Attention English Kiwi Baiters, and you know who you are:
[ amusing riposte to the France vs NZ "choker" baiting that has occurred for the past 2 weeks, snipped ... ]
Thanks for reading this far, it was cathartic to write it, and I
feel better now...
Unfortunately, the replies can go something like this ...
At least we reach actual finals to choke in. And even when we do choke, it ain't against France.
Sadly for you lot, you will have to endure for a bit longer the "choker" stuff, as your counter-parts will similarly do so for "the ref cheated us" protests. But you know that will soon die away (the things that don't kill us, only make us stronger etc) ...
Walter Mitty 23 October 2007 01:54:29 [ permanent link ]
"Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net> writes:
"Walter Mitty" <mitticus@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ojkvu4-vus.ln1@news.individual.net...
"Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net> writes:
"Walter Mitty" <mitticus@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:lv1vu4-rph.ln1@news.individual.net...
<snip>
The "loss" to the Australia was one of Rick'S "dead
Rubbers".
Eh?
I was wrong. I had it in my head that the Convicts won the second game
in the Bled series.
IIRC the 'correct' reason NZ lost was because they played below their best.
Andrew
NZ "at their best" can probably beat anyone. probably. But not certainly. But the question is why were they not at their best or able to reach their best? My posting attempted to address those reasons.
"Peter Ashford" <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1193086082.381868.285550@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
And as anyone knows, he takes a rest from this group at this time every year. His logic is the rugby that he has access to is finished and it's time to intrioduce himself to his family again. But his main targets just love to make it into something it's not.
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
And as anyone knows, he takes a rest from this group at this time every
year. His logic is the rugby that he has access to is finished and it's
time to intrioduce himself to his family again. But his main targets just
love to make it into something it's not.
cheers,. aMtt
Plus he was last seen heading to the South Island of New Zealand, a place in which Osbourne Ruddock and Peter Ashford have reserved the only two internet connections.
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
And as anyone knows, he takes a rest from this group at this time every
year. His logic is the rugby that he has access to is finished and it's time
to intrioduce himself to his family again. But his main targets just love to
make it into something it's not.
cheers,. aMtt
A good story but not true: he always manages to find time to drop into the Autumn international threads. Usually to tell us that England, France whoever, only won because of a 'sub-par' {and that is a quote} performance by the team he was cheering for that day. He blew a gasket over the quarter finals, and I doubt he'll be back until NZ are ranked number one, or until he can produce a new formula that proves they are..... I never really thought he was a lightweight, but he proved it in some style this last 6 weeks.
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
And as anyone knows, he takes a rest from this group at this time every
year. His logic is the rugby that he has access to is finished and it's time
to intrioduce himself to his family again. But his main targets just love to
make it into something it's not.
That's not what he said going into the RWC, when he made it clear that due to the anticipated deluge of posts, he was going to be very selective and use his "killfiles" judiciously, to weed out those posters he didn't want to see.
He takes a break he says, when there is usually a lull here, but to see him absent over what was an outstanding event (shortly after NZ were eliminated) and not dispensing his usual 'wisdom and wit', absolutely speaks volumes for his *real* mindset and purpose!
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
And as anyone knows, he takes a rest from this group at this time every
year. His logic is the rugby that he has access to is finished and it's
time
to intrioduce himself to his family again. But his main targets just love
to
make it into something it's not.
That's not what he said going into the RWC, when he made it clear that
due to the anticipated deluge of posts, he was going to be very
selective and use his "killfiles" judiciously, to weed out those
posters he didn't want to see.
He takes a break he says, when there is usually a lull here, but to
see him absent over what was an outstanding event (shortly after NZ
were eliminated) and not dispensing his usual 'wisdom and wit',
absolutely speaks volumes for his *real* mindset and purpose!
Again, your loyalty to a chum is laudable.
I don't feel any loyalty to anyone in here - and he's not a chum, I've never met him and disagree with a lot of what he posts. But he is very consistent and this is another example of people making up stories to allow themselves to have a laugh at another posters expense. Childish.
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
And as anyone knows, he takes a rest from this group at this time every
year. His logic is the rugby that he has access to is finished and it's
time
to intrioduce himself to his family again. But his main targets just love
to
make it into something it's not.
