Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket
-
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
-
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
-
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel for what it's worth I don't drink.
But keep banging your drum if that's what works for you.
And look up abuse in the dictionary whilst at it.
When did you stop?
This is ridiculous. You abused other posters for their opinions. You couldn't back any of it up so now you're getting on your high horse.
@rancid-schnitzel said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel for what it's worth I don't drink.
But keep banging your drum if that's what works for you.
And look up abuse in the dictionary whilst at it.
When did you stop?
This is ridiculous. You abused other posters for their opinions. You couldn't back any of it up so now you're getting on your high horse.
None of the above happened?
I'm not even sure what your debating now.
a. I abused nobody
b. Everybody has the same facts. Everything else Is open to interpretation. I've laid out what I view and why.
c. High horse? Irony?It's not me calling others drunk because I don't agree with them.
-
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
@rancid-schnitzel you say he used the kids as a screen.
I say he was just taking them to the car after a long flight.
You say you can see through him to his scheming sympathy garnering via his toddlers
I say I see a man who's lost a terrble amount and wants to take himself, his wife and kids home, and carrying one of the kids through the airport to the car is how you do that.
-
Reality is that if warner had approached things the same way smith did and vice Versa, everybodies views and direction of bouts would be exactly the same due to preconceived thoughts.
The day a Dad gets abuse for carrying his sleeping 3 year old daughter off a plane is the day the world has lost the plot.
Those who abused him for that get a grip and take a look at yourself.
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Those who abused him for that get a grip and take a look at yourself.
What was this? Friendly advice?
Wouldn't be the first time.
-
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Those who abused him for that get a grip and take a look at yourself.
What was this? Friendly advice?
Wouldn't be the first time.
-
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
@rancid-schnitzel said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
Virgil asked who in their right mind would put their kids through that media scrum, and you read that.
-
@rancid-schnitzel you say he used the kids as a screen.
I say he was just taking them to the car after a long flight.
You say you can see through him to his scheming sympathy garnering via his toddlers
I say I see a man who's lost a terrble amount and wants to take himself, his wife and kids home, and carrying one of the kids through the airport to the car is how you do that.
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel you say he used the kids as a screen.
I say he was just taking them to the car after a long flight.
You say you can see through him to his scheming sympathy garnering via his toddlers
I say I see a man who's lost a terrble amount and wants to take himself, his wife and kids home, and carrying one of the kids through the airport to the car is how you do that.
And I see a guy who got caught hook line and sinker.
If I'd done something like this and knew that the press would meet me at the airport, there is no farking way Id let my family get off the plane until I'd gone through. It's disgusting and so obviously transparent. But if you think it's acceptable then that's your opinion and I won't be asking you to take a look at yourself.
-
@rancid-schnitzel that's abuse?
For calling out people who are abusing a guy for carrying a child?
Umm. Ok.
Quick question for you - may I please enquirer if you have been drinking?
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel that's abuse?
For calling out people who are abusing a guy for carrying a child?
Umm. Ok.
Quick question for you - may I please enquirer if you have been drinking?
Yes, it was just a guy, any old guy, just carrying a child. Why that could have been any of us. What a ridiculous thing to write.
You admitted you'd been drinking the last time you lost the plot which is why I asked.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
Virgil asked who in their right mind would put their kids through that media scrum, and you read that.
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
Virgil asked who in their right mind would put their kids through that media scrum, and you read that.
And? Who said anything about psychological trauma or lasting damage? Unless you think it was the right thing to do if it could have been avoided?
-
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel you say he used the kids as a screen.
I say he was just taking them to the car after a long flight.
You say you can see through him to his scheming sympathy garnering via his toddlers
I say I see a man who's lost a terrble amount and wants to take himself, his wife and kids home, and carrying one of the kids through the airport to the car is how you do that.
And I see a guy who got caught hook line and sinker.
If I'd done something like this and knew that the press would meet me at the airport, there is no farking way Id let my family get off the plane until I'd gone through. It's disgusting and so obviously transparent. But if you think it's acceptable then that's your opinion and I won't be asking you to take a look at yourself.
-
@rancid-schnitzel how do you hold up the plane for an hour And insist the wife and 2 irritable kids stay on board?
Serious question
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel how do you hold up the plane for an hour And insist the wife and 2 irritable kids stay on board?
Serious question
What? That must have been the only option right. I mean he could never have just gotten off first could he? That would have been a logistical nightmare.
-
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rancid-schnitzel how do you hold up the plane for an hour And insist the wife and 2 irritable kids stay on board?
Serious question
What? That must have been the only option right. I mean he could never have just gotten off first could he? That would have been a logistical nightmare.
@rancid-schnitzel who carries the child? Candice can only carry one, who carries the other?
I can fully explain my scenario from the plane arrival to home. He carries the kid to the car obstructed somewhat by the rigours of his job
Your scenario involves a confirmation of his character that is not obvious from observation of these events.
Your narrative implies further deceipt from a convicted cheater.
My narrative implies he's beaten and fucked whatever he does.
Could he not be pr plotting, but rather just taking the family home?
-
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
@rancid-schnitzel said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@siam said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The everlasting and grave psychological trauma for a 3 year old being carried through a partially full airport (way less commotion than Indian airports) to a taxi service outside the terminal, enroute to home, in Daddy's arms is being slightly overstated here I think
Yes because that's what has been argued by no one.
Ok ..that's enough you are close to having an enforced rest.
-
The sad reality is the flip side of this is, Warner walks through the airport alone to take the heat, while the family is ushered out thr side door, the next day there is a photo and the headline is
"Disgraced cricketer abandoned by family"
-
TBF, most people at thier dark times want family close by, your kid and thier non-judging innocence will help...yes it was probably contrived and set up to garner some sympathy, but by the same account, having your kid with you at such a low point would be a big comfort.
DDD is still a muppet though.
-
I also think that holding your child may help to keep your emotions in check should people / journalists try to bait you.
Reckon I'd have made some better decisions over the years if holding my sleeping 3 year old daughter!
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
I also think that holding your child may help to keep your emotions in check should people / journalists try to bait you.
Reckon I'd have made some better decisions over the years if holding my sleeping 3 year old daughter!
Shame Davy wasn’t allowed to carry one of his girls during his cricketing career
Might have stopped him acting like the cock he was. -
The sad reality is the flip side of this is, Warner walks through the airport alone to take the heat, while the family is ushered out thr side door, the next day there is a photo and the headline is
"Disgraced cricketer abandoned by family"
@mariner4life said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The sad reality is the flip side of this is, Warner walks through the airport alone to take the heat, while the family is ushered out thr side door, the next day there is a photo and the headline is
"Disgraced cricketer abandoned by family"
I would agree with that and then criticism of those claiming that would be more than justified.
Look, I think DW is probably a fantastic father and husband, who is devoted to his family. I applaud him for having them on tour and anyone who criticises him for that is a cnut. But in this case it was quite clear he was trying to get sympathy and to get through the media with as least amount of harassment as possible. As much as he loves his family and they him, this is something he has done and he should be a man and leave them out of it, not use them to relieve pressure on himself.
-
TBF, most people at thier dark times want family close by, your kid and thier non-judging innocence will help...yes it was probably contrived and set up to garner some sympathy, but by the same account, having your kid with you at such a low point would be a big comfort.
DDD is still a muppet though.
I see some people still have sympathy for Warner.
Me. I see the tears -- from an alleged hard man -- and think "fuckin' sook".
No, I haven't been through that sort of thing on that scale. But there'd be none of the blubbing, that I am sure of.
He was game for abuse. Now he's reaping the reward.
