Anthony Watmough-Credit where credit is due.

[Citizen_Tiger]

Excellent response, considered, relevant and beautifully argued. Some things never change

 

[citizen_cub]

Ink, a couple of things:

1\. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious, I can never understand a thing you say.

2\. "Sniping" and ridiculing others (from the safety of your own keyboard) is not cool.

 

[Flippedy]

Whilst we may not always agree with some of the comments Ink makes, Cub, there really is not a lot wrong with his grammar and punctuation. In fact, he is probably one of the better posters on here. I think you are just 'clutching at straws' calling it atrocious because it clearly isn't. I have never had any trouble understanding his posts. Perhaps you have trouble understanding them because your vision is clouded by bias or you're just not willing to try.

 

[Citizen_Tiger]

Whilst we may not always agree with some of the comments Ink makes, Cub, there really is not a lot wrong with his grammar and punctuation. In fact, he is probably one of the better posters on here. I think you are just 'clutching at straws' calling it atrocious because it clearly isn't. I have never had any trouble understanding his posts. Perhaps you have trouble understanding them because your vision is clouded by bias or you're just not willing to try.

Somewhat confused here, Cub hasn't made a contribution to this thread? If you're referring to me, I'm not commenting on the quality of anyone's written expression, I'm making a point about the lack of counter argument.

 

[citizen_cub]

Whilst we may not always agree with some of the comments Ink makes, Cub, there really is not a lot wrong with his grammar and punctuation. In fact, he is probably one of the better posters on here. I think you are just 'clutching at straws' calling it atrocious because it clearly isn't. I have never had any trouble understanding his posts. Perhaps you have trouble understanding them because your vision is clouded by bias or you're just not willing to try.

Well, maybe not atrocious, but his sentence structure is very hard to understand and he tends to use random lines to ridicule others.

 

[innsaneink]

No point submitting any counter argument, your mind - narrow as it is - is clearly made up.

Youre looking at only his past, not the present, not willing to give the player in question any credit, whilst continuing to discredit him for an apprent good deed.

Good for you.
====================

Thanx Flipp..

 

[Flippedy]

Whilst we may not always agree with some of the comments Ink makes, Cub, there really is not a lot wrong with his grammar and punctuation. In fact, he is probably one of the better posters on here. I think you are just 'clutching at straws' calling it atrocious because it clearly isn't. I have never had any trouble understanding his posts. Perhaps you have trouble understanding them because your vision is clouded by bias or you're just not willing to try.

Somewhat confused here, Cub hasn't made a contribution to this thread? If you're referring to me, I'm not commenting on the quality of anyone's written expression, I'm making a point about the lack of counter argument.

Not referring to you mate. Citizen Cub did post a comment here straight after yours - surprised you can't see it. Anyway, it was that post I was referring to and he has since replied, so no worries.

Sorry about the mix up - your user names, being so similar, are a tad confusing.

 

[citizen_cub]

Ink, if you're going to ridicule others, at least have the dignity to do it "face-to-face", instead of using the forum to express your disdain towards others.

Clearly (for some unknown reason) you hate Citizen Tiger (and myself) with a passion, and you seem to go out of your way to find a comment of either of ours you disagree with, and you will come up with insulting lines in order to make yourself feel better.

It was clearly evident the other day with the thread about 'home ground advantage' and is once again on display in this thread. Give it up, your bitter vendetta against the both of us has been carrying on for sometime now and frankly, is getting extremely boring.

I come here to talk football with fellow forum members who also want to talk football, not to get into boring, meaningless fights.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Ink, a couple of things:

1\. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious, I can never understand a thing you say.

2\. "Sniping" and ridiculing others (from the safety of your own keyboard) is not cool.

wow, clutching at straws there. As flip said, there isn't anything wrong with Ink's punctuation. If you want to talk about someone whose grammar is 'atrocious' i could point you in the direction of someone else in particular on here who you might enjoy knit-picking at

 

[citizen_cub]

Ink, a couple of things:

1\. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious, I can never understand a thing you say.

2\. "Sniping" and ridiculing others (from the safety of your own keyboard) is not cool.

wow, clutching at straws there. As flip said, there isn't anything wrong with Ink's punctuation. If you want to talk about someone whose grammar is 'atrocious' i could point you in the direction of someone else in particular on here who you might enjoy knit-picking at

Whom may that be?

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Ink, a couple of things:

1\. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious, I can never understand a thing you say.

2\. "Sniping" and ridiculing others (from the safety of your own keyboard) is not cool.

As Flipp said, there is nothing at all wrong with Ink's grammar. You're clutching at straws there mate

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Ink, a couple of things:

1\. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious, I can never understand a thing you say.

2\. "Sniping" and ridiculing others (from the safety of your own keyboard) is not cool.

wow, clutching at straws there. As flip said, there isn't anything wrong with Ink's punctuation. If you want to talk about someone whose grammar is 'atrocious' i could point you in the direction of someone else in particular on here who you might enjoy knit-picking at

Whom may that be?

Try reading one of Tigersrule4life's posts some time

 

[happy_tiger]

Ink, a couple of things:

1\. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious, I can never understand a thing you say.

2\. "Sniping" and ridiculing others (from the safety of your own keyboard) is not cool.

Having had few tiffs with Ink I can say I have always understood him perfectly and this is a forum not an English lesson
Ink keep sniping mate most of us don't have an issue
But I still disagree with you in what body shape half backs have to be :laughing:

 

[stryker]

If we are to criticise someone on their off field misdemeanours - rightly so in Chocs many cases, then surely we can allow him a bit of praise when he does something that i'd imagine most on here have never done.

