: Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:03 pm  

rover49 wrote:

Yeah he is, he spent 20 mins kicking a ball to my grandson and then autographed his boots and patted his head. The sort of impression that will stay with him for years. He is still grinning.

Is your grandson OK? Crooke did the same to Brad Drew last year.

: Thu Jun 07, 2007 1:24 pm  

rover49 wrote:

Yeah he is, he spent 20 mins kicking a ball to my grandson and then autographed his boots and patted his head. The sort of impression that will stay with him for years. He is still grinning.

Don't worry about it he did the same for Hull, when they were paying him. I'm sure Justines happy that while he can't produce it on the pitch, he's keeping future criminals busy by playing kick ball with them

Re: Ben Cockayne future GB fullback : Thu Jun 07, 2007 7:10 pm  

vastman wrote:

Matt Blaymire will probably never play for GB yet he is better than Cockayne in every facet of the game. Not a chance old luv not a chance.

totally agree matey, Blaymire can catch and tackle and also a COOL head

: Thu Jun 07, 2007 7:12 pm  

I cannot believe that there are 103 posts on here about Cockayne being GB fullback. No chance. Lock it.

: Thu Jun 07, 2007 7:14 pm  

He gets right up ya nose!

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:51 pm  

dave m wrote:

FFS you're having a laugh.

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:52 pm  

dave m wrote:

i love the way scummers make things up.
Where did i ever mention Sean Long you argumentative little poop.
Briscoe couldn't get into Wigans Team because of Radlinski even though Radlinski was playing crap at the time still better than old bent nose.

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:52 pm  

redtillimdead wrote:

He has you know,hes won a grand final! Oh yes and played so well last season that the then World Club Champions showed an interest in him.




Oh and as for Briscoe,if he was that fab,why did Wigan see fit to let him leave?

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:57 pm  

The AUP is quite clear.
1.4. Messages intended to destroy threads or to only increase post counts are prohibited* Users who intentionally aim to prevent conversation on a thread will have their posts removed and risk losing posting rights on the board in question, or to the whole site.

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:33 pm  

phil webbo wrote:

The AUP is quite clear.
1.4. Messages intended to destroy threads or to only increase post counts are prohibited* Users who intentionally aim to prevent conversation on a thread will have their posts removed and risk losing posting rights on the board in question, or to the whole site.