That's not what he said going into the RWC, when he made it clear that
due to the anticipated deluge of posts, he was going to be very
selective and use his "killfiles" judiciously, to weed out those
posters he didn't want to see.
He takes a break he says, when there is usually a lull here, but to
see him absent over what was an outstanding event (shortly after NZ
were eliminated) and not dispensing his usual 'wisdom and wit',
absolutely speaks volumes for his *real* mindset and purpose!
Again, your loyalty to a chum is laudable.
I don't feel any loyalty to anyone in here - and he's not a chum, I've
never met him and disagree with a lot of what he posts. But he is very
consistent and this is another example of people making up stories to
allow themselves to have a laugh at another posters expense. Childish.
cheers, aMtt
Agree.He is my oldest foe on this NG and has always argued a consistent point of view. Please, for example, don't get him started on forward passes!!!!
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:19:31 -0700, Peter Ashford <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:45:21 +0100, Charles <jrh@msn.com> wrote:
[...] .
How can you possibly whinge about the English supporters on the Group
teasing the NZ fanboiz, given the stick we have had to take since RWC
2003?
This is very rare payback time, and it is most amusing that such a
prolific tormentor as Rick "The Guru" Boyd has opted to hide away.
Rick, despite the fact that he may be something of a provocateur, does
at least usually try to (a) have a point and (b) argue for it. In
that sense, he's a lot more worthwhile that the sludge that filled the
NG of late.
The use of "provocateur" is an exotic way of describing a long-term
serial "troll", who is never happier than when he is giving the
English a good kick in the balls.
You loyalty is very misplaced, but is still a credit to you! ;o)
It's nothing to do with "loyalty" - I merely appreciate people who can
string an argument together.
You have once again deflected the main thrust, and turned the discussion to your "loyalty" or lack of it.
However, having not addressed the use of "provocateur" as an exotic way to describe a "serial troll", speaks volumes for the fact that that is exactly what it is! ;o).
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:34:24 -0700, Peter Ashford <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> wrote:
Dave Gordon also contributed:
And before Ashford did some selective snipping, Charles said:
"No, it's to do with *all* the World Cups, and is about the only weakness in the NZ game."
You have a one-sided view of what the normal NG fare is like, if
you're claiming otherwise.
"Hardly, NZ supporters are normally well ahead in the crowing stakes, given the high percentage of NZ wins in world rugby. England is normally treated as a laughing stock, and comes in for more than its fair share of "troll" posts."
Just look up anything about "choking",
"forward passes", "cheating", "refs let ABs away with anything" and
"basket ball rugby" and you'll see there's a bloody long history of
trolling coming from the UK quarters.
"Given the crowing that emanates from the 'fanboiz', that is about all the ammunition any spirited opposition has available to them by way of retaliation. That's not to say that some of the non-NZ supporters are acting in the best interests of the game - but then this is a Usenet newsgroup, where "trolling" abounds."
So spare me your martyr pose.
"Hardly martyrdom Peter, but certainly a rare yet satisfactory position to be in after a long hard lean spell.
When it's the other way round, all we hear about is whingeing and whining should anyone adopt the tack you are at the moment."
Still, look on the bright side. "Daylight second" hasn't appeared for a few weeks.
He's planning a late run for glory....
...which appeared to be a great deal more successful than an early exit! ;o)
"Peter Ashford" <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1193185940.866286.11250@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 8:36 pm, BrritSki <Brrit...@iname.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford wrote:
<mercy snip>
....and there we have the perfect example of the exact kind of troll
that Keegan refers to.
It also illustrates the point that anything fuckwits like you don't want
to hear is a de facto troll.
Why don't you discuss the valid points he made ?
No, it shows that I've learned that fuckwits like you and Mitty are
trolls through and through and that there's no point engaging in
discussion with trolls.
I debate with people who have demonstrated that they are worth
debating. Mitty's posting history (and yours) are adequate evidence
for why he's not in that group.
The newsgroup is big enough for all sorts. Even Matuas posts have a sort of eloquent poetry to them, albeit couched in rather uncouth terms. I for one love a good argument using wit and profanity in equal measure. Some of the longer "worthy" posts leave me cold.
