Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 1:24 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

That's your interpretation.

I don't see anyone on here saying that.

You crack me up babe.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:43 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

I'm the only one not taken in by an opposition fan's speculation on what they were saying.

Dux is an opposition fan?

Arguments happen all the time between players on the pitch, it's no big deal. Graham can be a leader, but needs to learn when to bollock and when to encourage, that comes with experience. I think he was given the captaincy in an attempt to keep him here, is he really ready? Possibly not, but it's not going to make a big difference to us this year and won't be a problem next.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:52 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

Dux is an opposition fan?

The OP was written by Wire 91. I would assume they are an opposition fan?

Arguments happen all the time between players on the pitch, it's no big deal. Graham can be a leader, but needs to learn when to bollock and when to encourage, that comes with experience. I think he was given the captaincy in an attempt to keep him here, is he really ready? Possibly not, but it's not going to make a big difference to us this year and won't be a problem next.

Again, you're assuming he was bollocking someone, all based upon him being red faced and shouting, which is par for the course with Jammer.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:55 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Again, you're assuming he was bollocking someone, all based upon him being red faced and shouting, which is par for the course with Jammer.

Red faced and shouting at somebody is definitely bollocking them.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:57 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

The OP was written by Wire 91. I would assume they are an opposition fan?

The fact an argument occurred has been confirmed by a Saints fan, your position on it being pure trolling has been shown to be incorrect by a respected poster on here. Let it go.

Again, you're assuming he was bollocking someone, all based upon him being red faced and shouting, which is par for the course with Jammer.

That's because he's usually bollocking someone, which has become a more common occurrence over the last few seasons.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:04 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

The fact an argument occurred has been confirmed by a Saints fan, your position on it being pure trolling has been shown to be incorrect by a respected poster on here. Let it go.

When did I say it was trolling? I haven't said that at all. I've found it amusing that people have just agreed with speculation put forward by an opposition fan without question. I always find it amusing when the sheeple come out.

That's because he's usually bollocking someone, which has become a more common occurrence over the last few seasons.

I don't see you out on the pitch. Which position do you play?

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:09 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

When did I say it was trolling? I haven't said that at all. I've found it amusing that people have just agreed with speculation put forward by an opposition fan without question. I always find it amusing when the sheeple come out.

I don't see you out on the pitch. Which position do you play?

Well done on avoiding the point there, are you a politician? You have many of their traits in all honesty.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:16 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

When did I say it was trolling? I haven't said that at all. I've found it amusing that people have just agreed with speculation put forward by an opposition fan without question. I always find it amusing when the sheeple come out.

I don't see you out on the pitch. Which position do you play?

There is only you that thinks its speculation put forward by an opposition fan,its perfectly clear that Jammer has said something to Wilkin and Wilkin was clearly pee'd off and replied " who are you eh ? " Wilkin's face said it all,he was really peeved at Jammer and let him know it,you dont need to be able to lip read to see clearly what Wilkin said.

Given that the last thread i was invloved in that had you in it was you doubting Tompkins was knocked out when everyone else knew he was you have lost any credibility you ever had,you argue and argue long after the point is proven,why do you carry on when everyone else on here acknowledges whats gone on ?

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:17 pm  

brook40 wrote:

why do you carry on when everyone else on here acknowledges whats gone on ?

There's a very simple answer to this. She's a woman and women can never admit they're wrong.

Re: Wilkin and graham : Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:18 pm  

BackrowSaint wrote:

There's a very simple answer to this. She's a woman and women can never admit they're wrong.

And that from a man!