> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:59:45 -0600, Matthew Pope
> <matt&samatNOSPAMiinet.netdotau> wrote:
>>Oswald P Wrong <ossiepwr...@spamawayexposures.co.nz> wrote in
>>news:aq21f5t6i3i6fqn1m8k72p6l0hq1mrqp4f@4ax.com:
>>> Great to see the Ausfailure coach having another whingefest. Usually
>>> it's after they have lost but I'm not surprised he's getting in
>>> early.
>>> I guess he can see the writing on the wall.
>>> Again.
>>> It's a shame that Ausfailure have already got it in their heads that
>>> they have lost this tournament, but in all fairness, it's not
>>> surprising. They've lost the last 3.
>>I hate to correct you, but they've lost 2 of the last 3. Australia
>>managed to get a tri-nations series win in there in 2006... the golden
>>point show- and-go from Thurston that burgled the Kiwis and handed
>>Lockyer a try after 90 odd minutes of ball-busting rugby league.
>>They lost the 2005 Tri Nations and lost the 2008 World Cup. What else
>>have they lost?
>>> Still, very un-Ockerish to throw the towel in and starting crying
>>> this early. Can't be doing too much for the confidence in the
>>> Ausfailure team, or perhaps just a reflection of the paranoia that
>>> has crept in.
>>> We've had the conspiracy theories and the ref bullying so I suppose
>>> it was only inevitable that a hanky wringing sookfest would be next.
>>> Good comedy as far as I'm concerned, please keep posting these gems.
>>> - - -
>>> Oswald P Wrong
>>> World Champion Tipster.
> This goes to the heart of the entire current sports debate about
> Ausfailure's current sh1thouse form.
> Let's forget for just a moment Ausfailure's inglorious past in
> cheating that Mike Burke has campaigned against in here with little
> support for but what we real sports's fans so eloquently term the
> stolen generation of hollow victories. We will come back to it later
> of course.
> Before I start I accept that most Aussies will fail to grasp the
> concepts I use in this post. Fair play is alien to the Ausfailure
> sporting culture. Ausfailure sports culture, for better or worse is a
> win at all costs ethic that includes means both fair and more often
> foul to get a much needed leg up.
> Core samples, thuggery. underarm bowling, judiciary rub outs etc etc
> etc.
> Even Aussies who do not think that their shameful past is anything to
> be ashamed of will find this post impossible to disagree with, so they
> will need to resort to trolls and flames to try and pretend that the
> disgust the world holds for Ausfailure isn't real.
> Now that we have that out of the way let's deal with the serious issue
> at hand, Ausfailure's current loser mentality.
> But don't take my word for it. I could be trolling after all.
> Let's listen to Billy Slater from last week prior to the Aus GB game.
> ''If we lose this game, we may as well get on a plane back to
> Australia,' Slater said.
> Or all powerful wingman Jared Hayne perhaps?
> "'If we lose this, I'm sure the Poms aren't going to beat the Kiwis so
> they can play us in the final,'' Hayne said.
> ''They're going to want to be beaten by the Kiwis so they can play
> them the week after. It's a must-win. We lose this game, we're out of
> the final.''
> Hayne even went as far to suggest there was a conspiracy to make
> Ausfailure lose the four nations. Where it's coming from is anyone's
> guess but Tim Sheens comments offer a hint.
> Now I've never heard the Ausfailure of hold talk about the chances of
> losing before, but you can't shut them up now. Why?
> Hayne said Sheens had told the team ''that we played crap''.
> His latest whinge translates to 'Our forwards can't match the
> toughness from New Zealand and England any more"
> So we have it from the coach that he agrees with me, Ausfailure are
> crap. Nothing new there. They've been crap for ages. But they've been
> able to cover it up with the way they used to be able to run the game
> and manipulate it.
> And how have they done that you ask?
> In any sport there are one set of rules. The rules apply to all
> participants. In the 2006 series you claim to have won there were
> clear and strict rules regarding player eligibility. All questions of
> player eligibility were required to be directed to the controlling
> body for determination. Before the series began there was a question
> over one players eligibility. Ausfailure had documents which cleared
> these up beyond question but instead allowed New Zealand to believe
> they were fielding an eligible player. At this point Ausfailure and
> New Zealand failed to follow the requirement to refer the matter to
> the IRLB as was required by the process.
