Replies

  • giphy.gif

  • lipflap.gif

  • jZQyo.gif

  • 3320938706?profile=original

  • 2861432129?profile=original

    • why bring vaughton in to the eels site?

  • 3320911369?profile=original

  • 3320931974?profile=original

  • Ok, let's bite here for argument sake.

    Say Fogarty plays off the bench as the #14. What role does he play? 
    Are you going to take off Bevan French, Clint Gutherson or Corey Norman to allow him to play? 

    Before I put forth why it wouldn't work, let me allow you to firstly say why you think Fogarty as the 14 would work and where and how you would play him within the 80-minute confine of the game. 

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Coryn Hughes replied to EelsAgeMe's discussion The Lomax Case: What Are We Missing?
"In all essence this case is very black n white but Lomax's lawyers will be looking for avenues that will highlight different that's the key here is for us not to get drawn into the Lomax arguement but to stay on track and highlight what's been…"
19 minutes ago
Clintorian replied to EelsAgeMe's discussion The Lomax Case: What Are We Missing?
"Not to mention all the other teams in Rugby he could be playing in."
4 hours ago
Muttman replied to EelsAgeMe's discussion The Lomax Case: What Are We Missing?
"It's now out of the NRL's hands. If the court says the conditions of the release are valid and still stand then that is that. The NRL can't stomp all over the Eels' legal rights.  Lomax told the Eels in writing he was proceeding with the Storm…"
6 hours ago
EelsAgeMe replied to EelsAgeMe's discussion The Lomax Case: What Are We Missing?
"You'd think it's in the NRL's best interest to be on Parra's side here. If they take the side of Lomax then every player contract means nothing. This is bigger than a single case- it could open up a world where players do whatever they want,…"
6 hours ago
More…