RooiAAS and HasBeen-ou

Moffie, stop whining for my attention like the pitiful loser you so obviously are. You know I generally ignore you because you're too childish and too much of a liar to waste any time on . . . and here you are squealing for me in the subject line. Have you no self-respect at all?

If you're that desperate to know my age, ask a poster with a shred of courage and integrity to ask me and I'll tell them. My age is no big secret and it's not something I feel I need to "confess".

Now shut your despicable little cakehole, stop squealing at me in the subject lines of your silly little threads and speak when you're spoken to.

Are we clear at long last?

Surely they aren't afraid? They must just have forgotten......not a good sign!!

How old are you Rooi? 

Hey, what is wrong with watching rock bands? 

At least Rooi has taste in music  

bluebok, I'm 52.

Blikkies, you must know me from a long time ago because the only time I recall explaining my nick was back on the old Supersport board more than 10 years ago.

Rooi, i'd say that is par for the course. About the average age here. 
Beans, what say you? 

Rooie, yup, that is about right. It was you and I think Stu or Vlag discussing your days in the army.  

Nope the average age is 48 so far....RooiAAS is trending older.....probab ly at about the 75th percentile if we have a normal distribution. An old toppie pretending to be a young toppie.

"Rooie, yup, that is about right. It was you and I think Stu or Vlag discussing your days in the army."

Stu or Vlag? Huh? Were either of those two on the old Supersport board? Note I'm talking about Supersport, not Supersupporter (aka Kamp SS).

Interesting. I only know those two from the Supersupporter board. Didn't know either one was ever a Supersport poster.

 Most of us were at Supersport untill it closed down and Barlee created the supersupporter board.

 Rooinek

Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1757 RE: RooiAAS and HasBeen-ou
October 27, 2014, 16:09:51 Interesting. I only know those two from the Supersupporter board. Didn't know either one was ever a Supersport poster.

Oh. So you do not know everything after all then , do you?

"Oh. So you do not know everything after all then, do you?"

Ummm . . . did I ever claim to know everything, Ceradunce?
Come on, let's see you put up the evidence as you're always demanding from others, big-mouth. Where did I ever say I know everything? Put your famous search skills to some good use and find a quote of mine where I claim to know everything.

So what was your name on the Supersport board, chump? I don't remember a Ceradyne or a Vlagman . . . although admittedly perhaps I missed you . . . because you were about as interesting then as you are now!

Ceradunce, I know you spend most of your waking life sitting with your hands poised above the keyboard waiting for an ou Maaik comment to jump all over so I'm pretty sure you've read this already. Don't be a gutless coward now . . . I'm waiting.

@Rooinek,  I have been away for a while. I have always been vlagman on both Supersupporter and Supersport. Let me remind you of a few Supersport characters.


On the Motorsport board we had Boudica, who also joined Supersupporter but have since disappeared. A lady who knew/know more about motorsport than a hell of a lot of men that I know of. There was also Wolverine who also joined Supersupporter. Viva Alonso is still on Supersupporter. Alonso Fan joined Supersupporter from Supersport as Rilman. Lemon was a fanatic Lewis Hamilton fan.


On the Cricket board we had Ou Nick. He had a hell of a lot of contacts and the walking encyclopaedia as far as cricket is concerned. He was a close friend of Fanie de Villiers. Used to call him Vinegar Fanie. Hilda is still on Supersupporter and pops in once in a while. She is a staunch Aussie supporter and know and/or met some of them personally. She, Ou Nick, DennisL and Taipan have met e few times in person, if I am not mistaken.


On the rugby board there was ou Dawie, then known as DaveS. Cannot remember if he changed to Saffex before we moved to Supersupporter. Mozart, Beeno, Blikkies, Stu, Barlee, Hawkeye, DbDraad, etc were all on Supersport as well. Some of the guys who totally disappeared was my old pal Jan23 and his nemesis Stier. Some of the other old characters from both Supersport and Supersupporter were TCFireman, Galitso, BaasJohn, Boomer, DoubleUP, Groenbloed, etc.

That's a very long-winded way of dodging the question. Where did I ever claim I knew everything, Ceradunce?
I hardly recognize any of the names you put up and I'm not convinced we're talking about the same Supersport message board. I don't remember a motorsport section. I remember guys like Weepee, Baard, Werda, Groenbloed, Xupatude as well as the likes of Baboon-ou, moffie, ou Maaik and Sharky . . . but hardly any of the names you've put up.
Anyway, nice try at changing the subject but stop being a stinking coward and put up your evidence . . . or at least have the decency to admit you were lying that I calimed I know everything.

