London Welsh in the Pro12 ? Talks have began.

by LordDowlais Thu 01 Oct 2015, 3:11 pm

First topic message reminder :

No, No, No. Why should this lot be allowed in the Pro12 ? Surely RGC1404 should be the next team in the Pro12. London Welsh are not even Welsh, they're English with a Welsh name, anyway here we are:-

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/23951/exclusive-london-welsh-have-initiated-discussions-about-switching-to-pro12/

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:30 am

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

Phillips claims he has initiated talks, like I said previously that could mean him asking and being rejected then asking again

Which would mean that the article is 100% correct.

f the author was told by Phillips he has spoken to the Pro12 why not quote him or if Phillips doesn't want to be quoted or even someone within the Pro12 has told him why not say sources told them?

Also Phillips has repeatedly said over the last few years he has spoken to the Pro12 and only 5 months ago they said its a lie, so now all of a sudden they have spoken to him? The man lacks credibility, you ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf?

Guesswork. You're basing your thought process on soemthing that happenend last season, when you don't know all the facts.

I've been told numerous times on here that this shouldn't form the basis of opinion, and that reading between the lines / posting without proof should not form the basis of a debate. Yet when the shoe's on the other foot - it seems to be concrete evidence.

Laughable.

No it doesn't mean its 100% correct as he has said nothing about speaking to the Pro12, the reporter has said that they have spoken to them without anything said by Phillips

Its not guesswork, its opinion as I don't see how he can be believed when he has lied in the past. Do you think he is credible given his history of saying one thing only to have the other party say it never happened?

If he spoke to either party why isn't there a big shiny quote saying so?

No idea. I can't speak for the journalist.

Phillips is one of the top Law Professionals in the country. I expect he knows what he's doing with his soundbytes.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:31 am

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

So maybe you would like to tell me where I said it was made up

Maybe this bit?

marty2086 wrote:

Well the talks with Pro12 officials would seem made up.

I expect you'll wriggle again though.

Well the talks with Pro12 officials would seem made up since they didn't bother offering anything to back it up or seeking confirmation from the Pro12.'

If your going to quote me do use the full quote

So you did say it was made up?

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:33 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

You did read the evidence Marty provided? Didn't you? That's all the evidence that's out there, Chunky, and that's all that's needed. New article publishing old claims.

Look at it this way: There is evidence that those claims are false. there is no evidence that those same claims, published in a recent article, are true.

Think about it.....

Complete and utter guesswork.

How on earth do you come to the conclusion that it is guesswork? Shocked

The evidence you required is there in black and white. The claim has already been refuted. It has already been shown as false. The claims in the more recent article are unsubstantiated, just as the previous claims, and so have to be treated as the old claims, the old claims that are already proven to be false.

This is what you are doing:

Someone makes unsubstantiated assertion that something is true.

That unsubstantiated assertion is proven false.

Someone makes same unsubstantiated assertion that something is true.

You claim that same unsubstantiated assertion is true, even though that assertion has been already been proven to be false.

It's up to you to provide evidence of that unsubstantiated assertion, chunky. That is something you can't do because no such evidence exists within that article. You are supporting something to be true, without evidence, and even though it is a claim that has already been refuted, and proven to be false.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:35 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

Phillips claims he has initiated talks, like I said previously that could mean him asking and being rejected then asking again

Which would mean that the article is 100% correct.

f the author was told by Phillips he has spoken to the Pro12 why not quote him or if Phillips doesn't want to be quoted or even someone within the Pro12 has told him why not say sources told them?

Also Phillips has repeatedly said over the last few years he has spoken to the Pro12 and only 5 months ago they said its a lie, so now all of a sudden they have spoken to him? The man lacks credibility, you ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf?

Guesswork. You're basing your thought process on soemthing that happenend last season, when you don't know all the facts.

I've been told numerous times on here that this shouldn't form the basis of opinion, and that reading between the lines / posting without proof should not form the basis of a debate. Yet when the shoe's on the other foot - it seems to be concrete evidence.

Laughable.

No it doesn't mean its 100% correct as he has said nothing about speaking to the Pro12, the reporter has said that they have spoken to them without anything said by Phillips

Its not guesswork, its opinion as I don't see how he can be believed when he has lied in the past. Do you think he is credible given his history of saying one thing only to have the other party say it never happened?

If he spoke to either party why isn't there a big shiny quote saying so?

No idea. I can't speak for the journalist.

Phillips is one of the top Law Professionals in the country. I expect he knows what he's doing with his soundbytes.

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:37 am

Munchkin wrote:

How on earth do you come to the conclusion that it is guesswork?

