Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 7:48 am  

I didn't write a post on here yesterday as emotions with fans on both the Bulls and Wakey were running high.

So here goes all is not lost for the Bulls, there are 12 games to go and 24 points to play for. Wakefield were 6 points adrift when JK came in and we won our last 3 games beating Castleford who were relegated.

The scenario this time not the same but there is more time for the Bulls. Accepting that both Wakefield and Salford will pick up points you need to win I would say half your games. Sunday is a key game for you as you would be 5 behind Salford if you win, that puts them under pressure. If Wakey beat London on Friday and I expect they will then if you lose on Sunday to Salford it makes the hill a bit steeper.

I wouldn't rule Hull FC out of the running yet although they are on 12 points and are more safe that at risk but never say never.

So chins up dig in and get some fire in your bellies look forward not backwards good luck

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 7:58 am  

I'll not embarrass the mods by posting what they actually requested of me, on several occasions. And "warnings" was admittedly a bit strong - they were actually requests, hence Christian's "roll eyes" comment I suspect?

But the gist of what they asked me was to try and avoid giving a certain specific problem poster any excuse to fire off. Which I duly did. Even though said problem poster continued to involve himself in matters that did not involve him and had nothing whatsoever to do with him. And, even then, I refrained from responding, despite repeated provocations.

Sadly, the end result of continuing appeasement is that the good guys eventually get dispirited and fed up, and go away. And you can see above what sort of nonsense you get left with.

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:03 am  

I dont want to go into the ins and outs of it all but I think the demise of the Bulls can be traced back to the signing of Iestyn Harris and the compo you had to pay. It seems from an outsiders point of view that everything bad has stemmed from there.

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:06 am  

altofts wildcat wrote:

I dont want to go into the ins and outs of it all but I think the demise of the Bulls can be traced back to the signing of Iestyn Harris and the compo you had to pay. It seems from an outsiders point of view that everything bad has stemmed from there.

Everything bad in the world ever stems from electing Thatcher in 1979. FACT.

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:08 am  

altofts wildcat wrote:

I dont want to go into the ins and outs of it all but I think the demise of the Bulls can be traced back to the signing of Iestyn Harris and the compo you had to pay. It seems from an outsiders point of view that everything bad has stemmed from there.

So basically it's Leeds' fault that we are in this mess?
I always knew it, bl**dy L**ds.

[Bullseye]

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:10 am  

So is there still a conspiracy to relegate Wakefield?

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:16 am  

debaser wrote:

So basically it's Leeds' fault that we are in this mess?
I always knew it, bl**dy L**ds.

Well no, its whoever made the decision to sign Harris without fully looking into the contracts and agreements that were already in place.

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:17 am  

tigertot wrote:

Everything bad in the world ever stems from electing Thatcher in 1979. FACT.

Some could argue that is when the country changed for the better but lets not go there....

[Pumpetypump]

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:21 am  

Adeybull wrote:

I'll not embarrass the mods by posting what they actually requested of me, on several occasions. And "warnings" was admittedly a bit strong - they were actually requests, hence Christian's "roll eyes" comment I suspect?

But the gist of what they asked me was to try and avoid giving a certain specific problem poster any excuse to fire off. Which I duly did.

Thank you for that. I was feeling a tad misrepresented but I appreciate you clarifying.

Adeybull wrote:

Even though said problem poster continued to involve himself in matters that did not involve him and had nothing whatsoever to do with him. And, even then, I refrained from responding, despite repeated provocations.

Sadly, the end result of continuing appeasement is that the good guys eventually get dispirited and fed up, and go away. And you can see above what sort of nonsense you get left with.

The inaction and appeasement that people perceive to be happening, honestly isn't. I can assure you that PMs fly relentlessly between the mods and the people you may think are being given free reign. I know for a fact that the person you mainly refer to feels quite the opposite and is aggrieved at some of the warnings and bans he has accrued.

Re: Points deduction upheld : Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:23 am  

Adeybull wrote:

I'll not embarrass the mods by posting what they actually requested of me, on several occasions. And "warnings" was admittedly a bit strong - they were actually requests, hence Christian's "roll eyes" comment I suspect?

But the gist of what they asked me was to try and avoid giving a certain specific problem poster any excuse to fire off. Which I duly did. Even though said problem poster continued to involve himself in matters that did not involve him and had nothing whatsoever to do with him. And, even then, I refrained from responding, despite repeated provocations.

Sadly, the end result of continuing appeasement is that the good guys eventually get dispirited and fed up, and go away. And you can see above what sort of nonsense you get left with.

Not even an explanation of why you feel the need to verbally abuse and/or try to censor others. Good guy? Aye right.

No doubt I am the un-named "problem poster" you referred to, and, lets be clear on this, I take people like you to task when you act all "superior" to others, think you have the right to criticise everyone else but nobody is allowed to answer back. Sadly, the last time you got offensive it took me quite some time to ensure that you got a friendly message from the mods because one of them seemed unable to want to deal with you. I wonder why this is?

It was only when one fair minded mod interjected that you got a message (I suspect) but, even then, after I had had a warning for pointing out your abuse and frequent AUP breaches, rather than the offender being brought to task earlier on in the piece.

Don't kid yourself. There is more of a chance that "Christians'" rolly eyes comment was more at utter embarrassment of your comment than anything else.

People like you seem to think that it is only people who get your "seal of approval" that can post on here. I reallly have no idea why? Why on earth anyone would want the Adey seal of approval is a mystery to me. Perhaps they would rather have you inside the tent spitting out than outside the tent spitting in?

Anyway, this post will most likely get removed as I am being critical of the uncriticisable. Thankfully, there are more and more people who can see you for what you really are Adey. You can fool some people some of the time.........