Walter Mitty 25 October 2007 01:29:35 [ permanent link ]
BrritSki <BrritSki@iname.com> writes:
Peter Ashford wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 pm, BrritSki <Brrit...@iname.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford wrote:
<mercy snip>
....and there we have the perfect example of the exact kind of troll
that Keegan refers to.
It also illustrates the point that anything fuckwits like you don't want
to hear is a de facto troll.
Why don't you discuss the valid points he made ?
No, it shows that I've learned that fuckwits like you and Mitty are
trolls through and through and that there's no point engaging in
discussion with trolls.
I debate with people who have demonstrated that they are worth
debating. Mitty's posting history (and yours) are adequate evidence
for why he's not in that group.
QED
Peter Ashford likes to take the moral high ground when he has nothing else. He is caught out whining and whinging all the time and thinks the occasional "well played" camouflages his real views. If you cant debate the points, insult the poster - a common technique. As pointed out to him many, many times, disgreeing with his views does not make one a troll no matter how wittily, rudely or otherly one makes the replies.
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:51:30 -0700, Peter Ashford <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 24, 8:55 pm, Charles <j...@msn.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:27:38 -0700, Peter Ashford
<peter.m.ashf...@gmail.com> wrote:
Again, your loyalty to a chum is laudable.
I don't feel any loyalty to anyone in here - and he's not a chum, I've never
met him and disagree with a lot of what he posts.
Then why take up the cudgels on his behalf, particularly as it has got
bugger all to do with you? It is being mischievous simply for the sake
of it, which is just another way of describing "trolling"!
People can be more concerned with truth rather than point scoring. It
*can* happen, you know.
Peter, you really are turning into a repetitive whining, whingeing,
humourless bore, which is rather spoiling your input.
Do lighten up old chum and take what's coming your way with a degree
of inevitability, and perhaps with some dignity. ;o)
You *do* realise that "I don't feel any loyalty to anyone in here -
and he's not a chum, I've never
met him and disagree with a lot of what he posts." was from Neilsons,
not me, don't you?
Yes, of course I do, but I was responding to *you* when you added this observation and assertion to Neilson's missive:
"People can be more concerned with truth rather than point scoring. It *can* happen, you know."
I don't expect you realised that you claimed that he was Rick's "chum" as well.
I have stated before that Boyd is a rabble rouser and encourages a clique mentality. To be accused of being Boyd's chum is not meant to be a compliment! ;o)
Look, I think you have a hard time either following what other people
are saying or expressing yourself
I doubt even my worst critics would suggest that is the case. However, ad hominem responses are quite common here, so it doesn't surprise me that you have chosen to use that tack, in order to lash out in frustration.
since none of your replies to my posts in this thread seem to follow on in any logical way.
If you choose to be add odds with people with no better motive than ultra disappointment and embarrassment, then what follows may well appear to be out of sync with your appreciation of the situation.
As I said Peter, it's time for you to lighten up and to get back to enjoying the Group! ;o)
Walter Mitty 25 October 2007 12:33:11 [ permanent link ]
BrritSki <BrritSki@iname.com> writes:
Peter Ashford wrote:
On Oct 24, 7:52 pm, BrritSki <Brrit...@iname.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 pm, BrritSki <Brrit...@iname.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford wrote:
<mercy snip>
....and there we have the perfect example of the exact kind of troll
that Keegan refers to.
It also illustrates the point that anything fuckwits like you don't want
to hear is a de facto troll.
Why don't you discuss the valid points he made ?
No, it shows that I've learned that fuckwits like you and Mitty are
trolls through and through and that there's no point engaging in
discussion with trolls.
I debate with people who have demonstrated that they are worth
debating. Mitty's posting history (and yours) are adequate evidence
for why he's not in that group.
QED
Not at all - I debate the points that your compatriots make - often
the same points you and Mitty make, but made in a constructive way.
So, your point is not proved, mine is. I discuss issues with those
who want to discuss issues, not trolls. You are a troll.
Self fulfilling isn't it ? You say I'm a troll, so you won't discuss
issues with me.
Yet, contradictatorially (TM Dubya), you are discussing this with me !
Don't bother. Ashford is looking for "get out of jail" cards to diffuse the attention to his bizarre fan boy rantings about how NZ was cheated out of the RWC. He has a habit of calling anyone who disagrees with him trolls. Say it aint so.
