The hands in the back rule is a joke
Barry Hall was today playing down rumours that he is set to contest for the leadership of the ALP after Brad Johnson's approval rating slipped under that of Jason Akermanis.
"There's more chance of me becoming the full forward for the Dogs than there is any change in the Labor Party,” Akermanis said in Brisbane.
Akermanis, who famously said that, was today refusing to be drawn on a piece of paper with a crayon because of tension in his hamstring, singing that he felt something go "twang".
"I'm not pulling your leg," club physiotherapist Kerry O'Brien joked as he told Akermanis that there is, in fact, truth in the rumours that he's not a natural gingernut.
O'Brien - coming off a big bag in the WAFL - put his hands in the back of Kevin Rudd to contest a mark in the pocket before the spill was picked up by Laurie Oakes who passed it to Wendy Kingston who handed it off to Peter Hitchener for an update!
Barry Hall, the incumbent full forward for the Dogs, is today standing firm on the head of solid Christian defender Tony Abbott after it emerged that he had made it impossible for him to tie his boots up.
"I was the one what who cut his fingers off," Abbott said, proudly sporting a necklace made of human fingers, "but I did not have sexual relations with that woman. Lewinski is a Jewish name."
First Quarter: the Winners made a modest return for the quarter despite falling behind in the early exchanges, and allowed their group to hand creditors a massive boost, as they continued the trend they had been following in limiting the Losers through the proficient running of their business.
Second Quarter: managing a savage monopoly of the means and a serious surge from the board, the Winners guaranteed their group's confidence would continue unabated, which proved to have adverse effects on the deficit the Losers were attempting to downplay, as recession proved inevitable.
Third Quarter: the Winners experienced a severe contraction of the size and scope of the deficit they had bought for the opposition to their group, which allayed fears analysts had that the Losers are a spent force, and gave their creditors cause to manage their alarm with an injection of calm.
Fourth Quarter: not managing the opposition to their group's business as effectively as hoped, the Winners ended the day's trading with a margin sufficient to send a message to the industry, which was aided by the massive losses the Losers had made in previous periods, and couldn't be erased enough.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners were rightly gratified by the gains they had made at the table, which they attributed to the confidence they had generated from the previous opposition, which made the opposition the Losers put forward an uncertain and lacking group of enitities with no business here.
First Quarter: the Losers got the business running in limiting the severity of the class inequality evident on paper by managing to halve the figures the competition managed, which equated to a deficit the Winners could manage to add to, as their group struggled for structure, going forward.
Second Quarter: misdirected actions and a tight workplace limited the growth of the deficit the Losers managed to slash, as they added confidence to their optimism, which the Winners added inflation to as the interest of observers rallied, after the competition went into a major recession, looking up.
Third Quarter: the Losers owned the competition, despite failing to manage to manage the position on the board aligned to the systematic control of the means across the board, which the Winners negotiated, as they struggled to consistently find a realistic target to focus their advances on.
Fourth Quarter: liable to doubt the validity of their own confidence, the Losers managed an outcome that was more closely aligned to the work of the competition, which guaranteed the Winners an outcome they had managed due to the confidence they had built up over time, to their credit.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers managed to avoid paying out the person responsible for missing the ultimate opportunity that cost them the value their industry warranted, which detracted slightly from the account the Winners managed to perform of paying out the person they held solely responsible.
First Quarter: the Losers utilised the plan they had been managing to effectively implement, which netted them a manageable margin going into the impending recession, as the Winners, stretched going forward due to the strain on the running of some of their business, managed a short-term loss.
Second Quarter: value-adding to the turnover they managed on the board, the Losers managed to be limited by the costly practices of accounting for the competition, which allowed the Winners sufficient room to negotiate a plan of attack going forward, which was feasible, and beneficial in the gloom.
Third Quarter: the Losers suffered a severe contraction of the turnover their business produced on the board, and manouvered their business into another credible loss, as the Winners, managing enough uncertainty to minimise the perception of a slump in their organisation, earned a gain.
Fourth Quarter: despite a late surge, the Losers cut the costs associated with a loss due to the industry they managed as a by-product of their strong values and integrity, which the Winners managed to negotiate as they put forward the proposal that their business going forward is poor, overall.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers urged their workers to reach viable and manageable goals after the board had finalised its position, which the Winners assessed as "priceless" despite the potential damage the size of the margin inflicted on their fraudulent claims to leading the industry, in any department.
