here mate, your own quote.

you accused me of making it up when clearly from the thread there are examples of what ive said.

dont worry, i dont get offended when people say im a liar.

regardless of who i support I love to gloat when I see arrogance fall flat out in its ar5e! Aside from the fact I thought what Stuart did was disgraceful for a national coach (of any side) and he had to go, the fact he was the Australian coach and the fact Australians had been so arrogant leading up to the tournament just made me laugh, alot!

That's not what I said.



I have not said there is no gloating - I've said the objection to Stuart's behaviour is not simply due to him being the then Australian coach.

Like I said earlier, you make things up.

how can i have made it up when the post above yours specifically is from someone who says he is gloating.

you really should apologize for saying i made it up, but i doubt you will

Because I didn't claim there was no gloating. That was something you made up.

I've posted my quote, and it makes no reference to an absence of gloating - it points out that the objection to Stuarts behaviour is not motivated purely by who he coaches. There is an objection to that sort of behaviour from a coach [ifull stop[/i.

sorry but thats a load of BS.

if you dont want to admit you are wrong thats fine enough with me.

It's not - and anyone who cares to read my comments will see that it's something you've simply [imade up[/i.

Please quote exactly where I said there was no gloating.

dally messenger wrote: and judging from the gloating on here, i think my point stands.


you - No, it doesn't.

This is you making things up again, and hoping people won't notice. It's a strange tactic, particularly as people can simply read the thread.

your reacting to one post, me the other one.

but hey you stick to the liar claim, its making you look good.

This doesn't make sense, and it certainly doesn't quote where I said there was no gloating.

You're not quoting me saying that because I did not say it - you made it up.

how can i have made something up which a person has admitted to doing.

Because I didn't say there was no gloating, so whether someone admits to doing so is irrelevant to your claims regarding what I said.

All you have to do is quote my post where I said there was no gloating.

just repeating myself mate.

just go with liar liar pants on fire, it saves time

Yes, because you can't quote where I said what you claim I've said. You can't do it because you [imade it up[/i.

You never cease to amaze with your alternate reality (population: 1).

Seems to be a recurring theme this, that when people try and converse with Dally, we all end up wondering what we are discussing because rather than answer a question and show himself up that hes wrong, he will just dodge it and come back with something totally irrelevant and add a laughing smily to it.

That's because everyone else but him is a Rugby Union fan.

Use they correct terminology - we're all [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Hopkinsunion trolls!!11!!!one!!!1[/url

hey dopey ive never accused you of being a union troll have i now?

"we" = "the people who don't inhabit your alternate reality*"

* [iWelcome to Dally's Alternate Reality! Population: 1[/i.

you just keep lieing about me mate, i think its funny.

thats twice in 2 days.

I appreciate that transferral is a standard technique for people such as yourself who are constantly humiliated on websites such as this one, but surely you don't think [ianyone[/i will fall for this ruse?

like i said before dopey, ive never called you a union troll.

Here we go again.

I made a lighthearted comparison to TARANIS - if you want to take it seriously and literally, and it seems you do, then the only response is:

Please quote where I said you had accused me of being a troll.

Remember, if you want to take things [iliterally[/i (and it seems you do), you'll need a [iliteral quote[/i.

So, off you pop.

You should know, however, that we all know you're about to jump through hoops in an attempt to claim my Witchsmeller Persuivant reference somehow equates to a literal claim equating to "Dally called me a troll". So it should be funny to see the results.