2020 Parramatta Eels Thread......Lets not get carried away.

do you really not have anything better to do on christmas morning than to write a novel for the sake of a pointless internet argument? might read and dissect at a later date, but i'm not getting dragged into this shit today

surmo13 wrote:do you really not have anything better to do on christmas morning than to write a novel for the sake of a pointless internet argument? might read and dissect at a later date, but i'm not getting dragged into this shit today

seriously?
did you really not have anything better to do on christmas afternoon than write a one liner just to try and sound cool? Pretty poor form there from you, people can post when ever the fuck they want on this place and everyone is in a different situation.

Believe it or not mate, between the beach and breaky with family and lunch with more family, Pieman had a few hours of sitting around time. And after his annual post lunch food coma, Pieman is now back home, with more family and sitting around time.

Considering Pieman is the Jesus of FF, it is most important that he come to impart his wisdom on his loyal disciples especially on his birthday.

Merry Christmas, young Judas.

Amen.

I worked today and now I am here...

Yay Christmas.


Edit: Just because I know we have some very wonderful people here, I am doing Christmas celebrations tomorrow so no need to check in on me. The above comment was tongue in cheek.

Random wrote:..... The above comment was tongue in cheek.

but was it a consensual tongue in cheek or don't you remember.

*deep breaths* okay

Pieman wrote:Thats not what I am saying at all - I didn't even mention gender in that post. I never said anything about legality in that post, before it I literally said drunk sex is not illegal, your admittedly poor analogy did say say it was illegal. In the post you quoted I said, dont do it if you dont want to put ur self in the position to be accused of it - If you argue that, you are a deadshit. If there is a risk (and its magnified by a billon as an NFL player in the states) that if you take a chick home when blind you might get accused of rape, then dont do it. Bang her the next day. He ran the risk and it came back to bite him. It is more about protecting yourself than protecting someone else from their own decision.

you didn't yourself mention gender, but you did say: "Ice is 100% right" to a post which contained "If you don't want to potentially get accused of rape, don't fuck drunk girls"... so there's that whole gender thing, furthermore if your saying don't do something, your (obviously) saying that it shouldn't be done, so that's where the illegality parallel came from...

and here's my point with flipping your observation:
doesn't a man who gets accused of being a rapist when they didn't commit rape assume a sort of victimhood?
Why are you so okay with saying 'guys who fuck drunk girls get what's coming to them' when its abhorrent to say 'girls who fuck drunk guys get what's coming to them'? why can't both be equally abhorrent?
It's never been rape when a drunk man wakes up next to a chick who looked a lot better when he was filled up with jagerbombs, why is it considered rape when the genders are reversed?

it's a fantastic idea to say 'don't get yourself into the situation' when the situation is 'raping', but the problem in the current climate is that 'getting yourself into the situation' just requires you to sleep with a female that has consumed alcohol in the last 5 hours, if at anytime after that, that girl decides she made a mistake, no matter how much she wanted it at the time, all she has to say is one 4-letter word and your life is in the toilet. Shit, Honeysett confirmed earlier he was living proof of that statement.

Indeed Surmo - that's my problem with it. No shades of grey.....

surmo13 wrote:*deep breaths* okay



you didn't yourself mention gender, but you did say: "Ice is 100% right" to a post which contained "If you don't want to potentially get accused of rape, don't fuck drunk girls"... so there's that whole gender thing, furthermore if your saying don't do something, your (obviously) saying that it shouldn't be done, so that's where the illegality parallel came from...

and here's my point with flipping your observation:
doesn't a man who gets accused of being a rapist when they didn't commit rape assume a sort of victimhood?
Why are you so okay with saying 'guys who fuck drunk girls get what's coming to them' when its abhorrent to say 'girls who fuck drunk guys get what's coming to them'? why can't both be equally abhorrent?
It's never been rape when a drunk man wakes up next to a chick who looked a lot better when he was filled up with jagerbombs, why is it considered rape when the genders are reversed?

it's a fantastic idea to say 'don't get yourself into the situation' when the situation is 'raping', but the problem in the current climate is that 'getting yourself into the situation' just requires you to sleep with a female that has consumed alcohol in the last 5 hours, if at anytime after that, that girl decides she made a mistake, no matter how much she wanted it at the time, all she has to say is one 4-letter word and your life is in the toilet. Shit, Honeysett confirmed earlier he was living proof of that statement.