> New Zealand fielded the player and in the last week of the series
> Ausfailure released the documents which they had been sitting on. At
> this point both New Zealand and Ausfailure had failed to comply with
> the tournament regulations and both were guilty and deserved the same
> penalty. Any other decision was nothing short of a corruption of the
> tournament regulations.
> By sitting on the information instead of referring it to the IRLB
> Ausfailure corrupted the process by which player eligibility is
> determined. When ruling on breach's of regulation, process is always
> important.
> Any legitimate body which ignores process denies itself the right to
> argue that natural justice is followed in determining the outcome.
> Ausfailure chose to ignore the tournament regulations and deal with
> the issue of player eligibility informally. BZZZZZZZZZZT.
> Ausfailure was no doubt hoping that New Zealand would be ejected from
> the tournament, this failed. They hoped that New Zealand would lose to
> Great Britain like Ausfailure did the week before. This also failed.
> New Zealand got back up off the floor and made it into the final with
> the ineligible Ausfailure team.
> At half time the scores were locked at 6 all. At full time the scores
> were locked at 12 all.
> As the game unfolded and we saw Ausfailure clearly fail to beat New
> Zealand again we learned that a decision had been made to allow the
> game to run into extra time.
> Now that wouldn't be something I'd have an argument with, but
> international guidelines for extra time used to require 2 x 10 minute
> halves. A draw at the end of that means the team holding the trophy
> retains it. But that didn't happen. So we ended up with the
> Ausfailure-centric golden point applying.
> New Zealand knew nothing of this change to the international game.
> Fans knew nothing of this change. It was another case of Ausfailure
> making up the rules as they go along to avoid losing. Again.
> They tried to pass the 24 - nil hiding in Leeds the year before off as
> a fluke. But then the World Cup final rolled along and as you so very
> well put it, for the third time in a row Ausfailure failed to beat the
> Kiwis when the ref blew the full time whistle in a final.
> Ausfailure still calls this a fluke. A decade long fluke of their team
> losing and New Zealand beating them.
> Let's look at that rest of that decade. In the 2000 World Cup series
> it is now a matter of fact that Sid Eru took a banned substance. A
> cough mixture. This made him ineligible for selection and he was sent
> home in disgrace and banned for a time. It is also a matter of fact
> that one Andrew Johns played in that tournament. He has by his own
> admission established as a further matter of fact that in that
> tournament he was taking banned drugs. This means he was ineligible
> for selection.
> Now we test players for banned drugs because we don't expect them to
> admit to it, but Johns has admitted it. These are the facts now and we
> have to deal with the facts.
> Now for those who argued that Ausfailure was innocent in 2006 over
> player eligibility come unstuck here. During the 2000 World Cup Gordon
> Tallis made a complaint to the team management about players taking
> banned drugs.
> Little was done about it, certainly nothing formal. Players who had
> taken banned drugs continued to compete despite being ineligible.
> Incredibly none of the players Tallis complained about returned a
> positive drug test. Not even Andrew Johns. More incredibly he admits
> to taking banned drugs for 10 more years and still there are no
> positives, just a lot of inexplicable breaks from the game.
> Now I would never suggest that an national Australian controlling body
> would be corrupt enough to go to great lengths to cover up behavior by
> it's players that would normally result in players being suspended.
> I don't need to suggest that because it is a matter of fact that the
> ACB did this during the match fixing era when it discovered key
> players were on the payroll of bookies involved in match fixing.
> So the first question is why did Gordon Tallis's complaint about
> players taking banned drugs not result in players guilty of taking
> those banned drugs being sent home?
> The second question is if the Ausfailure team reached the World Cup
> Final in 2000 using players who we now know were ineligible Ausfailure
> should never have been in the final and the match is forfeited. So who
> were the real World Cup winners in 2000? That's right Matthew, New
> Zealand.
> The third question, and this is the killer, is how did Andrew Johns
> get away with taking banned drugs for 10 years?
> How did Ausfailure manage that? Their star player and captain taking
> drugs which made him ineligible 'fluked' 10 years of cheating?
> I think we all know what would happen if say Stacey Johns came out and
> said 'I took LSD for a decade' or Ruben Wiki said 'I took heroin for
> 20 years'
> Imagine what lengths Ausfailure would have gone to catch them had
> Gordon Tallis tipped them off with
|