"So what was your name on the Supersport board, chump? I don't remember a Ceradyne or a Vlagman . . . although admittedly perhaps I missed you . . . because you were about as interesting then as you are now!"


Alzheimers?

1.
Posted by vlagman on 10 January 2011 - 09:16 PM in Rugby

'Rooinek', on 10 Jan 2011 - 8:56 PM, said:

At the expense of Beast or Gurthro? Forget it. Smit either plays tighthead or he doesn't play. If Jannie du Plessis maintains his improved form then there's no room for John Smit. He's a great captain but he's no longer a great player.

First pick your best XV and then pick your captain.

Regards

That is exactly the point. It should never have come to this point. Our great National coach's inability to work out how to utilise both John and Bismark. He tried to find a way to have them both on the field at the same time. The same as he has done with Ruan Pienaar. He wanted both Pienaar and FDP on the field at the same time. In each case he was always going to stuff up one of the pair.

John Smit does not deserve to end his international career like this, but that is unfortunately the only way out, thanks to our friend Twakkies.

2. My reply to one of your posts. My remarks/replies to your arguments are in blue.

Posted by vlagman on 17 November 2010 - 11:21 AM in Rugby

'Rooinek', on 17 Nov 2010 - 10:37 AM, said:

Vlagman, first off, you don't need to put up a summary of who played who at the RWC2007 for my benefit, I'm not the one who couldn't remember who we played in that tournament.

Secondly, you can spin it any way you like, nothing will change the fact that of the big 5 teams in world rugby, 4 of those 5 teams ended up in one half of the draw and we were alone in the other . . . and we ended up playing the same team in the final who we'd hammered in the pool game. I am not trying to spin anything. You keep on avoiding the issue. What are you on about. One would have expected OZ to sort out England after England's defeat against SA. Right? The same could be said about the AB's who could not get past France. Easy as pie. They did not deserve a shot at SA in the final. Why is that so difficult to understand. Yes, they were in the top 5 sides in the world at that stage, but that has nothing to do with it. They couldn't make it past the 1/4 finals. If you want to pretend that the likes of Fiji and Argentina are stronger than the All Blacks, the Wallabies or a French team on their home turf the go ahead, just don't expect me to agree. Did I say that anywhere? I keep on saying that, in the RWC2007 competition, the AB'z and OZ did not make it past the 1/4 finals. At the same time the same old shit keeps on coming up about SA's so-called easy path to the final. Why should we be reminded of that if the AB's and OZ were too kak to make the semi-finals, and who say that we wouldn't haven beaten them as well. I truly think that we would have beaten any of OZ or NZ in the 2007 RWC. Proof me wrong if you can.

Finally, please understand that just because we had such an easy draw does not mean I think we would have lost to one of those other teams in the much tougher half of the draw, nor does it mean I think we were anything but deserved winners. That's the way the draw worked out and you can only play what is put in front of you.

I just don't think we can elevate a very ordinary coach like Eddie Jones to greatness just because he was the backline coach for a team that managed to win a tournament by beating a below-average England side twice along with a whole bunch of lesser nations who have never beaten the Springboks before in their entire history. That's all. Nobody has elevated Eddie Jones to greatness. We just acknowledge that he has brought something to the squad that was needed at the time. I don't know if you have bothered to read it but this issue was put to Jake White in his Q&A session, and this was his reply:

"In terms of Eddie's role as consultant, he spent time working on our motion on the ball, which is the role the guys on the inside and outside of the ball-carrier play when on attack. As a typical Aussie coach and with his Japanese background, his attention to detail was immaculate and he'd spend much time on small things. That said, we all benefitted from Fourie du Preez and Butch James playing together a lot more than what we were allowed to do in the past." Now, isn't the underlined part exactly where we are coming short at the moment, especially with our centers?

Regards


3.
Posted by vlagman on 17 November 2010 - 10:23 AM in Rugby

'Rooinek', on 17 Nov 2010 - 09:48 AM, said:

Well, I replied to your post before I saw those other guys pointing out the same error regarding Fiji . . . but apart from the irony of you telling me I was the one forgetting stuff, I did ask a few other questions which you haven't responded to. Where in my post did I say that the Springboks wouldn't have beaten those other teams if they had played them? Where did I imply that they were undeserving winners? My point was that we had a very easy draw, nothing else. Do you disagree?

Regards

No, you didn't say that, but you have to agree that the story of SA having an easy path is getting a tad irritating.

Let's have a look. SA had the reigning world champions who, after a humiliating defeat against SA, got their act together and played us again in the final. They had to beat OZ to get there. We beat England twice in the tournament. So, why should we be ashamed of not having played against OZ? Tell me that. In addition we had Tonga, Samoa (who are no puppies either), and the USA.

