YOU raised the cage boxing though, didnt you?. Yes you did, you also insinuated it had no rules and no medics without knowing if it did or not. now im no fan of the people running it but cut some people some slack or else you can be accused of bias and arnt you always claiming thats what youre not? as the admin for the site?
Ok youre not the site admin fair point. But you did insinuate there were no rules and no medics at that event without knowing if there are or not you also had a dig about this thread not being about cage boxing after you were the one who raised it
i think you should think before you type sometimes. just an idea.
I'll break this down again for you
So then i saidOriginally Posted by mrcr
Probably worse than this I'd say. I also say let each event have its day see what happens bitch about it afterwards if it fails but give everyone a fair crack of the whip.
My argument here is that, if there was an event with no rules, and was badly organised and a giant step back. Should we support it and give them a "fair crack of the whip" if it looks like the results could be disastrous?What happens is there is an event which has no rules, in a dodgy cage, no medics, etc etc
Should we just let it go and hope for the best? or should we be pro-active and try to protect the sport?
or should those in the scene have their say and do something about it.
Like i said you assume too much
Yeah i do need to get up earlier i just can't sleep at nights. But the rest of what you said makes no sense to me.
You're as paranoid as me.
No he didn't! You may have interpreted it that way but he in no way insinuated it.
It seems to me that he wanted to know where you'd put your limits on 'giving them a fair crack of the whip'. He was simply questioning your idea of giving everyone a fair crack of the whip, not insinuating anything.
"You've got a lot of opinions for someone who's not on there!"
"Showed a lot of grit" - Ian Butlin
I AM AFFILIATED TO MMAES