Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Cam wrote:Worse, in 2002 when he said it he was lambasted and lampooned. Every man and his dog shouted that poor guy down, all the while hiding their mounds of the white stuff and spliffs under the metaphorical tables with one hand whilst using the other to point at Dale Lewis and laugh.

He deserves an official AFL apology.

Interesting coming from one G Lyon, behold, from 2002.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/ ... 48371.html

Yeah I remember his interview with Mike on Open Mike where he talked about his claims of drug use and how he was treated after that. I mention his name because of the fact that he became a bit of an outcast after suggesting there was widespread drug use.

Probably a good case for him to come out with a big "I told you so." but it has always seemed even now there's a bit of a naive reaction to the possibility of drug use in the AFL.


An apology to him is needed when you see the last few years with so many drug stories. But not just that a better stance on them, and better way to get them off the drugs so we don't have a Chris Mainwaring tragedy.

Krakouer Magic wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:

E wrote:I was thinking the other day about a few of the players from the Eagles who got into trouble during the drug troubled years of the Eagles. Most noticeably, the late Chris Mainwaring and Ben Cousin, who I understand may be in a mental institution now (after a bunch of arrests for bizarre behavior last year). Now I don't know if the Eagles troubles during this period was limited just to these two blokes, I doubt it.

what I think is interesting is that no one really focuses on the fact that Mick Malthouse was the coach at that time. I wonder why nothing stuck on him for their behavior.

Listening to Terry Wallace talk about his meeting with Cousins, blind freddy would have known these guys were on the gear in a serious way.

My question is why didn't Mick do more to help these kids. Doesn't the club have a responsibility to their players to take care of them?

FFS, Mick left them at the end of 1999.

This is a absolute joke of a thread on so many levels. How many players tested positive to PED's under Malthouse at Collingwood? Under your logic Bucks just didnt do enough to stop Thomas and Keefe snorting coke and getting done for PED's.

I don't particularly want to bring this up, but under your logic I guess Matthews is responsible for Darren Millane (god rest his soul) too. Are Collingwood and Port Adelaide jointly responsible for JMac's (RIP) death?

Coaches really have very little control over the off feild behaviour of individual, or a group of, players. Didn't we have a load of guys hair test positive for drug use recently? That's one thing I don't blame Bucks for. He has f@ck all control over what players do in their own time. Young blokes will always test boundaries and experiment with booze and drugs.

All a club can do is provide good education on the subject matter, advise them to think about the consequences and then hope to god they make the right decision. If the club finds out about a "drug culture" then I guess the club can delist or trade them off or offer counselling.

I mean seriously, you dredge up this WCE sh!t and we just redrafted two players that admitted cocaine use and tested positive to PED's. From a hardline point of view people could say Collingwood is soft on drugs. But from a rational point of view I commend the club for giving the guys a second chance.

To unload the WCE issues onto Malthouse is just f@cking ridiculous. Have some respect for a Collingwood premiership coach.

Great post. Sums up my thoughts on this matter entirely.

And, David, now you've seen it, perhaps you could consign it to "Other AFL", where it belongs?

Mountains Magpie wrote:

5 from the wing on debut wrote:

Daniel wrote:Chad Fletcher

Thank's Daniel. I wasn't quite truthful. I was aware of the name but even though this is a notice board there is no immunity from defamation laws. If something is defamatory this board assists the plaintiff by publishing the amount of views the post has received.

You can't be successfully sued for defamation if you are telling the truth.

MM

5 from the wing on Debut - as you don't seem to have a regard for the truth, maybe you should study law, so that you can fit in with other bullshit artists and make a living out of lying.

Now try to sue me for defamation, and see how far you will get

Or you can grow a set and live with integrity and make something positive out of your life.

Daniel wrote:Or you can grow a set and live with integrity and make something positive out of your life.

Daniel, you are really quite a strange individual. You know nothing about me or about my life yet see fit to comment about it? As you appear to be interested, my set is doing quite well thank you. My family are also well. As is my business, my staff and my clients. My dog is also quite content, asleep at my feet in front of the fire.

It's amazing the sense of security some people have sitting behind a computer and insulting people that they have never met. A confident person would not have the need to behave in your manner. Your post indicates two things. Insecurity and ignorance.

I would love to debate the defamation issue with you but your ignorance on the topic makes it quite clear that you are starting from such a low level that there is no point. A year 11 legal studies student would be expected to have a better knowledge than you have displayed. Come back to me when you have done some research- there is a legal website called Austlii which you may care to refer to. You will find many reported defamation cases there. Although, by reading your previous exchange with E in which your rambling non-sensical argument was an embarrassment to you, I doubt your capacity to do so. There are some long words used in places but if you break them up into their components and say them out loud to yourself you should then be able to pronounce them.

Didn't you mention in your exchange with E that you were a financial planner and that you would have advised Cloke to take less money on his contract next year? I had a good laugh about that. It reminded me of George from Seinfeld. He always pretended that he was an architect but why would you pretend to be a financial planner? If you are one, are those your clients that were sleeping rough in the city square?

Anyway, I have had enough of shooting fish in a barrel for the moment but will be happy to continue once you respond.

Have a nice evening.

