Jump to content
thespywhozaggedme

Boise State @ CSU game thread.

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Hey you were the guy saying how horrible Boise was for a WR rub and having 85% of our team vaxxed before game 2.  Here you are stanning for battery against a small woman by 4 male students....

A hat is considered an article of clothing, and removing it, pushing her are both legally considered battery.

Your fans made unwanted physical contact on multiple occasions in an attempt to intimidate a small woman cheering for her partner.  

Trashy AF.

 

Bring on the deflection @halfmanhalfbronco.  Gee...I wonder why you are losing focus & won't discuss the topic at hand...

 

Here you are stanning for battery against a small woman by 4 male students....  I---> Where did I "stanning" (whatever that is) for the CSU student's???  I've said over & over aggressively touching a girl is uncalled for.  What you refuse to see, is I'm calling you our for being NAVIE, heavily BIASED & IRRESPONSIBLY running roughshod with a ONE-SIDED 2nd-HAND story.   

A hat is considered an article of clothing, and removing it, pushing her are both legally considered battery.   I---> YES...both are illegal & both are RARELY charged, but you know that.  For the THIRD TIME, this isn't a court of law.  If you continue to pretend it is with your theatrics...I'M DONE discussing this topic w/you here.

Your fans made unwanted physical contact on multiple occasions I---> Now there are "multiple occasions "  While you are educating us about these "multiple occasions" pls tell us what she did to attach this "unwanted" attention.  You know darn well situations like this just don't sponatiouly happen.  You also didn't address my multiple questions about, why she thought it was a good idea going into the CSU Student Section.  Something tells me, she didn't have a ticket for that section.  Pls tell us more about this "multiple occasions" & give us more context, since now you have more info not include in the original tweet.  EDUCATED US Half-Man...

 

in an attempt to intimidate a small woman cheering for her partner.  I---> So now this players' "family member" is a player's "partner."  Come on dude.  Like me, he's from The Bay.  Your new version of the story has hilly billy cousins from a holler in the Appilacans Mtn doing un "family member" like behviors together now.  

 

Pls get your story straight & fill us in my friend.

 

Trashy AF.  I---> ...& the more we hear about your story...the more one-side, unconfirmed, shady & unbelievable it becomes...

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoState99755 said:

 

Bring on the deflection @halfmanhalfbronco.  Gee...I wonder why you are losing focus & won't discuss the topic at hand...

 

Here you are stanning for battery against a small woman by 4 male students....  I---> Where did I "stanning" (whatever that is) for the CSU student's???  I've said over & over aggressively touching a girl is uncalled for.  What you refuse to see, is I'm calling you our for being NAVIE, heavily BIASED & IRRESPONSIBLY running roughshod with a ONE-SIDED 2nd-HAND story.   

A hat is considered an article of clothing, and removing it, pushing her are both legally considered battery.   I---> YES...both are illegal & both are RARELY charged, but you know that.  For the THIRD TIME, this isn't a court of law.  If you continue to pretend it is with your theatrics...I'M DONE discussing this topic w/you here.

Your fans made unwanted physical contact on multiple occasions I---> Now there are "multiple occasions "  While you are educating us about these "multiple occasions" pls tell us what she did to attach this "unwanted" attention.  You know darn well situations like this just don't sponatiouly happen.  You also didn't address my multiple questions about, why she thought it was a good idea going into the CSU Student Section.  Something tells me, she didn't have a ticket for that section.  Pls tell us more about this "multiple occasions" & give us more context, since now you have more info not include in the original tweet.  EDUCATED US Half-Man...

 

in an attempt to intimidate a small woman cheering for her partner.  I---> So now this players' "family member" is a player's "partner."  Come on dude.  Like me, he's from The Bay.  Your new version of the story has hilly billy cousins from a holler in the Appilacans Mtn doing un "family member" like behviors together now.  

 

Pls get your story straight & fill us in my friend.

 

Trashy AF.  I---> ...& the more we hear about your story...the more one-side, unconfirmed, shady & unbelievable it becomes...

 

 

 

TLDR

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

 

In related news:  ¿Did your player apologize for TARGETING?  ¡AGAIN!

