That is why im saying we should've challenged it. Not the cap. The cap was in 02 not 04. I'm talking CH fine.for that one no way we should have been fined, channel 9 should have been sued millions because we lost sponsers because of it and till this day people call them ******s
Couldnt agree more. Well saidMy Email would read:
Danny Weidler, as a journalist with no credentials, your job is to report gossip and unsubstantiated "facts". Then when the heat is applied to your so-called "sources" - you respond with it is an "insider" and/or "it may or may not happen (gee so much for the inside scoop LOL)" ..... Cop out.
I think a 3 year old could write the same dribble as you.
Totally agree - even Fatty and Matt Johns were smirking and seemed quite baffled by his "sources" which are NEVER revieled. Fatty has a soft spot for the Dogs anyway!My Email would read:
Danny Weidler, as a journalist with no credentials, your job is to report gossip and unsubstantiated "facts". Then when the heat is applied to your so-called "sources" - you respond with it is an "insider" and/or "it may or may not happen (gee so much for the inside scoop LOL)" ..... Cop out.
I think a 3 year old could write the same dribble as you.
when u age a bit you'll see, quality radio, mind you im only 35what I dont get is WTF ARE YOU TOOLS LISTENING TO 2UE FOR?