Search results

Don't tell me... you can't say! :yawn:

Unfortunately it aint worth knowing. :p

The Moochant of Venice :)

Ok Shakespeare cow jokes, I'll start; Romeo and Mooliette. :smuggrin:

Behave Bry! :eek:

And they'd never fit under the slabs in the back yard.

If you can't take the heat... :rolleyes:

It's easy enough to throw a back story together. Big news Peeler... there is a conflict! And you need to choose a side.

I didn't say they do or should, I was simply pointing out that if you want to make a case against 'City of Rugby' then attendances are a better argument.

If there were any of course we would. Unless you think the press would leave out a juicy fact like that?

Ooooh handbags! I still don't really see the point. If you are arguing against a 'city of rugby' then the attendance stats are the argument. Participation stats may be part of the strategy but they are no threat to us are they? Unless we are also worried about becoming a city of swimming?

Boris Johnson being another one?

You have a drinking name? I always use my regular name to save confusion. o_O

Wow you are so cool and hard. :D

Not even Mr Death to Traitors, Freedom for Britain?

Regarding your first point: participation is not really relevant though is it? The figures re spectators would surely be more impressive.

I suspect that may be untrue

Based on?

Was a few weeks ago... TM linked to the Rotherham job and rumored to have had an interview.

Absolutely right Otis, the debate is certainly valid but now is not the time.