OMG could i have got farmer all wrong

mcadam05 · Post: # 440672Post **mcadam05** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:16pm

On Sen Mark Doren just read out Farmers statement in defence of barks and I must say it nearly brought a tear too this old buggers eye the nuts of it was that Farmer and baks have been fierce opponent's over the last 5yrs and how before and after each game they always shake hands and Farmer said in his heart he knows baks couldnt and wouldnt do anything under handed

bigcarl · Post: # 440675Post **bigcarl** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:17pm

they all say that ... part of the player's code. secretly they want to kill each other

fonz_#15 · Post: # 440676Post **fonz_#15** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:17pm

ummm..mods...baker related thread

Behind Play · Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:17pm

Problem is, it cannot be used tonight..........wonder if Freo new this.

mcadam05 · Post: # 440679Post **mcadam05** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:18pm

Behind Play wrote:Problem is, it cannot be used tonight..........wonder if Freo new this.

it is for tonight

Otiman · Post: # 440680Post **Otiman** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:20pm

I think freo just realised who we are playing this week.

evertonfc · Post: # 440681Post **evertonfc** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:20pm

mcadam05 wrote:On Sen Mark Doren just read out Farmers statement in defence of barks and I must say it nearly brought a tear too this old buggers eye the nuts of it was that Farmer and baks have been fierce opponent's over the last 5yrs and how before and after each game they always shake hands and Farmer said in his heart he knows baks couldnt and wouldnt do anything under handed

Am I the only one who doesn't feel the need to punish himself by reading slabs of unedited text?

A shame - I'm sure there's a lot of good ideas in these jumbled posts.

It's a bit of a slap in the face to other posters who try to use at least some puncuation and grammar.

Are we stupid or something? Or incapable of intelligent and informed debate on this forum? Feels like it.

mcadam05 · Post: # 440682Post **mcadam05** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:21pm

fonz_#15 wrote:ummm..mods...baker related thread

I couldnt help my self

it was right out of the blue really Farmer didnt have too do it but he did and i think we should give him some credit pity i cant link ppl too it

fingers · Post: # 440688Post **fingers** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:26pm

evertonfc wrote:
mcadam05 wrote:On Sen Mark Doren just read out Farmers statement in defence of barks and I must say it nearly brought a tear too this old buggers eye the nuts of it was that Farmer and baks have been fierce opponent's over the last 5yrs and how before and after each game they always shake hands and Farmer said in his heart he knows baks couldnt and wouldnt do anything under handed
Am I the only one who doesn't feel the need to punish himself by reading slabs of unedited text?

A shame - I'm sure there's a lot of good ideas in these jumbled posts.

It's a bit of a slap in the face to other posters who try to use at least some puncuation and grammar.

Are we stupid or something? Or incapable of intelligent and informed debate on this forum? Feels like it.

Oh yeah! I know you are but what am i ?

St. Luke · Post: # 440695Post **St. Luke** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:37pm

Well the scummy AFL has just blocked Farmers letter!

plugger66 · Post: # 440697Post **plugger66** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:38pm

St. Luke wrote:Well the scummy AFL has just blocked Farmers letter!

The Saints lawyers should have known you cannot bring in new evidence at the appeal. I really do onder if we get the best legal advise.

riccardo · Post: # 440698Post **riccardo** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:39pm

Farmer is a scumbag, Helen Demidenko has more writers credibility than he does.

Unimpressed.

St. Luke · Post: # 440700Post **St. Luke** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:42pm

plugger66 wrote:
St. Luke wrote:Well the scummy AFL has just blocked Farmers letter!
The Saints lawyers should have known you cannot bring in new evidence at the appeal. I really do onder if we get the best legal advise.

But this is absurd, because without new evidence we were unable to lodge an appeal??? Isn't this what everyone was told yesterday??? I'm gonna be so pissed off if we're screwed again tonight!

evertonfc · Post: # 440702Post **evertonfc** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:46pm

fingers wrote:
evertonfc wrote:
mcadam05 wrote:On Sen Mark Doren just read out Farmers statement in defence of barks and I must say it nearly brought a tear too this old buggers eye the nuts of it was that Farmer and baks have been fierce opponent's over the last 5yrs and how before and after each game they always shake hands and Farmer said in his heart he knows baks couldnt and wouldnt do anything under handed
Am I the only one who doesn't feel the need to punish himself by reading slabs of unedited text?