The evidence you required is there in black and white. The claim has already been refuted. It has already been shown as false. The claims in the more recent article are unsubstantiated, just as the previous claims, and so have to be treated as the old claims, the old claims that are already proven to be false.

This is what you are doing:

Someone makes unsubstantiated assertion that something is true.

That unsubstantiated assertion is proven false.

Someone makes same unsubstantiated assertion that something is true.

You claim that same unsubstantiated assertion is true, even though that assertion has been already been proven to be false.

It's up to you to provide evidence of that unsubstantiated assertion, chunky. That is something you can't do because no such evidence exists within that article. You are supporting something to be true, without evidence, and even though it is a claim that has already been refuted, and proven to be false.

Journlaist writes article
Irish person claims it's made up
I have to prove it's not made up?

Amazing logic.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:39 am

marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:39 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

So maybe you would like to tell me where I said it was made up

Maybe this bit?

marty2086 wrote:

Well the talks with Pro12 officials would seem made up.

I expect you'll wriggle again though.

Well the talks with Pro12 officials would seem made up since they didn't bother offering anything to back it up or seeking confirmation from the Pro12.'

If your going to quote me do use the full quote

So you did say it was made up?

I actually wasn't trying to say that but I do think it, as with my first post I think its a poor piece of journalism. Its an old trick to say something early in a piece to that is bs and hope the rest holds weight with the reader giving the bs credibility.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:41 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:42 am

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

So maybe you would like to tell me where I said it was made up

Maybe this bit?

marty2086 wrote:

Well the talks with Pro12 officials would seem made up.

I expect you'll wriggle again though.

Well the talks with Pro12 officials would seem made up since they didn't bother offering anything to back it up or seeking confirmation from the Pro12.'

If your going to quote me do use the full quote

So you did say it was made up?

I actually wasn't trying to say that but I do think it, as with my first post I think its a poor piece of journalism. Its an old trick to say something early in a piece to that is bs and hope the rest holds weight with the reader giving the bs credibility.

Yes or no........Did you say it was made up?

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:42 am

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:45 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

How on earth do you come to the conclusion that it is guesswork?

The evidence you required is there in black and white. The claim has already been refuted. It has already been shown as false. The claims in the more recent article are unsubstantiated, just as the previous claims, and so have to be treated as the old claims, the old claims that are already proven to be false.

This is what you are doing:

Someone makes unsubstantiated assertion that something is true.

That unsubstantiated assertion is proven false.

Someone makes same unsubstantiated assertion that something is true.

You claim that same unsubstantiated assertion is true, even though that assertion has been already been proven to be false.

It's up to you to provide evidence of that unsubstantiated assertion, chunky. That is something you can't do because no such evidence exists within that article. You are supporting something to be true, without evidence, and even though it is a claim that has already been refuted, and proven to be false.

Journlaist writes article
Irish person claims it's made up
I have to prove it's not made up?

Amazing logic.

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:47 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:48 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Yes or no........Did you say it was made up?

Asked and answered

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:48 am

Munchkin wrote:

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

What claim have I made? The only claim being made about the article is that it is made up.

So provide evidence which backs it up.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:49 am

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:50 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

What claim have I made? The only claim being made about the article is that it is made up.

So provide evidence which backs it up.

It was, you dismissed it as you do with everything else because others have to have a smoking gun rather than conspiracy theories that you provide

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:53 am

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

What claim have I made? The only claim being made about the article is that it is made up.

So provide evidence which backs it up.

It was, you dismissed it as you do with everything else because others have to have a smoking gun rather than conspiracy theories that you provide

Hilarious. This is a really good example of wriggling out of a false claim by just trying to shout the loudest..... This thread should be stickied for all to see how fraudelent the debating style of some of the posters are on here.

Complete frauds.

"It's made up"

"Is it? How do you know"

"It's made up"

"Oh ok then"

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:54 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

What claim have I made? The only claim being made about the article is that it is made up.

So provide evidence which backs it up.

You have already been given the evidence that it is made up. If your claim is that it isn't made up, then you have to have the evidence in support of your claim. That evidence does not exist within that article. You will then have to go to primary source to gain that evidence, by contacting Pro12, Phillips or the journo.

The only real evidence, evidence that you requested and were provided with, is evidence that refutes the claims made within that article.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:55 am

Munchkin wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

What claim have I made? The only claim being made about the article is that it is made up.

So provide evidence which backs it up.

You have already been given the evidence that it is made up. If your claim is that it isn't made up, then you have to have the evidence in support of your claim. That evidence does not exist within that article. You will then have to go to primary source to gain that evidence, by contacting Pro12, Phillips or the journo.

The only real evidence, evidence that you requested and were provided with, is evidence that refutes the claims made within that article.