Yep because I agree, he is 100% right with what he said. That doesnt mean that it is the only thing that is valid or the only thing that I agree with.
I also said, dont put yourself in a situation of you dont want to get accused of something. If you want to take that as ONLY legality, then ok. Thats you.

Read back through what I said mate, it can be read from both the perspective of a man or woman. The only times I really specifically mention gender are when I am talking about a specific situation.

Pieman wrote:

I totally agree - if someone does something they regret they have to live with it. Blaming the other person or alcohol is ridiculous. But in this case that isnt what is happening, so we might be arguing different things mate.

Does that sentence not answer that for you??

I totally agree that a girl regretting getting smashed by a dude and just saying he raped you is wrong, and if a chick does that she is a piece of shit and there should be harsh punishments for it. But that is totally different to what has happened in this situation (or so she says). Who considers "a girl waking up after having sex with a guy and regretting it" rape?????  What the fuck are you on about????? They dont say that, they say they were raped, they dont say - omg I had sex with someone I shouldnt have so therefore=rape.

Yes, a male celebirty having sex with a drunk girl is absolutely a risk in todays current climate - and it shouldnt be, but it is. Thats why someone (especially someone famous) shouldnt put themselves in the position to be exploited or accused of something like that. 99% of the time it will work out fine, but that 01% will ruin your image/life/whatever. Its sad that some people will do that, but its a fact. Also, there are pieces of shit out there who will use their status to pressure a girl into having sex with them. Or people who dont take no for an answer. So it goes both ways.

Thinking that I am saying "guys who fuck drunk girls get what's coming to them" .. right. Wrong. The parrot who posted above says no grey area lol. What I am acutally saying is - be smart about it. Talking in hyperbole doesnt help your argument either

Pieman wrote:

The parrot who posted above says no grey area lol. What I am acutally saying is - be smart about it. Talking in hyperbole doesnt help your argument either

Parrot? What tha? I agree with something that someone says and I'm a parrot? What I said had nothing to do directly with you, just the situation.

Good on ya. Having a discussion about something fairly serious, and you're off throwing insults.

dasherhalo wrote:

Parrot? What tha? I agree with something that someone says and I'm a parrot? What I said had nothing to do directly with you, just the situation.

Good on ya. Having a discussion about something fairly serious, and you're off throwing insults.

sorry mate when you comment on a post that is directed to me, then you say - thats my problem with it etc etc, I assume you are talking about the post/me.

Apologies if u werent

No, nothing personal from me. I was commenting on the topic. With my kids in that sort of age bracket, it's a genuine concern for me, from both angles.

SO hayne came last in the endurance run the eels did recently??
He is really the most unfit bloke at the club? Crazy.

The coach beat him.

Pieman wrote:SO hayne came last in the endurance run the eels did recently??
He is really the most unfit bloke at the club? Crazy.

The coach beat him.

The coaches 12 year old son beat him in an agility test too

I can't find the quotes I read last week but Arthur is totally happy with the attitude that Hayne has bought to the team.
Easy to bag people.

code delta wrote:I can't find the quotes I read last week but Arthur is totally happy with the attitude that Hayne has bought to the team.
Easy to bag people.

I am not bagging him mate, they are facts.

I love watching him play when he is playing well, I just find it amazing that this "elite athlete" is literally the most unfit bloke at the club - and was beaten by the coach in the run, as well as the coach's prepubescent son apparently.

You wouldnt see any of the all time great players coming last in their team's fitness drills.

