Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

Foster, Robertson etc

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
allblacks
5.7k Posts 131 Posters 759.8k Views 3 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • canefanC canefan

    @nzzp said in Foster must go:

    @Crucial said in Foster must go:

    @nzzp said in Foster must go:

    @Crucial said in Foster must go:

    @nzzp said in Foster must go:

    @Crucial said in Foster must go:

    Oh god I’ve just realised that Gatland is still floating around.

    If I was as evil as some other posters I could have started a thread titled “Gatland takes over”

    Not trolling, but I'd have him in the AB setup in a heartbeat. He worked wonders with the Lions; mixed record with Wales but they were competitive with a limited set of players. He's got international experience, and would be a safe(ish) pair of hands.

    Honest question: Foster vs Gatland, who ya got?

    Which has the better Super Rugby coaching record?

    Super and Tests are not the same game.

    Who's got a better international record? (actually, that's a bloody goo dquestion - is Gatland's win percentage against T1 better than Foster's?)

    Frankly, I think Gatland is a much better coach than Foster. for one, he can coach rush defence - something no one in NZ seems to do consistently.

    Who’s going to do the Wazzaball hit ups?

    he coached a scratch team to be super competitive with the ABs. That's impressive. He's clearly a good coach ... I don't get the animosity against him. Well, except for the Chiefs supporters 😛 But even then, good coaches can have bad years.

    Kiwis don't like whingers. But he is a good coach

    taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugby
    wrote on last edited by
    #591

    @canefan well he did say anyone could coach the ABs....

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • nzzpN nzzp

      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

      Oh god I’ve just realised that Gatland is still floating around.

      If I was as evil as some other posters I could have started a thread titled “Gatland takes over”

      Not trolling, but I'd have him in the AB setup in a heartbeat. He worked wonders with the Lions; mixed record with Wales but they were competitive with a limited set of players. He's got international experience, and would be a safe(ish) pair of hands.

      Honest question: Foster vs Gatland, who ya got?

      BonesB Offline
      BonesB Offline
      Bones
      wrote on last edited by Bones
      #592

      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

      Oh god I’ve just realised that Gatland is still floating around.

      If I was as evil as some other posters I could have started a thread titled “Gatland takes over”

      Not trolling, but I'd have him in the AB setup in a heartbeat. He worked wonders with the Lions; mixed record with Wales but they were competitive with a limited set of players. He's got international experience, and would be a safe(ish) pair of hands.

      Honest question: Foster vs Gatland, who ya got?

      Yeah exactly, coached a team he had full selection over to a draw with a much better AB's, as well as a decent B team record, over a short period of time, for what...the same amount around about as matches played in a RWC if you reach the final?

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • mariner4lifeM mariner4life

        @Crucial said in Foster must go:

        @Tim said in Foster must go:

        Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

        Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
        If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

        yeah fair point

        voodooV Offline
        voodooV Offline
        voodoo
        wrote on last edited by
        #593

        @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

        @Crucial said in Foster must go:

        @Tim said in Foster must go:

        Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

        Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
        If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

        yeah fair point

        @Crucial

        It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

        F nostrildamusN 2 Replies Last reply
        2
        • ACT CrusaderA ACT Crusader

          @BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:

          I don't care if we lose against SA.

          0d705baf-a7f5-4e2a-8a6e-9a587f0e76fe-image.jpeg

          There’s nothing more that I hate than losing to the Boks.

          voodooV Offline
          voodooV Offline
          voodoo
          wrote on last edited by
          #594

          @ACT-Crusader said in Foster must go:

          @BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:

          I don't care if we lose against SA.

          0d705baf-a7f5-4e2a-8a6e-9a587f0e76fe-image.jpeg

          There’s nothing more that I hate than losing to the Boks.

          Really???

          I'd say they'd be the team that I can most tolerate losing to. Certainly preferable to England, Ireland, Australia, any other 6n team (though surprisingly I can deal with losses to the French ), Georgia, Samoa or Tonga, Spain or Portugal.

          ACT CrusaderA 1 Reply Last reply
          3
          • voodooV voodoo

            @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

            @Crucial said in Foster must go:

            @Tim said in Foster must go:

            Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

            Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
            If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

            yeah fair point

            @Crucial

            It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

            F Offline
            F Offline
            Frye
            wrote on last edited by
            #595

            @voodoo said in Foster must go:

            @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

            @Crucial said in Foster must go:

            @Tim said in Foster must go:

            Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

            Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
            If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

            yeah fair point

            @Crucial

            It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

            Yes exactly, you don't calculate the cost of paying someone out by also including the cost of the new hire. That's nonsensical.