=======================================

Late whistle or not...the pass was incomplete, thus your "negated...TD" was BOGUS either way ¿Right?

What a shame the zebras made a small error, getting a call right.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

TLDR

 

 

Here you go lazy man.  A digestible tid bit for you:

in an attempt to intimidate a small woman cheering for her partner.  I---> So now this players' "family member" is the player's "partner."  Come on dude.  Like me, he's from The Bay.  Your new version of the story has hilly billy cousins from Butcher's Holler in the Appalachians doing un "family member" like behaviors together now.  

 

Your fans made unwanted physical contact on multiple occasions I---> Now there are "multiple occasions "  While you are educating us about these "multiple occasions" pls tell us what she did to attach this "unwanted" attention.  You know darn well situations like this just don't sponatiouly happen.  You also didn't address my multiple questions about, why she thought it was a good idea going into the CSU Student Section.  Something tells me, she didn't have a ticket for that section.  Pls tell us more about this "multiple occasions" & give us more context, since now you have more info not include in the original tweet.  EDUCATED US Half-Man...

 

Pls get your story straight & fill us in my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GoState99755 said:

 

Here you go lazy man.  A digestible tid bit for you:

in an attempt to intimidate a small woman cheering for her partner.  I---> So now this players' "family member" is the player's "partner."  Come on dude.  Like me, he's from The Bay.  Your new version of the story has hilly billy cousins from Butcher's Holler in the Appalachians doing un "family member" like behaviors together now.  

 

Your fans made unwanted physical contact on multiple occasions I---> Now there are "multiple occasions "  While you are educating us about these "multiple occasions" pls tell us what she did to attach this "unwanted" attention.  You know darn well situations like this just don't sponatiouly happen.  You also didn't address my multiple questions about, why she thought it was a good idea going into the CSU Student Section.  Something tells me, she didn't have a ticket for that section.  Pls tell us more about this "multiple occasions" & give us more context, since now you have more info not include in the original tweet.  EDUCATED US Half-Man...

 

Pls get your story straight & fill us in my friend.

Family member/partner does not matter.  I misspoke, it was his family member.  That is hardly relevant.

Yes, multiple occasions.  Pushing equals one occasion, the removal of her hat is a separate distinct act.  Multiple.

You seem to really struggle with English and like, what words mean.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bsu_alum9 said:

I still don’t see how it was overturnable evidence? 

 

 

Which is one of the many reasons why, you are not a replay official.

Let the professionals do their job....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GoState99755 said:

 

 

Which is one of the many reasons why, you are not a replay official.

Let the professionals do their job....

 

The ones who apologized to our coach for doing their job so poorly they removed a TD from the board?  Those ones?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Family member/partner does not matter.  I misspoke, it was his family member.  That is hardly relevant.

Yes, multiple occasions.  Pushing equals one occasion, the removal of her hat is a separate distinct act.  Multiple.

You seem to really struggle with English and like, what words mean.  

 

Family member/partner does not matter.  I misspoke, it was his family member.  That is hardly relevant.  I---> TRUE....its "...hardly relevant..." now that I know you "misspoke" & that you are presenting personal conjecture as fact.  I'm confident you can see why I thought you had additional & or new information with your two new details ("multiple occasions" & "partner) ¿right? 

Yes, multiple occasions.  Pushing equals one occasion, the removal of her hat is a separate distinct act.  I---> I see now, more conjecture on your part.  4-guys so it could have happened simultaneously, thus no "multiple occasions" ¿Right?  My pt as it has been all along, YOU & I DON'T KNOW, yet you are dressing conjecture as fact, pretending like you know both sides of this incident.

You're being VERY IRRESPONSIBLE running with a ONE-SIDE 2nd HAND (at best) story, like you know both sides & have all the facts.

In addition, you are totally ignore my question of, why was she in a universally & traditional hostel  section, which she most likely didn't have a ticket for.  HMMMM...I wonder why you don't want to address these pts.