A shame - I'm sure there's a lot of good ideas in these jumbled posts.

It's a bit of a slap in the face to other posters who try to use at least some puncuation and grammar.

Are we stupid or something? Or incapable of intelligent and informed debate on this forum? Feels like it.
Oh yeah! I know you are but what am i ?

Brockman: As expected, New Springfield's experiment of 'Slob Rule' is a disaster.

Homer: Hey! The TV man is talking about us!

Brockman: ...A study shows their crumbling economy is due to their lazy attitude and shoddy work.

Homer: How the hell did they find that out?

Brockman: ...Scientists say they're also less attractive physically, and while we speak in a well-educated manner, they tend to use lowbrow expressions like, "Oh, yeah?" and "Come here a minute."

Homer: Oh yeah? They think they're better than us, huh? Bart, come here a minute.

Bart: You come here a minute.

Homer: [shakes fist] Oh yeah?

ifonlybarkswashere · Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:46pm

fonz_#15 wrote:ummm..mods...baker related thread

I know you're only half serious Fonz but it isn't a big deal that people want to post and chat about this. It is a big issue. If we have one or five hundred and one Bakes threads who cares.

I suppose the issue is that people shouldn't crank up threads that are similar to others.

Telling people not to stop posting Bakes threads seems to make about as much sense as posting replica threads in the first place! It's like the kids in classrooms that put their fingers up to their lips and make the "shush" sound... without realizing how annoying that is and that they have become the ones making the noise!

saintsRrising · Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:47pm

The AFL will only accept new evidence which will not help Baker's case....which is quite logical to the AFL...but to no one else.

plugger66 · Post: # 440705Post **plugger66** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:47pm

St. Luke wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
St. Luke wrote:Well the scummy AFL has just blocked Farmers letter!
The Saints lawyers should have known you cannot bring in new evidence at the appeal. I really do onder if we get the best legal advise.
But this is absurd, because without new evidence we were unable to lodge an appeal??? Isn't this what everyone was told yesterday??? I'm gonna be so pissed off if we're screwed again tonight!

No an appeal has nothing to do with new evidence. You can appeal on certain grounds but none of them allow new evidence and the lawyers should know that

saintsRrising · Thu 23 Aug 2007 5:49pm

fonz_#15 wrote:ummm..mods...baker related thread

It's Ok...it is not 5:30pm yet!!!!

Well not on EST...

On SST it was 5:30 twenty minutes ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

St. Luke · Post: # 440713Post **St. Luke** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 6:01pm

plugger66 wrote:
St. Luke wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
St. Luke wrote:Well the scummy AFL has just blocked Farmers letter!
The Saints lawyers should have known you cannot bring in new evidence at the appeal. I really do onder if we get the best legal advise.
But this is absurd, because without new evidence we were unable to lodge an appeal??? Isn't this what everyone was told yesterday??? I'm gonna be so pissed off if we're screwed again tonight!
No an appeal has nothing to do with new evidence. You can appeal on certain grounds but none of them allow new evidence and the lawyers should know that

Oh okay thanks. So the reality of this whole mess boils done to a bunch of numbnuts leading the legal charge for Baker. I think we need to overhaul our legal department then. I can't seriously remember the last time we got off anything!

Behind Play · Thu 23 Aug 2007 6:02pm

mcadam05 wrote:
Behind Play wrote:Problem is, it cannot be used tonight..........wonder if Freo new this.

it is for tonight

According to Moron, it is not admissible at the appeal. Only evidence which was brought up last Tuesday can be used at an appeal.

doggerel · Post: # 440731Post **doggerel** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 6:37pm

On the strength of that letter you would have to give Farmer the Class Act of the Week award. Top stuff.

Behind Play · Thu 23 Aug 2007 6:44pm

doggerel wrote:On the strength of that letter you would have to give Farmer the Class Act of the Week award. Top stuff.

Probably worried about the next time they meet, should Bakes cop 7 weeks.

Freo put him up to it and I will bet my left one that they new it could not be used.

OMG could i have got farmer all wrong

OMG could i have got farmer all wrong

Re: OMG could i have got farmer all wrong