What claim is this?

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:56 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:

Yes, you do have to prove it! It was up to the journo to provide the evidence. The journo failed. Now that it's you that is making the claim, based on the jouno's unsubstantiated claims, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The only way you can do this is by going to primary source (Pro12 or Phillips), or at the very least the journo who made the claim, who would then have to furnish you with primary evidence.

The only real evidence that we have is that those claims are false. Proven false.

What claim have I made? The only claim being made about the article is that it is made up.

So provide evidence which backs it up.

You have already been given the evidence that it is made up. If your claim is that it isn't made up, then you have to have the evidence in support of your claim. That evidence does not exist within that article. You will then have to go to primary source to gain that evidence, by contacting Pro12, Phillips or the journo.

The only real evidence, evidence that you requested and were provided with, is evidence that refutes the claims made within that article.

What claim is this?

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 11:59 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty?

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 12:04 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty?

You must have picked that habit up from Phil. You know, the same guy who disappeared when I cornered him with a question.....

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 1:30 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
It's very simple:

Since the last article in May,

1) Phillips claims he has been in talks with the RFU.
2)The author claims there have been talks with the Pro 12 and London Welsh.

If one or more of these is "made up", can you show me / tell me why or how it is made up.

Thanks in advance.

Still waiting.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 1:54 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty?

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 2:59 pm

LordDowlais wrote:Ha, and there we go, I have been asked numerous times on here to prove this, prove that, give me a link. Now that the people who always ask for this evidence are being asked, getting a link or showing proof is not really needed anymore.

More double standards from some of our Irish members.

We have provided the evidence. The evidence Chunky asked for. More evidence that you lack comprehension skills.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:04 pm

Munchkin wrote:
We have provided the evidence. The evidence Chunky asked for. .

No. You did not. You provided absolutely no evdience that proves London Welsh have categorically not been in contact with Pro12 about the matter since it was last brought up. Nor can you. Which renders your claim embarrasing.

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:21 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
We have provided the evidence. The evidence Chunky asked for. .

No. You did not. You provided absolutely no evdience that proves London Welsh have categorically not been in contact with Pro12 about the matter since it was last brought up. Nor can you. Which renders your claim embarrasing.

Yes we have. You asked for evidence within the last 6 months. Marty provided evidence from 5 months ago. You moved the goalposts.

There is no evidence that the claims in this article are new, and there is no evidence to say that he hasn't talked to Pro12 since last making his claim. The evidence that does exist, however, suggests that Phillips was less than truthful in his last claim. His last claim was no different to the more recent nonsense that has been published, and equally lacking in anything of substance. As the claim has been shown to be false in the recent past, and as it is no different, and equally lacking in substance, it is right to assume that the claims are as false as the original publication.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:23 pm

No, I asked for evidence since May. That is old news. You know this. But your pride is taking a battering so you're being obnoxious.

Show us the evidence - go on.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:24 pm

Munchkin wrote: Phillips was less than truthful in his last claim.

Which claim was this?, just so I can see what he said.

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:33 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:No, I asked for evidence since May. That is old news. You know this. But your pride is taking a battering so you're being obnoxious.

Show us the evidence - go on.

Goodness, Chunky, I fear for you sanity.

Take my last comment to someone who can help you with your difficulties, and be patient in learning. That's the best advise I can give you. Hope it goes well for you.

Now, although I couldn't be bothered bringing this up earlier, I will now. Here's a quote from you:

"None of what is reported in that article is made up"

Now look closely at your quote. In claiming that none of that article is made up, you are in fact asserting that those claims are true. You are making a positive assertion, and a positive assertion requires you, Chunky, to support that assertion with evidence. The burden of proof is on you. Not anyone else. I guess that will take you a few weeks to figure out why that should be, but it will be progress nonetheless.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:40 pm

No evidence. A total fraud.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:40 pm

Munchkin wrote: Phillips was less than truthful in his last claim.

Which claim was this?, just so I can see what he said.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:41 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty?

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:42 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:No evidence. A total fraud.

Finally you agree with us, that's what we've been saying about the article all along thumbsup

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:43 pm

marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:No evidence. A total fraud.

Finally you agree with us, that's what we've been saying about the article all along

Dear, dear. This is a kindergarten response Marty.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:46 pm

Sorry Ill try to bring them down to your level in future Chunks

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:48 pm

Lets just point out that you say we're wrong because we've no evidence, your saying the article is completely right despite any evidence, correct?

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:52 pm

marty2086 wrote:Lets just point out that you say we're wrong because we've no evidence, your saying the article is completely right despite any evidence, correct?

