clark needed lifts over to Warrington when in reality he already lives over there, or the now annual "Clark is signing for Leeds next season", or Clarkson is signing for Cas next season and when he moves to Widnes on loan try and claim that proves I was right, or Ferres preferred option was Wigan because he wanted distance when in reality he wanted to be as close as possible and Leeds were always his preferred choice. Never mind Falloon making his debut, I'm still waiting for Danny Haughton to make his debut after he signed last year

Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:33 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Nothing wrong with him giving stories he's heard......I just didn't realise we were duty bound to believe them or not question them even when the original story (we'd get him if Leigh didn't get promoted) was one of the most obviously unrealistic rumours I've ever heard on hear yet he kept insisting me and others who doubted him were definitely wrong and then has continually failed to answer the question of why did the original deal change.

Unlike what has been claimed, no one has called him liar. No one has said he's made it up. Just highlighting how some people shouldn't believe every story they hear because then you end up with silly claims like Westerman signing to give Clark lifts over to Warrington and they usually then try and blame the club for their story not happening rather than accept it wasn't true to begin with and that their source could ever possibly be wrong.

Yes, that was a priceless piece of rubbish from Walter Mittey... Erm I mean, Gotcha.

Re: Brierley. : Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:37 pm  

Gotcha wrote:

I think there is a little pack of posters who will scrape the bottom any barrel for excuses. But have now moved from their little boyband branding of knownothings to the affectionately named Frostiesbitches. The uncalled for posts at him for just giving information I am sure won't be forgotten, regardless of what transpires, and that is regardless of where Brierley ends up.

The excuses have come from those that pass on the misinformation when the "done deal" turns out to be a false claim. You should know this as you have some form in this area yourself. Perhaps why you for once are not jumping in to point out the mistake.

I have not said the stories were made up, in fact I have directed my comments to the horse mouth himself be it the player or his agent who keeps leaking different stories in different directions. If the poster had said 'I have heard a rumour from a good source' then nobody would have been critical.

Re: Brierley. : Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:43 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

Yeah I really wish I was in the loop that claimed Clark needed lifts over to Warrington when in reality he already lives over there, or the now annual "Clark is signing for Leeds next season", or Clarkson is signing for Cas next season and when he moves to Widnes on loan try and claim that proves I was right, or Ferres preferred option was Wigan because he wanted distance when in reality he wanted to be as close as possible and Leeds were always his preferred choice. Never mind Falloon making his debut, I'm still waiting for Danny Haughton to make his debut after he signed last year

You can make as much rubbish up as you like mate, only you look the fool. #frostiesbitches.

Re: Brierley. : Fri Mar 11, 2016 9:00 am  

Gotcha wrote:

I think there is a little pack of posters who will scrape the bottom any barrel for excuses. But have now moved from their little boyband branding of knownothings to the affectionately named Frostiesbitches. The uncalled for posts at him for just giving information I am sure won't be forgotten, regardless of what transpires, and that is regardless of where Brierley ends up.

Am i missing something here? has brierley been confirmed then? all i have ever seen is people doubting Frosties on his said 'done deal'.Why the hissy fit?

Re: Brierley. : Fri Mar 11, 2016 9:02 am  

Biff Tannen wrote:

Am i missing something here? has brierley been confirmed then? all i have ever seen is people doubting Frosties on his said 'done deal'.Why the hissy fit?

It really doesn't matter. The manner in which he has been spoken about is totally uncalled for, by people who know very little, and that is the issue.