You seem to really struggle with English and like, what words mean.    I---> Let's see, you are present conjecture as fact & misspeaking, yet I'm the home that "...struggle(s) w/English & like what words mean."  Why isn't that an awful peculiar & illogical conclusion you have drawn....

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

The ones who apologized to our coach for doing their job so poorly they removed a TD from the board?  Those ones?  

 

 

You mean the TD that was set up w/an incomplete pass?  Is that the one you are referencing?

Funny how selective you are with the variables you chose to address.

DAMN those officials using technotogy to get it right.  SHAME ON THEM!!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoState99755 said:

 

Family member/partner does not matter.  I misspoke, it was his family member.  That is hardly relevant.  I---> TRUE....its "...hardly relevant..." now that I know you "misspoke" & that you are presenting personal conjecture as fact.  I'm confident you can see why I thought you had additional & or new information with your two new details ("multiple occasions" & "partner) ¿right? 

Yes, multiple occasions.  Pushing equals one occasion, the removal of her hat is a separate distinct act.  I---> I see now, more conjecture on your part.  4-guys so it could have happened simultaneously, thus no "multiple occasions" ¿Right?  My pt as it has been all along, YOU & I DON'T KNOW, yet you are dressing conjecture as fact, pretending like you know both sides of this incident.

You're being VERY IRRESPONSIBLE running with a ONE-SIDE 2nd HAND (at best) story, like you know both sides & have all the facts.

In addition, you are totally ignore my question of, why was she in a universally & traditional hostel  section, which she most likely didn't have a ticket for.  HMMMM...I wonder why you don't want to address these pts.

You seem to really struggle with English and like, what words mean.    I---> Let's see, you are present conjecture as fact & misspeaking, yet I'm the home that "...struggle(s) w/English & like what words mean."  Why isn't that an awful peculiar & illogical conclusion you have drawn....

 

 

 

 

 

 

If 4 students removed her hat, threw it on the ground and pushed her in a single incident, you get that is far worse and less easy to explain away, right?  You get how that looks way worse, right?  
 

As to why she was in the student section?  Well she age and it does not matter.  That is victim blaming "what was she doing wearing that skirt in that seedy bar?" type shit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GoState99755 said:

 

You mean the TD that was set up w/an incomplete pass?  Is that the one you are referencing?

Funny how selective you are with the variables you chose to address.

DAMN those officials using technotogy to get it right.  SHAME ON THEM!!!

 

 

 

One, looked like a catch to me but secondly and more importantly, they apologized for a reason ,any review has to come before the following snap, the rules state this.  They messed up and took a TD off the board with that mess up.  Hence the apology to our HC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

If 4 students removed her hat, threw it on the ground and pushed her in a single incident, you get that is far worse and less easy to explain away, right?  You get how that looks way worse, right?  
 

As to why she was in the student section?  Well she age and it does not matter.  That is victim blaming "what was she doing wearing that skirt in that seedy bar?" type shit.  

 

DAMN...you are wrk'g so hard to ignore my pt.

If 4 students removed her hat, threw it on the ground and pushed her in a single incident, you get that is far worse and less easy to explain away, right? I---> Neither you nor I, have enough information to make those assumptions.  I won't waste my time judging the severity of a hypothetical.

The Hypothetical solely exists to illustrate the pt:  you are INTRODUCING CONJECTURE AS FACT.  i

What could possibly be constructive` debating a hypothetical manufacture to show your shady story telling???

 

You get how that looks way worse, right?   I---> No...I DO NOT.  It's a hypothetical with ZERO BASIS in REALITY.  ¿RIGHT?

As to why she was in the student section?  Well she age and it does not matter.  I---> Can you resubmit this in coherent English pls.  REMEMBER, I'm the one that you claim  "... really struggle(s) with English and like." 

That is victim blaming "what was she doing wearing that skirt in that seedy bar?" type shit.     I---> ...& hear comes the false equivalencies.  SURE...it could be "victim blaming."  If we knew both sides & most of the facts, there's a context were my comments would be "victim blaming."  Re-read where I first brought up those questions.  I'm confident it will be crystal clear, it was in the context of gather facts & try to get both si=des of the story.   ¿RIGHT?   Here you go again, drawing conclusions w/with not even close to 1/2-the-story & TOTALY & irresponsibility ignoring the context in which I asked those questions.

 

How many more times do I have to make the point:     

WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY.  Not even 1/2-of-it.

 

How long are you going to try to:

*  mischaracterize my questions in my search for more info?

*  try to draw conclusions & introduce conjecture as fact, w/a sliver of the situation at hand???

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

One, looked like a catch to me but secondly and more importantly, they apologized for a reason ,any review has to come before the following snap, the rules state this.  They messed up and took a TD off the board with that mess up.  Hence the apology to our HC

 

One, looked like a catch to me but secondly and more importantly, they apologized for a reason ,any review has to come before the following snap, the rules state this.  They messed up and took a TD off the board with that mess up.  Hence the apology to our HC  I--->. DAMN...you have an AMAZING COMAND of the OBVIOUS.  It's impressive how you restated facts w/both understand & are in total agreement with.

I've asked the following on "multiple occasions" (¿remember that term? from another topic), however you continually refuse address them.  Here goes AGAIN:

Q:  Why won't you address that your "removed...TD" was set up by an incomplete pass?  You are focusing on a technicality...a human error made while the refs were trying their best to get right. Why are you driving home the minutiae?  You are all over a "removed...TD," yet won't address the fact it was set-up by an incomplete pass.  ¿Why?

 

DAMN those officials using technotogy to get it right.  SHAME ON THEM!!!  God bless the Lord Baby Jesús you are here to call-out those dedicated professionals on a technicality.

Always remember:  "The trick to forgetting the big picture, is to look at everything close-up."

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoState99755 said:

 

One, looked like a catch to me but secondly and more importantly, they apologized for a reason ,any review has to come before the following snap, the rules state this.  They messed up and took a TD off the board with that mess up.  Hence the apology to our HC  I--->. DAMN...you have an AMAZING COMAND of the OBVIOUS.  It's impressive how you restated facts w/both understand & are in total agreement with.

I've asked the following on "multiple occasions" (¿remember that term? from another topic), however you continually refuse address them.  Here goes AGAIN:

Q:  Why won't you address that your "removed...TD" was set up by an incomplete pass?  You are focusing on a technicality...a human error, the refs are trying their best to get right. You are all over a "removed...TD," yet won't address the fact it was set-up by an incomplete pass.  ¿Why?

 

DAMN those officials using technotogy to get it right.  SHAME ON THEM!!!  God bless the Lord Baby Jesús you are her to call those professionals out on a technicality.

Don't forget:  "The trick to forgetting the big picture, is to look at everything close-up."

 

 

 

 

 

There was no irrefutable evidence the pass was incomplete.  You know what irrefutable means, I hope?  Maybe not.  More importantly it does not matter.  You do not review a play after the following one is complete.  Hence the apology.  It was a TD taken off the board.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

So what?  Like I said, it happens plenty. Far from the first time I’ve seen it.  Pretty weak that they apologized for it IMO. Plenty of stuff we can demand apologies for going forward I guess.  Seriously; stand behind your work or find different work. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

If 4 students removed her hat, threw it on the ground and pushed her in a single incident, you get that is far worse and less easy to explain away, right?  You get how that looks way worse, right?  
 

As to why she was in the student section?  Well she age and it does not matter.  That is victim blaming "what was she doing wearing that skirt in that seedy bar?" type shit.  

I’m sick and tired of victimization. She was assigned a seat in the stadium. She chose not to sit there and chose to visit the CSU student section.  Student sections are full of idiots. Want to avoid idiocy? Stay the +++++ away or accept any consequences.

Your seedy bar analogy is flat out dumb.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Swoll Cracker said:

I’m sick and tired of victimization. She was assigned a seat in the stadium. She chose not to sit there and chose to visit the CSU student section.  Student sections are full of idiots. Want to avoid idiocy? Stay the +++++ away or accept any consequences.

Your seedy bar analogy is flat out dumb.

Battery is never ok.  Trashy.

 

What was she wearing all that makeup for if she did not want me to slap her on the ass?!?!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...