            As for the assistants, quite frankly considering their resumes they shouldn't be on particularly high salaries anyway.

            broughieB 1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • MrDenmoreM Offline
              MrDenmoreM Offline
              MrDenmore
              wrote on last edited by
              #596

              The other cost not being considered is the damage to Silver Lake’s equity stake from the reputational damage to the AB brand. I think that is more substantial than the cost of paying out the contracts of the incompetent incumbents. Don’t underestimate the pressure coming to bear there.

              canefanC Rancid SchnitzelR 2 Replies Last reply
              1
              • MrDenmoreM MrDenmore

                The other cost not being considered is the damage to Silver Lake’s equity stake from the reputational damage to the AB brand. I think that is more substantial than the cost of paying out the contracts of the incompetent incumbents. Don’t underestimate the pressure coming to bear there.

                canefanC Online
                canefanC Online
                canefan
                wrote on last edited by
                #597

                @MrDenmore said in Foster must go:

                The other cost not being considered is the damage to Silver Lake’s equity stake from the reputational damage to the AB brand. I think that is more substantial than the cost of paying out the contracts of the incompetent incumbents. Don’t underestimate the pressure coming to bear there.

                We can only hope

                1 Reply Last reply
                1
                • mariner4lifeM mariner4life

                  @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                  Just a question. That initial squad was for the Ireland series only wasn't it? When does the new squad get announced considering that they are meant to fly out soon?

                  had the same thought this morning

                  any change has to be now, or we wait until October.

                  If they decide to wait until October i can see him staying the other 12 months unless we lose absolutely everything.

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  junior
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #598

                  @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

                  @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                  Just a question. That initial squad was for the Ireland series only wasn't it? When does the new squad get announced considering that they are meant to fly out soon?

                  had the same thought this morning

                  any change has to be now, or we wait until October.

                  If they decide to wait until October i can see him staying the other 12 months unless we lose absolutely everything.

                  And we won't lose everything because we will beat Argentina because they're shit, and we will beat Australia at Eden Park because we always do. Hell, we may even beat the Boks in one of those matches on the basis that Rassie & Co may just be charitable enough to play their B team again. And if all or any of that happens, there will, from NZR's perspective, be enough improvement and "learnings" to show that keeping Fozzie on for the 2023 RWC is the most prudent course of action.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • CrucialC Crucial

                    @Machpants said in Foster must go:

                    Just so we have facts not conjecture!

                    d93455b9-a8cc-45df-bcbe-2b61405e7a79-image.png

                    Jeez Lozza was shit as well and he wasn’t even fat.

                    nostrildamusN Offline
                    nostrildamusN Offline
                    nostrildamus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #599

                    @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                    @Machpants said in Foster must go:

                    Just so we have facts not conjecture!

                    d93455b9-a8cc-45df-bcbe-2b61405e7a79-image.png

                    Jeez Lozza was shit as well and he wasn’t even fat.

                    Come back Wayne Smith!

                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    2
                    • canefanC canefan

                      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                      Oh god I’ve just realised that Gatland is still floating around.

                      If I was as evil as some other posters I could have started a thread titled “Gatland takes over”

                      Not trolling, but I'd have him in the AB setup in a heartbeat. He worked wonders with the Lions; mixed record with Wales but they were competitive with a limited set of players. He's got international experience, and would be a safe(ish) pair of hands.

                      Honest question: Foster vs Gatland, who ya got?

                      Which has the better Super Rugby coaching record?

                      Super and Tests are not the same game.

                      Who's got a better international record? (actually, that's a bloody goo dquestion - is Gatland's win percentage against T1 better than Foster's?)

                      Frankly, I think Gatland is a much better coach than Foster. for one, he can coach rush defence - something no one in NZ seems to do consistently.

                      Who’s going to do the Wazzaball hit ups?

                      he coached a scratch team to be super competitive with the ABs. That's impressive. He's clearly a good coach ... I don't get the animosity against him. Well, except for the Chiefs supporters 😛 But even then, good coaches can have bad years.

                      Kiwis don't like whingers. But he is a good coach

                      nostrildamusN Offline
                      nostrildamusN Offline
                      nostrildamus
                      wrote on last edited by nostrildamus
                      #600

                      @canefan said in Foster must go:

                      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                      @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                      @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                      Oh god I’ve just realised that Gatland is still floating around.

                      If I was as evil as some other posters I could have started a thread titled “Gatland takes over”

                      Not trolling, but I'd have him in the AB setup in a heartbeat. He worked wonders with the Lions; mixed record with Wales but they were competitive with a limited set of players. He's got international experience, and would be a safe(ish) pair of hands.

