Re: It's David Saker then

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:09

embee wrote:
skully wrote:It's the way of the Riverina, apparently.

But you'd better check with the expert in these matters, the Assassin.

ya SGDT ...Im only an expert on the gayness of your posts

Sez you. Seems like you've been doin' a sh!tload of research on the general topic. Twisted Evil

by Zat Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:14

Not hard to gauge the gayness of your posts, meaty. It's uniformly high.

by tac Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:14

a sheepload? or a goatload?

by tac Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:15

Zat wrote:Not hard to gauge the gayness of your posts, meaty. It's uniformly high.

meaty . . . . farkin snorfle

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:17

Zat wrote:Not hard to gauge the gayness of your posts, meaty. It's uniformly high.

Zat in "sucking MB's cock" shocker. Shocked

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:18

tac wrote:
Zat wrote:Not hard to gauge the gayness of your posts, meaty. It's uniformly high.

meaty . . . . farkin snorfle

Aye, a smidge of a give-away of the Zogster's predilictions.

by tac Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:19

skully wrote:
Zat wrote:Not hard to gauge the gayness of your posts, meaty. It's uniformly high.
Zat in "sucking MB's cock" shocker.

by G.Wood Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:27

Since when did zatts atttend the vikas school of comebacks?

by Zat Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:30

skully wrote:
Zat wrote:Not hard to gauge the gayness of your posts, meaty. It's uniformly high.
Zat in "sucking MB's cock" shocker.

skully in automatic gay reflex retort shocker.

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:40

Erm, you were sucking MB's c0ck and calling me meaty. Double gayness on your part.

But again, check with the self-appointed gayness wozzie umpire. Suspect

by embee Fri 09 Apr 2010, 04:56

Skully's posts ....75 centiskullys

Zatts's post ....53 milliskullys ...adjusted to 0 after residual dubberness taken into consideration

by Zat Fri 09 Apr 2010, 05:00

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 05:00

Perplexing analysis and decision from the G-ump. Suspect

by WideWally Fri 09 Apr 2010, 05:11

So, the general consensus is that David Saker will make a good bowling coach for England?

Yes?
No?

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 05:39

Ask me after Ashes 10-11.

by Shoeshine Fri 09 Apr 2010, 10:53

WideWally wrote:So, the general consensus is that David Saker will make a good bowling coach for England?

Yes?
No?

Who knows? Never heard of him till last night!

by JKLever Fri 09 Apr 2010, 11:43

Indeed. 'Who the fark are you?'

by Shoeshine Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:10

But a big name doesn't necessarily equal a decent coach of course. In fact you'd suggest in most sports the opposite is true.

by skully Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:31

Perhaps Saker > Cooley.

by Zat Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:34

If he does well, the Aussies can go 'For F*cks Saker...' If he doesn't the English can.

by Basil Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:35

Saker is a pragmatic choice - experienced in the ways of bowling with a Kookaburra ball in Aussie conditions not being the least factor.

Although, I find it depressing that we don't appear to have a current coach on the county circuit thought worthy enough of a shot at the job.

by eowyn Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:36

Maybe they didn't want the job, Bas.

by Basil Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:38

Even more depressing if that's the case.

by PeterCS Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:39

ffsaker
?
WHERE WAS DAZZLER??

by Basil Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:40

Missed the interview - prior engagement at the solarium.

by Sponsored content