On Oct 24, 7:52 pm, BrritSki <Brrit...@iname.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:36 pm, BrritSki <Brrit...@iname.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford wrote:
<mercy snip>
....and there we have the perfect example of the exact kind of troll
that Keegan refers to.
It also illustrates the point that anything fuckwits like you don't want
to hear is a de facto troll.
Why don't you discuss the valid points he made ?
No, it shows that I've learned that fuckwits like you and Mitty are
trolls through and through and that there's no point engaging in
discussion with trolls.
I debate with people who have demonstrated that they are worth
debating. Mitty's posting history (and yours) are adequate evidence
for why he's not in that group.
QED
Not at all - I debate the points that your compatriots make - often
the same points you and Mitty make, but made in a constructive way.
So, your point is not proved, mine is. I discuss issues with those
who want to discuss issues, not trolls. You are a troll.
Self fulfilling isn't it ? You say I'm a troll, so you won't discuss
issues with me.
Yet, contradictatorially (TM Dubya), you are discussing this with me !
Don't bother. Ashford is looking for "get out of jail" cards to diffuse
the attention to his bizarre fan boy rantings about how NZ was cheated
out of the RWC. He has a habit of calling anyone who disagrees with him
trolls. Say it aint so.
It IS so.
One of the self-styled founders of Usenet, Eugene Miya, says that ALL post are trolls anyway, and I don't deny that I do (ahem) occasionally post something deliberately inflammatory.
What he hasn't noticed in the blind rage that descends whenever sees a post from me though is that I often agree with him and reply as such.
I only flame him when he (and others) come in with the one-eyed fanboy approach that he has done several times in the past (Shaw knee incident, BOD incident, Barnes "incident") and he doesn't like it, no matter how many genuine facts are wrapped up in the flame.
Anyway, he can live in peace for a while, much as there are some interesting discussions going on about law changes, competition formats etc., I have a life as well and only come here when there is some good N/SH competition and banter to be had.
Well done again to France for the organisation, SA for winning it and our lot for displaying some pride. TTFN
Walter Mitty 25 October 2007 14:52:59 [ permanent link ]
Uncle Dave <davidcovey@t-online.de> writes:
On Oct 25, 9:41 am, Charles <j...@msn.com> wrote:
Charlie, you're painting a pitcure of the Rick you know, not the one
we knowso we'll leave it at that. Just don't think everyone agrees
with you just because you and Rick lock horns on a regular basis...
UD
In fairness UD, Charles can only judge him on how Rick crosses swords with Charles. As we all know, usenet and email is notorious for stripping the "signs" which would, in real life, indicate a good leg pulling or even old fashioned trolling.
Walter Mitty 26 October 2007 13:50:40 [ permanent link ]
Peter Ashford <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> writes:
Other than that you may have address your mounting paranoia. But
remember, if they really don't like you - it's not necessarily
paranoia!! ;o)
*sigh*
In other words, you *didn't* read the thread. I guess that explains
your posts.
Henceforth known as the Assford Defence.
Contrary to all evidence and history, when you have been "owned" in an argument merely make some self righteous exclamation ("Sigh" will do here) and then mutter some more drivel totally contrary to the rest of the thread just to put you in the right light. Remember, he who takes the moral high ground first and leaves wins!
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:50:40 +0200, Walter Mitty <mitticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter Ashford <peter.m.ashford@gmail.com> writes:
Other than that you may have address your mounting paranoia. But
remember, if they really don't like you - it's not necessarily
paranoia!! ;o)
*sigh*
In other words, you *didn't* read the thread. I guess that explains
your posts.
Henceforth known as the Assford Defence.
Contrary to all evidence and history, when you have been "owned" in an
argument merely make some self righteous exclamation ("Sigh" will do
here) and then mutter some more drivel totally contrary to the rest of the
thread just to put you in the right light. Remember, he who takes the
moral high ground first and leaves wins!
Walter, you really mustn't tease Peter. He gets awfully sensitive and then says things he doesn't really mean. He also becomes frustrated and posts increasingly incomprehensive and illogical responses, which can be seen by some as wriggling.
In a nutshell he reverts to 'plum duff firing' and spouts bollocks.
Have a great weekend mate - you know I intend to! ;o)
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please . Если Вы хотите пожаловаться на содержимое этой страницы, пожалуйста .