                      Honest question: Foster vs Gatland, who ya got?

                      Which has the better Super Rugby coaching record?

                      Super and Tests are not the same game.

                      Who's got a better international record? (actually, that's a bloody goo dquestion - is Gatland's win percentage against T1 better than Foster's?)

                      Frankly, I think Gatland is a much better coach than Foster. for one, he can coach rush defence - something no one in NZ seems to do consistently.

                      Who’s going to do the Wazzaball hit ups?

                      he coached a scratch team to be super competitive with the ABs. That's impressive. He's clearly a good coach ... I don't get the animosity against him. Well, except for the Chiefs supporters 😛 But even then, good coaches can have bad years.

                      Kiwis don't like whingers.

                      Changing my post because...well...
                      But don't think Gatland could suddenly drop what he is doing...

                      BovidaeB 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • MN5M MN5

                        @Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:

                        @Machpants

                        God, I'd forgotten Vodanovich. Made Foster look like a genius.

                        Who is Alex McDonald ?

                        I bet he got some nasty letters in the mail that took days to arrive.

                        A Offline
                        A Offline
                        ARHS
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #601

                        Who is Alex McDonald ?

                        I bet he got some nasty letters in the mail that took days to arrive.

                        The celebrated 1905 All Black. You can do the math on his age.........

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • voodooV voodoo

                          @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

                          @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                          @Tim said in Foster must go:

                          Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

                          Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
                          If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

                          yeah fair point

                          @Crucial

                          It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

                          nostrildamusN Offline
                          nostrildamusN Offline
                          nostrildamus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #602

                          @voodoo said in Foster must go:

                          @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

                          @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                          @Tim said in Foster must go:

                          Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

                          Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
                          If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

                          yeah fair point

                          @Crucial

                          It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

                          But surely the real cost, is, how well will the brand do over the next two years the way we are going?

                          voodooV 1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • nostrildamusN nostrildamus

                            @canefan said in Foster must go:

                            @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                            @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                            @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                            @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                            @nzzp said in Foster must go:

                            @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                            Oh god I’ve just realised that Gatland is still floating around.

                            If I was as evil as some other posters I could have started a thread titled “Gatland takes over”

                            Not trolling, but I'd have him in the AB setup in a heartbeat. He worked wonders with the Lions; mixed record with Wales but they were competitive with a limited set of players. He's got international experience, and would be a safe(ish) pair of hands.

                            Honest question: Foster vs Gatland, who ya got?

                            Which has the better Super Rugby coaching record?

                            Super and Tests are not the same game.

                            Who's got a better international record? (actually, that's a bloody goo dquestion - is Gatland's win percentage against T1 better than Foster's?)

                            Frankly, I think Gatland is a much better coach than Foster. for one, he can coach rush defence - something no one in NZ seems to do consistently.

                            Who’s going to do the Wazzaball hit ups?

                            he coached a scratch team to be super competitive with the ABs. That's impressive. He's clearly a good coach ... I don't get the animosity against him. Well, except for the Chiefs supporters 😛 But even then, good coaches can have bad years.

                            Kiwis don't like whingers.

                            Changing my post because...well...
                            But don't think Gatland could suddenly drop what he is doing...

                            BovidaeB Offline
                            BovidaeB Offline
                            Bovidae
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #603

                            @nostrildamus said in Foster must go:

                            But don't think Gatland could suddenly drop what he is doing...

                            He is still contracted to the Chiefs until 2023 but has spoken about going overseas again.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • nostrildamusN nostrildamus

                              @voodoo said in Foster must go:

                              @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

                              @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                              @Tim said in Foster must go:

                              Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

                              Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
                              If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

                              yeah fair point

                              @Crucial

                              It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

                              But surely the real cost, is, how well will the brand do over the next two years the way we are going?

                              voodooV Offline
                              voodooV Offline
                              voodoo
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #604

                              @nostrildamus said in Foster must go:

                              @voodoo said in Foster must go:

                              @mariner4life said in Foster must go:

                              @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                              @Tim said in Foster must go:

                              Newshub claimed that they've been informed by "sources" that sacking Foster would cost $3M to $4M.

                              Depends how you add it up. Maybe 18 months payout for Foster (NZRs fault) and 18 months for the new guy.
                              If Schmidt he’s already on a contract so the increase won’t be a full salary. Then there’s the assistants to pay out.

                              yeah fair point

                              @Crucial

                              It's semi-fair. The cost of the replacement guys shouldn't be counted as an additional cost, just any incremental cost above what the current guys are getting. Meaningless number if we count both in any assessment of what to do from here.

                              But surely the real cost, is, how well will the brand do over the next two years the way we are going?