Theres no need to turn a good news story into a negative is there?

 

[Marshall_magic]

If we are to criticise someone on their off field misdemeanours - rightly so in Chocs many cases, then surely we can allow him a bit of praise when he does something that i'd imagine most on here have never done.

Theres no need to turn a good news story into a negative is there?

Exactly, whilst choc can't change what he's done, he can at least change what he does in the future. People complain that the media only publish the bad stuff, yet when the publish something positive people complain about that too. You just can't please some people.

 

[Goose]

If we are to criticise someone on their off field misdemeanours - rightly so in Chocs many cases, then surely we can allow him a bit of praise when he does something that i'd imagine most on here have never done.

Theres no need to turn a good news story into a negative is there?

My thoughts exactly. IF you are going to give it to a bloke (and in Choc's case I have), it is only fair to praise them on their good deeds, which this clearly is.

As others have said, it does not make him a saint, but it is what it is, a good deed that deserves praise.

 

[Citizen_Tiger]

A very long history of nasty off field stuff including the application of at least two AVO's for domestic violence, involving two different partners, abuse of a sponsor's daughter, then an assault on the sponsor himself, urinating in public and while sometimes you have to go, a shopfront is not the most intelligent choice, various problems in rep camps over the years, including Australian sides which Sheens has coached and culminating in the trashing of a hotel room this last Origin series. The list goes on and on. This isn't some errant schoolboy pattern of misbehaviour, this is a sociopath in action. What he does with himself doesn't concern me all that much and I'll concede that he's a half decent player, but for the media to start running 'redemption' style pieces involving soup kitchens and puppies is just fanciful spin.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

A very long history of nasty off field stuff including the application of at least two AVO's for domestic violence, involving two different partners, abuse of a sponsor's daughter, then an assault on the sponsor himself, urinating in public and while sometimes you have to go, a shopfront is not the most intelligent choice, various problems in rep camps over the years, including Australian sides which Sheens has coached and culminating in the trashing of a hotel room this last Origin series. The list goes on and on. This isn't some errant schoolboy pattern of misbehaviour, this is a sociopath in action. What he does with himself doesn't concern me all that much and I'll concede that he's a half decent player, but for the media to start running 'redemption' style pieces involving soup kitchens and puppies is just fanciful spin.

Tiger, I don't think anyone here is sprouting that he's a changed man, they're simply conceding it was a good deed, and good deeds ought to be congratulated. Personally, I'd like to hope that something like helping the homeless has struck a note with him and it gives him a heightened sense of responsibility in the way that he leads his life.

That's not me saying he is a changed man either, that's me saying no one is ever truly a write-off and it's OK to have a little hope for them.

 

[rossop]

Just one highlight from an illustrious off field career:-

Miss Rixon told the court she feared for her safety and that she had been subjected to several violent episodes during her seven-year relationship with Watmough.
On one occasion, after a New Year's Eve party in 2004, the footballer arrived home and began pelting her with coins.
"There were indents in the unit walls from the coins and one of them hit my head," she said. "I had a bruise on my forehead."
Miss Rixon said she was also hit on the shoulder with a chair thrown by Watmough and had a sliding glass door slammed into her.
She told the court she was scared of Watmough and feared further violence despite the fact their relationship had ended.
"I've seen what he has done before to me. I don't want to be hurt the way I was hurt," she said.

But it's all sweet now because he's working at the soup kitchen? Really, I despair

When I first read this article in The Terror I thought, "This is a setup". If AW didnt want it in print what were the reporters doing there? Then there is the story of how his new dog (a Husky) has helped to turn his life around. A month or so ago he stated he wanted a Pekinese just for the impact of a big footballer with such a little yap-yap. Very strange, I thought at the time.
All these photo ops indicating AW has turned the corner are all a bit much for me. If its true: good luck to him but I think the whole thing reeks of a fabrication.

 

[Yossarian]

Just one highlight from an illustrious off field career:-

Miss Rixon told the court she feared for her safety and that she had been subjected to several violent episodes during her seven-year relationship with Watmough.
On one occasion, after a New Year's Eve party in 2004, the footballer arrived home and began pelting her with coins.
"There were indents in the unit walls from the coins and one of them hit my head," she said. "I had a bruise on my forehead."
Miss Rixon said she was also hit on the shoulder with a chair thrown by Watmough and had a sliding glass door slammed into her.
She told the court she was scared of Watmough and feared further violence despite the fact their relationship had ended.
"I've seen what he has done before to me. I don't want to be hurt the way I was hurt," she said.

But it's all sweet now because he's working at the soup kitchen? Really, I despair

When I first read this article in The Terror I thought, "This is a setup". If AW didnt want it in print what were the reporters doing there? Then there is the story of how his new dog (a Husky) has helped to turn his life around. A month or so ago he stated he wanted a Pekinese just for the impact of a big footballer with such a little yap-yap. Very strange, I thought at the time.
All these photo ops indicating AW has turned the corner are all a bit much for me. If its true: good luck to him but I think the whole thing reeks of a fabrication.

What would you have had him do? Thump the reporter to prevent them doing a story? The article is pretty clear that Watmough refused to participate in the story and declined to be interviewed or provide a comment. If this was a setup on Watmough's part it seems a very strange way to go about it - get the press to show up and then refuse to co-operate. Now you can assume this is all part of the plot to make him look good but personally I doubt it. As I said before, the guy seems like a massive tool the vast majority of the time but I find it hard to begrudge him some kudos for this.