No. The only thing I have infront of me is the article. I have nothing else to go on, so any evidence either way to suggest that there is more to story than what is actually in the article would be helpful. If, of course there is more to the story in the first place. There isn't any at this point though. So all we have is the article. So at this point it is totally impossible to say anything in it is "made up".

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:52 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty?

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 3:59 pm

Munchkin wrote: Phillips was less than truthful in his last claim.

Which claim was this?, just so I can see what he said.

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 4:00 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:No evidence. A total fraud.

Indeed, you provide no evidence....

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 4:01 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:No evidence. A total fraud.

Indeed, you provide no evidence....

Can you answer the question above.

Thanks.

by marty2086 Fri 02 Oct 2015, 4:05 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:Lets just point out that you say we're wrong because we've no evidence, your saying the article is completely right despite any evidence, correct?

No. The only thing I have infront of me is the article. I have nothing else to go on, so any evidence either way to suggest that there is more to story than what is actually in the article would be helpful. If, of course there is more to the story in the first place. There isn't any at this point though. So all we have is the article. So at this point it is totally impossible to say anything in it is "made up".

The evidence was provided but rather than going and looking at it you want us to do your leg work all the while you dismiss it all because you cant be arsed

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 4:10 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote: Phillips was less than truthful in his last claim.

Which claim was this?, just so I can see what he said.

The Rugby Paper have removed the article, so I can't refer to it. All I have to go on is the related articles, such as this:

....."It's a symbiotic relationship which could benefit all parties," Phillips told the BBC. "I think it would bring an added dimension to Pro12 if you are able to establish a London franchise."

And while the RFU would have to agree to such a move, Phillips believes there would be widespread support within current Celtic nations towards the opening of a new frontier in the English capital.

"We are a team that believes in its Welsh traditions and Welsh roots.

"As an option it [the Pro12] is attractive to many people in this part of London. It would be attractive to a number of Celtic teams.

"I suspect the likes of Munster, Ulster, Glasgow and Edinburgh would rather fly into Heathrow than to certain other areas which currently participate in the Pro12, while Welsh fans would prefer to come to south-west London than perhaps go further afield.

"There would be a degree of support behind the possibility."

London Scottish have also been mooted as being part of a possible double switch, but as recently as May, the Pro12 were at pains to deny any discussions had taken place.

Pro12DenyTalkingAboutLondonwelshSwitchToPro12

Now, for Pro12 to deny any talks have taken place, it should mean that someone has made the claim that talks have taken place, otherwise it would be absurd that Pro12 come out and deny it.
I concede that it still doesn't mean that Phillips made the claim, and that it is possible that Jackson himself added/assumed on Phillips claims. I don't know, and I can't prove it either way, although the article has most likely been copied here, so I will take a look later when I get a chance.

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 4:14 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:No, I asked for evidence since May. That is old news. You know this. But your pride is taking a battering so you're being obnoxious.

Show us the evidence - go on.

Goodness, Chunky, I fear for you sanity.

Take my last comment to someone who can help you with your difficulties, and be patient in learning. That's the best advise I can give you. Hope it goes well for you.

Now, although I couldn't be bothered bringing this up earlier, I will now. Here's a quote from you:

"None of what is reported in that article is made up"

Now look closely at your quote. In claiming that none of that article is made up, you are in fact asserting that those claims are true. You are making a positive assertion, and a positive assertion requires you, Chunky, to support that assertion with evidence. The burden of proof is on you. Not anyone else. I guess that will take you a few weeks to figure out why that should be, but it will be progress nonetheless.

Hey, Chunky, what about providing the evidence? What evidence do you have that all that was reported is true?

by Chunky Norwich Fri 02 Oct 2015, 5:45 pm

Munchkin wrote:I can't prove it either way

Cheers Munchkin.

by Guest Fri 02 Oct 2015, 6:50 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I can't prove it either way

Cheers Munchkin.

by Chunky Norwich Sat 03 Oct 2015, 12:28 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty?

by Chunky Norwich Sun 04 Oct 2015, 8:59 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

You didn't anser the question, do you find him credible given that he's lied repeatedly in the past

I'll have to be reminded of his quote before I answer that. Can you post it.

Thanks.

You can go back and look up my posts but not his quotes? Talk about avoiding answering

Please post the quote of Bleddyn Phillips you are referring to.

Thanks.

I never mentioned a quote from him, your avoiding answering.

What did Bleddyn Phillips lie about? Can you show me where he lied?

I genuinely don't know which article / quote / statement you are referring to when you say he lied, so if you could point it out then I can answer.

Thanks.

Marty? Where has Bleddyn Phillips lied?

by No 7&1/2 Sun 04 Oct 2015, 1:09 pm

When do London Welsh move over then?

by Sponsored content