                              The brand is everything!

                              J 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • Victor MeldrewV Victor Meldrew

                                @MN5 said in Foster must go:

                                @Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:

                                @Machpants

                                God, I'd forgotten Vodanovich. Made Foster look like a genius.

                                Who is Alex McDonald ?

                                I bet he got some nasty letters in the mail that took days to arrive.

                                1949 would be the 4 Test tour to Sth Africa. Tough ask to win there with Saffa refs in those days, so he's excused.

                                Vodanovich was awful and the start a decade of dumping coaches every year or so as we bumped along the bottom. Just pray we aren't in the start of a run like that.

                                Rancid SchnitzelR Offline
                                Rancid SchnitzelR Offline
                                Rancid Schnitzel
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #605

                                @Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:

                                @MN5 said in Foster must go:

                                @Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:

                                @Machpants

                                God, I'd forgotten Vodanovich. Made Foster look like a genius.

                                Who is Alex McDonald ?

                                I bet he got some nasty letters in the mail that took days to arrive.

                                1949 would be the 4 Test tour to Sth Africa. Tough ask to win there with Saffa refs in those days, so he's excused.

                                Vodanovich was awful and the start a decade of dumping coaches every year or so as we bumped along the bottom. Just pray we aren't in the start of a run like that.

                                I think he (Donald) also had health problems and the altitude effed him up? In any case that appears to have been the tour from hell and they were bloody unlucky not to win one of those tests. Interesting fact, a bobbled ball was counted as a knock on back then.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • MrDenmoreM MrDenmore

                                  The other cost not being considered is the damage to Silver Lake’s equity stake from the reputational damage to the AB brand. I think that is more substantial than the cost of paying out the contracts of the incompetent incumbents. Don’t underestimate the pressure coming to bear there.

                                  Rancid SchnitzelR Offline
                                  Rancid SchnitzelR Offline
                                  Rancid Schnitzel
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #606

                                  @MrDenmore said in Foster must go:

                                  The other cost not being considered is the damage to Silver Lake’s equity stake from the reputational damage to the AB brand. I think that is more substantial than the cost of paying out the contracts of the incompetent incumbents. Don’t underestimate the pressure coming to bear there.

                                  Tbh I don't think those tards even care. They just see a wellknown brand to exploit like the Yankees or Chicago Bulls. And while we see the brand being thrashed by the Foster (who is also fat) dynasty, it will still remain strong and identifiable for a good while yet.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  1
                                  • nostrildamusN nostrildamus

                                    @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                                    @Machpants said in Foster must go:

                                    Just so we have facts not conjecture!

                                    d93455b9-a8cc-45df-bcbe-2b61405e7a79-image.png

                                    Jeez Lozza was shit as well and he wasn’t even fat.

                                    Come back Wayne Smith!

                                    S Offline
                                    S Offline
                                    stodders
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #607

                                    @nostrildamus said in Foster must go:

                                    @Crucial said in Foster must go:

                                    @Machpants said in Foster must go:

                                    Just so we have facts not conjecture!

                                    d93455b9-a8cc-45df-bcbe-2b61405e7a79-image.png

                                    Jeez Lozza was shit as well and he wasn’t even fat.

                                    Come back Wayne Smith!

                                    He's busy sorting out the Black Ferns. I'm afraid a new hero is required ☺️

                                    nostrildamusN 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • canefanC Online
                                      canefanC Online
                                      canefan
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #608

                                      JK said it best. Takes a shit coach to recognise a shit coach. It's not just that we are losing. I can accept losing if we go down swinging against a superior team. But it's the way we are losing that is dismaying

                                      nostrildamusN 1 Reply Last reply
                                      2
                                      • Victor MeldrewV Victor Meldrew

                                        @PecoTrain said in Foster must go:

                                        If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...

                                        Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.

                                        What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?

                                        boobooB Offline
                                        boobooB Offline
                                        booboo
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #609

                                        @Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:

                                        @PecoTrain said in Foster must go:

                                        If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...

                                        Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.

                                        What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?

                                        I'm way behind on my Ferning. Post 312 of 517 ...

                                        Any, to answer your question. No. Gets a free ride this year. And realistically to end RWC I'd appoint till end 2024.

                                        This year taking over the team with no prep.
                                        Needs to have full on crack at RWC, which can be forgiven if unsuccessful.
                                        But if there bad results/performances continue, the excuses will have worn thin.

                                        Much like they have now.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • BonesB Offline
                                          BonesB Offline
                                          Bones
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #610

                                          Schmidt, MacMillan and O'Halloran as caretakers? Or are we down on MacMillan now?

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Search
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Search