Official Match Day Thread: Roosters v Knights

[JAF]

crybully

someone who intimidates or harasses others while claiming to be a victim of ill treatment.

This sounds like Fatrell and Ezra Mam!!

[mightyrooster]

Come on Salvo, it’s ok for people to have a different opinion to you. It’s also ok to admit that a previous statement needs to now be qualified as it doesn’t fit the latest circumstances. Humility is a good thing. It’s what makes us human. None of us are perfect and you don’t have to be correct all the time. There’s often more than one way to look at or solve a problem.

[HunchoRooster]

I’ve come to the conclusion that KS is either a very disturbed individual who can’t be trusted with electrical appliances in the home OR the greatest online troll in the history of the internet. If playing a character, despite our differences in the past, I salute you for your ability to get under the skin of everyone and your consistency in doing it. My guilty pleasure is being a fan of the WWE and you’d go down as one of the greatest “heels” of all time if that’s the case. Although maybe I’m giving too much credit.

[HunchoRooster]

Can’t believe there is so much talk about Wong try?! It is deadset downward pressure and grounded deliberately with the forearm. You see Siua attempting to grab it with his hands in the build up, in a split second realising that would likely not grip it properly and knock it on, so he switches to using his forearm to just ground the ball. Was really savvy and clever from him and he deserved the try as a result. No way was it a no try, talk about salty.

[The Lip]

Thought Wong besides the try was very strong all night.

[player 1]

mmm, you're an interesting being.

I don't believe an apology is necessary. The poster was simply pointing out the manner in which, you contort statistics to suit your narrative.
It's ok and acceptable for others to disagree with your views and not get your knickers in a knot. Don't be so precious.

Is it even possible to legally defame an anonymous avatar on a footy forum? Which actual real human being, identifiable in society, has had their reputation damaged? Defamation judgements do not award financial compensation to anonymous individuals who have had their feelings hurt online by other anonymous individuals, do they? Because that's what we're really talking about here, isn't it?

All seems like a bit of a stretch - but a lawyer I am not.

[SamKerrSimp]

but I take you as being a 20 odd year old naïve person who is easily influenced and rather clueless about world and political matters.

Calling me a "20 year old naïve person who is easily influenced and rather clueless about world and political matters" does have legal ramifications - it is defamatory and a harm to my reputation under current NSW Law and as a Public Sector Employee - ICAC legislation and enquiries use the term clueless - i.e A Public Official was displayed clueless at their official function ( Public Officials engaging in conduct that is not truthful, ethical, or impartial, often for personal gain or to the detriment of others)

I request you apologise and "cease and desist" in using such harmful words when responding to any of my posts from here on out.

[player 1]

Can’t believe there is so much talk about Wong try?! It is deadset downward pressure and grounded deliberately with the forearm. You see Siua attempting to grab it with his hands in the build up, in a split second realising that would likely not grip it properly and knock it on, so he switches to using his forearm to just ground the ball. Was really savvy and clever from him and he deserved the try as a result. No way was it a no try, talk about salty.

There is outrage whenever even a line ball decision goes the roosters' way. Hatred is an intense emotion and the media will work it to get clicks every time - they don't stand to lose much - only the scorn and disrespect of the few of us who love the roosters. Everyone else hates us.

The 6 again drama of the 2019 GF - very few reported the fact that had that call not been correctly reversed, raiders would have been gifted a totally unearned repeat set of 6 tackles, on top of all the hundreds of tackles they had already had on our line failing to break our defence - including against 12 men for 10 minutes after a very harsh Cronk sinbin (as admitted by the then referees' boss - to top off the public outrage). It was the complete focus of the media for weeks afterwards, and almost all of them declined to give any credit at all to the roosters for a then historic back to back premiership. Plus for the second time in 6 years, the CC medal was given to a losing player against us. This had only happened twice previously in NRL history.

[HunchoRooster]

There is outrage whenever even a line ball decision goes the roosters' way. Hatred is an intense emotion and the media will work it to get clicks every time - they don't stand to lose much - only the scorn and disrespect of the few of us who love the roosters. Everyone else hates us.