5 from the wing on debut wrote:

Daniel wrote:Or you can grow a set and live with integrity and make something positive out of your life.

Daniel, you are really quite a strange individual. You know nothing about me or about my life yet see fit to comment about it? As you appear to be interested, my set is doing quite well thank you. My family are also well. As is my business, my staff and my clients. My dog is also quite content, asleep at my feet in front of the fire.

It's amazing the sense of security some people have sitting behind a computer and insulting people that they have never met. A confident person would not have the need to behave in your manner. Your post indicates two things. Insecurity and ignorance.

I would love to debate the defamation issue with you but your ignorance on the topic makes it quite clear that you are starting from such a low level that there is no point. A year 11 legal studies student would be expected to have a better knowledge than you have displayed. Come back to me when you have done some research- there is a legal website called Austlii which you may care to refer to. You will find many reported defamation cases there. Although, by reading your previous exchange with E in which your rambling non-sensical argument was an embarrassment to you, I doubt your capacity to do so. There are some long words used in places but if you break them up into their components and say them out loud to yourself you should then be able to pronounce them.

Didn't you mention in your exchange with E that you were a financial planner and that you would have advised Cloke to take less money on his contract next year? I had a good laugh about that. It reminded me of George from Seinfeld. He always pretended that he was an architect but why would you pretend to be a financial planner? If you are one, are those your clients that were sleeping rough in the city square?

Anyway, I have had enough of shooting fish in a barrel for the moment but will be happy to continue once you respond.

Have a nice evening.

as the great Bill Lawry used to say - "Yeeah, got him, he's out!!!!!!"

Nice restraint there 5'fer! Love it.

5 from the wing on debut wrote:

Daniel wrote:Or you can grow a set and live with integrity and make something positive out of your life.

Daniel, you are really quite a strange individual. You know nothing about me or about my life yet see fit to comment about it? As you appear to be interested, my set is doing quite well thank you. My family are also well. As is my business, my staff and my clients. My dog is also quite content, asleep at my feet in front of the fire.

It's amazing the sense of security some people have sitting behind a computer and insulting people that they have never met. A confident person would not have the need to behave in your manner. Your post indicates two things. Insecurity and ignorance.

I would love to debate the defamation issue with you but your ignorance on the topic makes it quite clear that you are starting from such a low level that there is no point. A year 11 legal studies student would be expected to have a better knowledge than you have displayed. Come back to me when you have done some research- there is a legal website called Austlii which you may care to refer to. You will find many reported defamation cases there. Although, by reading your previous exchange with E in which your rambling non-sensical argument was an embarrassment to you, I doubt your capacity to do so. There are some long words used in places but if you break them up into their components and say them out loud to yourself you should then be able to pronounce them.

Didn't you mention in your exchange with E that you were a financial planner and that you would have advised Cloke to take less money on his contract next year? I had a good laugh about that. It reminded me of George from Seinfeld. He always pretended that he was an architect but why would you pretend to be a financial planner? If you are one, are those your clients that were sleeping rough in the city square?

Anyway, I have had enough of shooting fish in a barrel for the moment but will be happy to continue once you respond.

Have a nice evening.

5 from the wing - really lovely to hear about your dog and family, and your fireplace and your computer.

I said you can try to sue me for defaming you, so use your Austlii knowledge and do it.

You can have all the material things you like, it won't change that you're a coward or lie, when even behind your computer.

Good luck to you buddy, but grow a set as you are a coward.

BTW - people have different definitions of what making something positive is....

in your case, it seems money oriented. You might be related to James Hird, because he has a bigger house, family, kids, business etc than you - yet is a waste of air as human being.

You seem to have difficultly distinguishing between material things and intergrity - so do us all a favour and get a law degree so you can bullshit more and make more money and contribute nothing of value to society.

Daniel wrote:BTW - people have different definitions of what making something positive is....

in your case, it seems money oriented. You might be related to James Hird, because he has a bigger house, family, kids, business etc than you - yet is a waste of air as human being.

You seem to have difficultly distinguishing between material things and intergrity - so do us all a favour and get a law degree so you can bullshit more and make more money and contribute nothing of value to society.

Daniel,

Gone off your medication?

no, but I'm sure you could benefit from some

Don't use steroids as you already lack balls, so you would want to preserve what you have.

Daniel wrote:Don't use steroids as you already lack balls, so you would want to preserve what you have.

Private message me so that we can meet.

5 from the wing on debut wrote:... I had a good laugh about that. It reminded me of George from Seinfeld. He always pretended that he was an architect...

Ah, George. A bigger bullshit artist than all of us on Nicks combined.

And our favourite fictional company: Vandelay Industries

http://seinfeld.wikia.com/wiki/Vandelay_Industries

Vandelay Industries is a fictional company that George Costanza claims to have been interviewed for as a latex salesman in when applying for an extension at the unemployment office in the Season Three episode, "The Boyfriend, Part 1".
George was the interviewed latex salesman. Jerry Seinfeld was Kel Varnsen, another Vandelay employee.

He tells the unemployment office he was close to a job with Vandelay Industries, a company that makes latex products and whose main office is Jerry's apartment.

This character single handedly gave us all enough false bravado to lie our arses off in job interviews worldwide in the 90s!

Dyso