Max = NO

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

bazeagle

Bencher
Why does Max Krilich shoot his mouth off before such a crucial match saying storm should give their premiership rings back. Why? We don't need to be giving the cheats any motivation to lift in response to reading this story. None.
 
Baz, we don't know when Krilich made those comments.

I do agree that the timing is atrocious.
 
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/krilich-calls-for-storm-to-lose-rings-20120918-264sg.html
 
Caption this
1fjsaw.jpg
 
Berkeley_Eagle said:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/krilich-calls-for-storm-to-lose-rings-20120918-264sg.html
''We had a few guys who were gutted,'' Kite said. ''Chris Hicks was on the bus the other night and came and watched us play. He found out … when he was playing for Warrington with Matt King. He was hitting Matt King up for the ring… "
 
I'll wager a bet that Krilich has not said this within the past six months, just the media trying to motivate the purple scum.
 
Mr InviswannahangoutnobigDEAL! said:
Krilich, is biting in relation to that whole premierships being reinstated issue brung up by someone associated with the storm.

Obviously, you weren't "brung up" by any literacy giant!
 
Shouldn't we also argue, based on this article, that Newcastle should also return their rings pertaining to the 1997 grand final?

For my part - lets let it lie and get on with this week's game.

GO MANLY!!!!
 
COMMANDER said:
Don't see a problem with it.

No problem here either. I doubt very much it will add any fire to the Storms belly. I think they'll have a few more incentives on the list to get through before they work their way down to what Max said.
 
lismore_fan said:
Mr InviswannahangoutnobigDEAL! said:
Krilich, is biting in relation to that whole premierships being reinstated issue brung up by someone associated with the storm.

Obviously, you weren't "brung up" by any literacy giant!

Since you started it, obviously you weren't brung up by a punctuation giant - the comma after 'obviously' is unnecessary.
 
sean1976 said:
lismore_fan said:
Mr InviswannahangoutnobigDEAL! said:
Krilich, is biting in relation to that whole premierships being reinstated issue brung up by someone associated with the storm.

Obviously, you weren't "brung up" by any literacy giant!

Since you started it, obviously you weren't brung up by a punctuation giant - the comma after 'obviously' is unnecessary.

Lols
 
sean1976 said:
lismore_fan said:
Mr InviswannahangoutnobigDEAL! said:
Krilich, is biting in relation to that whole premierships being reinstated issue brung up by someone associated with the storm.

Obviously, you weren't "brung up" by any literacy giant!

Since you started it, obviously you weren't brung up by a punctuation giant - the comma after 'obviously' is unnecessary.
I, happen to disagree. I, think the comma adds a unique tone and emphasis to the comment. Although, usually, I, favour using the word 'Krilich' as the only word in a sentence. This word is best, used as an exclamation, in my, view.
 
sean1976 said:
lismore_fan said:
Mr InviswannahangoutnobigDEAL! said:
Krilich, is biting in relation to that whole premierships being reinstated issue brung up by someone associated with the storm.

Obviously, you weren't "brung up" by any literacy giant!

Since you started it, obviously you weren't brung up by a punctuation giant - the comma after 'obviously' is unnecessary.

Since you raised it you weren't BROUGHT up by a grammar giant were you ;)
 
Since you raised it, you weren't brought up by the sarcasm/irony giant, nor the grammar giant seeing as you forgot a comma and a question mark!



(This is fun, someone fix mine!)
 
I see today's Herald is banging on with this story. Problem - like I said why give the cheats any motivation? I don't get it.
 
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom