HomeHow dare you Mr Pig ?
City till we die.
City till we die.
We are back.
+5
Mr Magoo
Natasha Whittam
karlypants
Boggersbelief
scottjames30
9 posters
Go to page : 
1, 2, 3
Message [Page 3 of 3]
42 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 19:52
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Norpig wrote:
look Nat's and Scotts lapdog is back
Norpig, you used to be a good poster. But you've got to make a decision here, stop pandering to the ponces and show a bit of spine. Or suffer the consequences of crossing us.
43 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 19:53
Boggersbelief
Nat Lofthouse
Copper Dragon wrote:The problem with the "brotherhood" is that two of the three members are the most boring posters on this site.
They are the most entertaining actually.
44 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 19:55
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Posts : 37240
Join date : 2012-08-04
What would you call it if you could change the name Copper?Copper Dragon wrote:The problem with the "brotherhood" is that two of the three members are the most boring posters on this site.
45 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 19:55
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
The problem with every Burnley fans is they have this wanker, Copper the wanker dragon!Copper Dragon wrote:The problem with the "brotherhood" is that two of the three members are the most boring posters on this site.
Shit fans let down by this shitter fan on a BWFC site.
Ban him again Sluffy.
46 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 19:56
Copper Dragon
Ivan Campo
Boggersbelief wrote:
They are the most entertaining actually.
Very good Boggers.
But it's Nastase that needs a new group.
48 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 19:58
Copper Dragon
Ivan Campo
karlypants wrote:What would you call it if you could change the name Copper?
Yawn Brigade.
49 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:00
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Posts : 37240
Join date : 2012-08-04
Copper Dragon wrote:karlypants wrote:What would you call it if you could change the name Copper?
Yawn Brigade.
50 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:07
Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
i'm my own man thanks, none of the so called bumchums are here anywayNatasha Whittam wrote:Norpig wrote:
look Nat's and Scotts lapdog is back
Norpig, you used to be a good poster. But you've got to make a decision here, stop pandering to the ponces and show a bit of spine. Or suffer the consequences of crossing us.
I actually like all of you (even Boggers) but this whole brotherhood vs bumchums is past its sell by date now
51 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:27
luckyPeterpiper
Ivan Campo
What a pity.scottjames30 wrote:The Brotherhood!!!!
52 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:39
Chairmanda
Andy Walker
what piggly wiggly said.Norpig wrote:i'm my own man thanks, none of the so called bumchums are here anywayNatasha Whittam wrote:Norpig wrote:
look Nat's and Scotts lapdog is back
Norpig, you used to be a good poster. But you've got to make a decision here, stop pandering to the ponces and show a bit of spine. Or suffer the consequences of crossing us.
I actually like all of you (even Boggers) but this whole brotherhood vs bumchums is past its sell by date now
53 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:41
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
It's bigger than Brotherhood v Bumchums, it's the future of this site.
People might not want to admit it, but they'd much rather read or contribute to an online argument than read/contribute to a site where all the members are good friends and no one has a bad word to say about anything.
People might not want to admit it, but they'd much rather read or contribute to an online argument than read/contribute to a site where all the members are good friends and no one has a bad word to say about anything.
54 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:42
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Posts : 37240
Join date : 2012-08-04
Norpig wrote:i'm my own man thanks, none of the so called bumchums are here anywayNatasha Whittam wrote:Norpig wrote:
look Nat's and Scotts lapdog is back
Norpig, you used to be a good poster. But you've got to make a decision here, stop pandering to the ponces and show a bit of spine. Or suffer the consequences of crossing us.
I actually like all of you (even Boggers) but this whole brotherhood vs bumchums is past its sell by date now
I thought you were one of us! P.S your grey T-shirt doesn't suit you!
55 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:45
luckyPeterpiper
Ivan Campo
Finally something we might agree on but for one thing. People want to read a debate about football and the club, not your pathetic attempts to diss everyone else and play the 'big dog' of the site. Here's a thought for you Nat, why not try actually talking about the club rather than spend time insulting other posters. Since you want to do the former I will respond in kind but should you ever decide to do the latter I'd be even happier to do that. And as to the future of this site I suggest you ask yourself why it might be in jeopardy? Coud it be because a small number of posters believe they have the right to slag off everyone else just because they've been here for longer?Natasha Whittam wrote:It's bigger than Brotherhood v Bumchums, it's the future of this site.
People might not want to admit it, but they'd much rather read or contribute to an online argument than read/contribute to a site where all the members are good friends and no one has a bad word to say about anything.
56 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:48
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
luckyPeterpiper wrote:
Finally something we might agree on but for one thing. People want to read a debate about football and the club, not your pathetic attempts to diss everyone else and play the 'big dog' of the site. Here's a thought for you Nat, why not try actually talking about the club rather than spend time insulting other posters.
I don't diss people on the football side of the site, just this one.
At the moment I find the club situation boring. I can't be arsed reading page after page of bollocks because the only people who know anything concrete are saying nowt.
Don't ever underestimate my love of BWFC.
57 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 20:52
luckyPeterpiper
Ivan Campo
By your own admission that would be impossible given how little you actually feel (or claim to).Natasha Whittam wrote:luckyPeterpiper wrote:
Finally something we might agree on but for one thing. People want to read a debate about football and the club, not your pathetic attempts to diss everyone else and play the 'big dog' of the site. Here's a thought for you Nat, why not try actually talking about the club rather than spend time insulting other posters.
I don't diss people on the football side of the site, just this one.
At the moment I find the club situation boring. I can't be arsed reading page after page of bollocks because the only people who know anything concrete are saying nowt.
Don't ever underestimate my love of BWFC.
What makes it worse in my eyes is that when you try you really can be an intelligent poster even though I sometimes disagree with what you say. Sadly you seem all too often to take the low road and call everyone a wanker rather than actually put a valid point across.
58 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 21:48
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
luckyPeterpiper wrote:
By your own admission that would be impossible given how little you actually feel (or claim to).
What makes it worse in my eyes is that when you try you really can be an intelligent poster even though I sometimes disagree with what you say. Sadly you seem all too often to take the low road and call everyone a wanker rather than actually put a valid point across.
Supporting BWFC has definitely been a chore these last few seasons, but I'm still here. I come here for the gallows humour, but just lately people seem to take offence at everything.
59 Re: We are back. Wed Dec 23 2015, 22:01
luckyPeterpiper
Ivan Campo
Probably because (and certainly in my case) nerves have been rubbed red raw over this mess and the fact so little real information is out there. Forty years of following the Trotters and I've never felt so in the dark and so helpless to do anything about it. In the 80's we all pulled together (insert suggstive joke of your choice here) from the boardroom to the terrace even though there was no guarantee we'd have a club to follow next week. I think the current mess and the miasma of gossip, rumour, half-truths and outright lies coming out of the Macron have left too many of us angry especially when it's been so bad ON the pitch as well.Natasha Whittam wrote:luckyPeterpiper wrote:
By your own admission that would be impossible given how little you actually feel (or claim to).
What makes it worse in my eyes is that when you try you really can be an intelligent poster even though I sometimes disagree with what you say. Sadly you seem all too often to take the low road and call everyone a wanker rather than actually put a valid point across.
Supporting BWFC has definitely been a chore these last few seasons, but I'm still here. I come here for the gallows humour, but just lately people seem to take offence at everything.
Message [Page 3 of 3]
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|
|