Who did the mighty OZ have in their pool? Fiji (note the correct spelling), Japan (nogal), Wales and Canada.

Then we have the mighty sides that the AB's had to face. Scotland, Italy, Romania and Portugal.

The last pool was Argentina, France, Ireland, Georgia and Namibia.

Then, in the 1/4 finals we had the following:
OZ-England
NZ-France
SA-Fiji
Arg-Scotland

Semi-finals
England-France
SA-Arg

Now, I say again. So what if we had to play Fiji in the 1/4 finals and Arg in the semi's? If the AB's were to kak to beat France, and OZ were to kak to beat France, why should we carry the tag that our RWC title is undeserved? We were mot lucky in the draw, we deserved to be in the final. If the loudmouth OZ and AB's and there supporters were better they would have had the honor of trying to beat us in the knock-out stages. Finish and klaar. OZ and the AB'z were lucky that they didn't have to face SA in the 1/4 or the semi-finals IMO.

PS, if there was any side who had a tough route to the final, it is England. They suffered that opening defeat against SA, then they had to hand off OZ in the 1/4 finals, then they faced France in the semis and SA in the final. I cannot remember reading anything on any board of any of them bitching and moaning about SA's "easy route to the final". Granted they had a piss about the "try" that wasn't, but I haven't seen anything about their "difficult" route to the final. The OZ squealed for about a week after the RWC but the flippin AB's and their supporters are still wailing about it.

4.
Posted by vlagman on 16 November 2010 - 10:02 PM in Rugby

'Rooinek', on 16 Nov 2010 - 8:54 PM, said:

I'd expect even a dom vorie to recognize that if you go to a RWC and get so lucky with the draw that you only play against average or minnow teams and avoid playing a single game against any of France, Australia or New Zealand that you're going to equal or break some RWC points/try-scoring records. Note that the only side we played at that RWC that had actually beaten us in their entire rugby history was England . . . and that was a rather ordinary England team.

Despite all that, we came as close as any Springbok team has ever come to losing to teams like Fiji and Tonga. I wouldn't get too carried away by what old squiff-eye Eddie did for our backline.

Regards

Once again the old story. We didn't play the AB's, OZ or France in RWC 2007. So f-ing what? Who says that we wouldn't have beaten them as well? I say this for the umpteenth time. We beat England, who beat Australia and France (who beat NZ), and we beat Argentina. Who's fault is it that we didn't play them? Ours? The way they played, we might well have beaten them as well.

In addition to that, we didn't play Fidji. They were in Pool B with OZ, Wales, Japan and Canada. We did have a close game against Tonga yes, but you have obviously forgotten that we started with 7 players from the starting 15, for the final, on the bench. In addition we also had 2 mens short at the end of the game through the generous hand-out of yellow cards by Wayne Barnes when he sin-binned Frans Steyn and Habana. Granted Tonga were also a player short in the same period, also having lost a player at the same time as Steyn, due to a fight between the two of them.

 My age, my bank balance, spiritul condition, the state of my marriage, the doings of my kids, the number of fillings I have and a number of other things as well are private and will remain so. 
Let's just say I am not too old and not too young. Bwahahahhahaha
Man you get some inquisitive types. Talk about poking noses into other people's business!!!  
I suspect some unfortunate oaks will die of the frustration of not knowing the details!! 

Ceradunce, you really are a tedious bore. You might think that copying and pasting old messages (from what looks to be the Supersupporter forum anyway) is some kind of answer but it's not. You're just a loud-mouthed coward and you seem a bit confused by which board I'm talking about. The Supersport board I'm talking about had been closed for many years in 2010 so I have no idea what you're babbling on about or where you're quoting from . . . not that I give a toss anyway so please don't mistake that for an invitation for more meaningless and irrelevant copy and pastes.
Now, please either show me where I claimed to know everything or else shut your cowardly cakehole.

 I was on Supersport too !! 
And you explained what Rooinek meant to me, although I did already know. But it was nice of you to explain to me  
I think I joined there about 7 or 8 years ago. 

 I really hope that you didn't think that I was actually giving a toss about what you really thought. I was just doing it so others can also see you for the bullsh!tter you are. I have just listed a number of posters from the Supersport board and the fact that you do not know them shows just goes to show.

Careful now RooiAAS, you are an old Toppie and you seem to be getting angry. But with all that dissolute living that led to AA....you cant be too careful. You might spring a leak.

 A BigBadKev. Used to refer to "springb oks (not lower case)...............".