The 6 again drama of the 2019 GF - very few reported the fact that had that call not been correctly reversed, raiders would have been gifted a totally unearned repeat set of 6 tackles, on top of all the hundreds of tackles they had already had on our line failing to break our defence - including against 12 men for 10 minutes after a very harsh Cronk sinbin (as admitted by the then referees' boss - to top off the public outrage). It was the complete focus of the media for weeks afterwards, and almost all of them declined to give any credit at all to the roosters for a then historic back to back premiership. Plus for the second time in 6 years, the CC medal was given to a losing player against us. This had only happened twice previously in NRL history.

Yeah it’s a 1 in a 100 event when it does occur but let’s forget the other 99 times and focus on the negative. Dont disagree with you there. We are the club everybody loves to hate. As a side note, I always thought they didn’t want to give the CC to SBW because of the bias against Union, they didn’t want him getting all the individual plaudits in league. As for 2019, god knows. That was absolute robbery. Especially when you consider 2023 when Mam scored a solo hat trick in what is arguably the greatest individual performance by a losing player in GF history, and he didn’t win it. In hindsight probably good for the game that he didn’t win it but the point is that it makes the DCE and Wighton calls even more of a joke. Definite bias there.

I just think with the Wong try example though it’s so obviously a try and they are rage baiting for no reason by saying it isn’t. They need to revisit the rule book.

[Bates]

Lol@Sally

[Inflictor]

Can’t believe there is so much talk about Wong try?! It is deadset downward pressure and grounded deliberately with the forearm. You see Siua attempting to grab it with his hands in the build up, in a split second realising that would likely not grip it properly and knock it on, so he switches to using his forearm to just ground the ball. Was really savvy and clever from him and he deserved the try as a result. No way was it a no try, talk about salty.

If that was their fullback who was trying to ground the ball with his arm and it rolled away and Wong put his hand on it would it have been a grounding by the fullback and No Try?

Imagine if that happened and Wong was then given a try. Same outrage. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

It's just an Easts thing and I enjoy every negative comment.

FFS

[player 1]

Yeah it’s a 1 in a 100 event when it does occur but let’s forget the other 99 times and focus on the negative. Dont disagree with you there. We are the club everybody loves to hate. As a side note, I always thought they didn’t want to give the CC to SBW because of the bias against Union, they didn’t want him getting all the individual plaudits in league. As for 2019, god knows. That was absolute robbery. Especially when you consider 2023 when Mam scored a solo hat trick in what is arguably the greatest individual performance by a losing player in GF history, and he didn’t win it. In hindsight probably good for the game that he didn’t win it but the point is that it makes the DCE and Wighton calls even more of a joke. Definite bias there.

I just think with the Wong try example though it’s so obviously a try and they are rage baiting for no reason by saying it isn’t. They need to revisit the rule book.

Interesting take on SBW - may well be on the money.

If they were fair dinkum and wanted a losing player CCM winner - 2000 GF - Luke Phillips kept it a two tries to one margin against a far stronger Brisbane side. Without his heroic performance at fullback that score would have been blown right out. As it was, Fitzy's sideline conversion attempt failed by inches to clear the crossbar, which would have made the last 5 minutes a 1 converted try game.

[Jacks Fur Coat]

Look at the pile on for the King! What brave warriors we have who frequent this site. Always safety in numbers.

[007]

Look at the pile on for the King! What brave warriors we have who frequent this site. Always safety in numbers.

Safety in numbers? Have you ever considered that the majority of posters on The Chookpen are sick to death of Dr. Googles hypocrisy, diatribe, cyber bullying, the endless, countless pointless threads he starts to which he only responds to, his Americanisms, his threats (yes, he's been banned once already for advocating violence), his boring stats which as Rooster_6 pointed out correctly was to suit his own narrative.

Maybe you'd like to try and back King 'chicken Kiev' Salvos comment up? Oh, wait I forgot, you are incapable of doing that.

If I were Rooster_6 (or any other moderator for that matter), I would have banned whom I consider the 'Ezra Mam' of the Chookpen a very, very long time ago.

[caz]

haha, ks has a winning way about him. no doubt he's faux omniscient, condescending and supercilious but he's just different. block him if he offends you.
called me a communist once and i told him i was an anti-communist and his reply suggested he didn't care what sort of a communist i was.
there's a difference between saying someone 'presents' something dishonestly and saying that they 'are' dishonest. and yeah, how can you be defamed when you haven't been identified? to take legal action you'd have to go public. big fella, don't make threats that you're not going to carry out