Bennett regularly beats home his players. I'm not sure why getting beaten home by the coach is such a big deal. As for his son, maybe his son is a gun athlete. Everyone knows Hayne isn't a marathon runner, but all the right people are saying he is training better than he ever has, that he isn't smashing himself in a bit of a mid distance time trial is no big deal at all. Buuuuuut, it's Hayne, so it's a massive story????

I think the big deal with it, is he has played in a position his whole career that is widely regarded as doing the most running and requires the fittest players.

That, and he came LAST. He is a highly experienced "elite" athlete, and he came LAST. To me, that is fucking amazing. He got beaten by props in a distance time trial. Props. Holy fucking dooley. He is prob lucky that it was a story and he is who he is (was it even??, it was on the sports news for one day wasnt it?), because I would reckon that a FB (or someone who has been for their entire career) at most other clubs they would have been cut or at least ripped to shreds pretty quickly. You expect the Pauli Pauli or Jr Paulo's of the world to come last, not the "elite" outside backs. (Yes he might be playing centre or wing this year - but still.. last lol)

Yep there have always been reports of bennett doing the time trial and beating a few players - but you never heard "alfie langer / lockyer / Tallis / KHunt and so on - came LAST.

At GC he looked overweight, unfit, disinterested (which is prob stemming from being unfit) etc. Being the unfittest bloke in the club over how ever long the distance was is just not exactly a good indicator IMO. If the coach is happy with how he is going then well who are we to judge, but still - IMO - it was very surprising lol. I fucking highly doubt that behind closed doors Arthur would have been happy that a prized recruit is in such bad shape.

Is it a huge story? No. His performance on the field will be the real story and how ultimately he should be measured. If I had a vested interest in the Eels would I be concerned? Yes. No doubt that, as Pieman says, a fullback should never come last in a 5km time trial of the entire club. Could you ever imagine other top line fullbacks like Slater, Teddy, Boyd, RTS or Inglis coming last? Or for that matter one of the lesser name fullbacks like Coote, Ross, Beale etc.

Perhaps even more worrying is the excuse (not from Hayne but from the journalist) - his body is that way due to the extreme specific conditioning from the NFL. C'mon please. This is his second offseason since then, and over 2 years since his last NFL game. It shouldn't take over 700 days for an elite athlete with all the best facilities to get into positional condition (at least to a average NRL level)

Pieman wrote:

That, and he came LAST. He is a highly experienced "elite" athlete, and he came LAST. To me, that is fucking amazing.

I too am amazed that en elite athlete could come LAST in a training drill. Especaily one against other elite athletes

I know at the Tigers, if anyone ever comes LAST in a training drill they are sacked from the club. Nobody should tolerate coming LAST


Please don't bother arguing with this post. I made the crappy joke I wanted to make, and now I'm done.

Milchcow wrote:

I too am amazed that en elite athlete could come LAST in a training drill. Especaily one against other elite athletes

I know at the Tigers, if anyone ever comes LAST in a training drill they are sacked from the club. Nobody should tolerate coming LAST


Please don't bother arguing with this post. I made the crappy joke I wanted to make, and now I'm done.

You forgot to mention that they don't actually sack them, but release them to play for another club, while continuing to pay 50% of their salary for the next 2 years.

firstly, athur beating hayne and multiple other players is clearly a non issue, they may be professional athletes but arthur likely does alot more of that type of training for his personal fitness then any of them do for footy. there are plenty of non-competive runners out there that could beat footy players in middle distance running, arthur beating him is a non-story

i don't think its really a huge story because i don't think its the type of thing that has a direct connection to how hayne plays and its widely reported that he has always struggled with this stuff, so it doesn't mean hayne can't be the hayne we have seen in some of his better years but i also agree with dip that you simply would never hear of somthing like this out of any other fullback in the comp and maybe hayne would have been a more consistent fullback if he built up a better cardio fitness like the others.


for all his explosive plays, you always notice he goes missing at times, even when in form, where with guys like teddy, boyd, RTS and especially slater, you always notice that they are everywhere, always popping up just in case but then getting back in position for the next backline play, being ready to involve themselves multiple times a set.