Search results

You are not wrong, there were more gaps found on Sunday than when the Toowoomba High-school smiled for the year photos..

No, some of us just think he needs to grow a set rather then hide behind obscure posts on Instagram.. Oh and learn to tackle.. And no that's not just since the Bronco's thing.. It's been an issue of his for some time..

They are brothers. Don Furner Snr hasn't been around for a while now.. McIntyre's wife changed nappies.. Your point still stands however..

I needed to listen more in science class..

I am not sure if you missed it, but that entire last post was tongue firmly placed in cheek. Did you watch the clip? The term douche comes to mind.. To answer your question, we actually have not "lost" many players that we wanted to re-sign. Milford will be the first in a long time. There have...

Don't be like that.. Vidot was going places ok.. Did you not see his youtube clip? azzadaz vidot - YouTube You say star. We say Superstar!

I could not agree more. I think this is where the battle will be lost or won, and both sides from the outside believe they have the upper hand, whether or not they do will eventually come out in the wash. But, it looks like it will unfortunately be a dirty little war played out in the media...

I'd still prefer Soward..

The extension discussions have been going on for a long time regarding Milford. So I would say even if the talks had stalled, the fact still stands that the negotioations have been taking place well before the Bronco's became embroiled in this and the Raiders may have just embellished the extent...

Like I said on the GH only this morning.. I would prefer Buttsy to start at half back than either of them.. No offence..

I get that. But as I mentioned earlier, why was Ayoub speaking to the Raiders a month ago about activating this clause, when only 3 weeks ago the Milfords were in Canberra to assess the place as a possible future home? Does that seem accurate now? I do not think so. I believe a more accurate...

No, you have taken my opinion out of context. I have said prior that the upsetting thing is, is that Milford will be the one that cops the cross fire. It is unfortunate, but when you have an ugly fight there are always innocent casualties and Milford's manager is making this ugly. Whether it is...

I am a Raiders supporter. I know I have a bias veiw of these proceedings, and I admit that shines through, but I am not on here to create or cause waves, but to actually have a good chat about it with the "otherside"..

No, they have no affiliation with them anymore and cannot send them to souths, but based on the fine print of this clause we speak of, if it is not being actioned in the appropriate manner and the clasue being manipulated and the Raiders do have a leg to stand on, due to Ayoub's behaviour they...

And I respect your opinion whilst respectfully disagreeing.

I am in no way comparing the events of the individual Inglis V Milford saga's. I am simply asking if the naive belief to the information shared by the media and player manager is unique to this case or was it also prevelant during the Inglis fiasco?

So were you lot this gullible of the media's interpretation and the manager view point when Inglis bailed and went to Souths? I am assuming this forum was as understanding and kindhearted toward the situation as you are now right?

Well no, clause is not then activated. As his fathers living arrangements not working out, does not necessarily make him in worse health. It means he stays in Brisabne, Milf stays in Canberra and no relocation takes place. Which in turn is why Ayoub then manipulates health issue to create reason...

Not at all. He would not be happy with that as his motive is not "just" his family. It is the Bronco's and playing football in Brisbane. And yes, the clause exists. but no one knows what the clause actually contains and on what grounds it can be activated. I assume and yes, as it is said this...

It can be seen both ways. I agree with you. But that is what I mean when I say Anthony needs to face the media and be seen to take a stance. be it for or against whichever party.