|
On August 11 2011 04:40 zerglingrodeo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 04:23 fellcrow wrote:
Verbal source from IPL. I got really confused when he said, "PuMa WAS available on the EG roster when these games were played." post IdrA losing game 2 and who the 2nd EG player would be. I was like WTF? So you took a vague verbal source that could have a variety of meanings (most of them innocuous), drew the craziest conclusion possible from it, and posted about it in such a way that it sounded like a much more sure thing than what it actually was (your imagination)? Great idea.
I don't know where you got the idea I was saying because he wasn't used he wasn't on EG. I was saying that because PainUser had said, "Puma WAS available for play when these matches were played, lets see if they use him." What else could that mean? He WAS available as in he isn't available in the present. Well, why wouldn't he be available in the present unless he wasn't on EG. That's what I was inquiring about. Thanks fucker.
|
No contract?
... Sooo.. What's the problem? If they player wants to change team, he changes, of course EG should offer a good seat at their house if they want him in and believe they can offer something better than the non-contract team.
I don't see the problem. It's a battle for the best players. Don't have a contract? Well, lololololololo at you then.
|
On August 11 2011 04:49 fellcrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 04:40 zerglingrodeo wrote:On August 11 2011 04:23 fellcrow wrote:
Verbal source from IPL. I got really confused when he said, "PuMa WAS available on the EG roster when these games were played." post IdrA losing game 2 and who the 2nd EG player would be. I was like WTF? So you took a vague verbal source that could have a variety of meanings (most of them innocuous), drew the craziest conclusion possible from it, and posted about it in such a way that it sounded like a much more sure thing than what it actually was (your imagination)? Great idea. I don't know where you got the idea I was saying because he wasn't used he wasn't on EG. I was saying that because PainUser had said, "Puma WAS available for play when these matches were played, lets see if they use him." What else could that mean? He WAS available as in he isn't available in the present. Well, why wouldn't he be available in the present unless he wasn't on EG. That's what I was inquiring about. Thanks fucker.
He WAS available to play meaning the games had already been played and were being casted from replays.
|
On August 11 2011 04:49 fellcrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 04:40 zerglingrodeo wrote:On August 11 2011 04:23 fellcrow wrote:
Verbal source from IPL. I got really confused when he said, "PuMa WAS available on the EG roster when these games were played." post IdrA losing game 2 and who the 2nd EG player would be. I was like WTF? So you took a vague verbal source that could have a variety of meanings (most of them innocuous), drew the craziest conclusion possible from it, and posted about it in such a way that it sounded like a much more sure thing than what it actually was (your imagination)? Great idea. I don't know where you got the idea I was saying because he wasn't used he wasn't on EG. I was saying that because PainUser had said, "Puma WAS available for play when these matches were played, lets see if they use him." What else could that mean? He WAS available as in he isn't available in the present. Well, why wouldn't he be available in the present unless he wasn't on EG. That's what I was inquiring about. Thanks fucker.
I feel like I'm listening to Glenn Beck proposing a conspiracy theory. Do you have a chalkboard right now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