First Quarter: the Winners limited the effect of the period of instability through the negotiation of the impact the damage the competition strategised to inflict on their business, which the Losers took credit for, as they careered towards a recession, managing a marginal gain on the board.
Second Quarter: managing a position on the board worth less than the industry they had managed, the Winners went into the major recession with the confidence a gain produces, which the Losers had managed as a by-product of the deficit they secured from a systematic method, going forward.
Third Quarter: the Winners incorporated enterprise into their plan and managed a savage surge in the turnover managed on the board, as the Losers, struggling to generate vision or accountability, declined into the last recession, which allowed them the relief of modifying the structure of their business.
Fourth Quarter: as the environment opened itself up for a more cohesive flow of business from all sides, the Winners managed to contract the size of their margin, as the Losers, concerned about the welfare of bludgers, surged closer to the competition, which was always beyond their means.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners attributed the overall outcome they managed to the management of their assets going forward, and the precision of their actions in the long-run, as the Losers managed to account for their result to the costly decision to value ownership over enterprise and endeavour.
First Quarter: the Winners secured the benefits of control of the environment from the position on the board they managed due to the peformance their business made, which guaranteed a long-term management issue for the Losers as they endeavoured to manage a deficit, going forward.
Second Quarter: due to the poor efficiency they managed at board-level, the Winners secured a marginal gain toadd to their overall margin, which accounted for their advantage over the Losers, as they struggled with the shortfall of class they were forced to manage, and produced a poor account.
Third Quarter: the Winners virtually guaranteed themselves an absolute advantage, despite their mismanagement of opportunity continuing to minimise the size of their control, which gave the Losers another sign of their decline, as they managed to increase their deficit, in a deep depression.
Fourth Quarter: handing back some of the gains they had acquired before the last recession, the Winners allowed themselves to decrease the intensity of the depression they were managing to give the Losers, which, in the long-term, guaranteed them some slight surge in confidence.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners gave an accurate account of the overall position they had manufactured on the board, and added value to the "strong performance" they managed, which added gloom to the reports the Losers gave of their work-rate because, they "couldn't fault their endeavour".
First Quarter: the Losers generated, in a protected environment, cautious pessimism from creditors about the future of what limited options they could manage, as the Winners, benefiting from rebounding figures, managed to capitalise on their surging confidence and enterpising outlook.
Second Quarter: relinquishing the momentary monopoly of turnover at board-level, the Losers spiralled towards the impending recession, despite the manufacture of fraudulent volatility, which added value to the assessments the Winners had made that their stocks are on the rise, going forward.
Third Quarter: the Losers, following two consecutive quarters of negative results and a recession, failed to manufacture sustainable future options to account for their industry, as the Winners delivered creditors, passing themselves off as analysts, confidence in their margin.
Fourth Quarter: after the last recession, the Losers managed to generate interest from creditors that the business of acquiring an absolute advantage was within their scope, which failed to eventuate, as the Winners, increasing the confidence placed in their industry, added a gain, again.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers managed to transfer some of the credit away from the competition by calling on incidents of mismanagement of maintaining control on the board, which detracted from the resourceful and enterprising business the Winners bargained for in acquiring credit for their control.
First Quarter: the Losers contributed to the deficit they generated in an environment that made the industrial revolution they have manufactured redundant, as the Winners produced a number of industrial measures to curtail the competition, and delivered substantial rewards for creditors.
Second Quarter: in a period of rapid stagnation, the Losers managed to reverse some of the pressure their business had been under despite registering only a slight contraction of the margin, as the Winners negotiated the slashing of their margin through the individual enterprise of an unsustainable target.
Third Quarter: the Losers virtually guaranteed an optimistic outlook for the interest of positive creditors, after managing to increase the size of their margin, as the Losers closed off their options with a third consecutive quarter which managed to send creditors into ownership of a pessimistic outlook.
Fourth Quarter: in a recurrency of stagnation, the Losers managed to generate insignificant impact on their substantial deficit as the margin contracted slightly, due to the Winners, deserving the ownership of the credit for their margin, negotiating their declining interest with adequate measures.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers credited their failure to capitalise on their failure to capitalise at critical times, and refused to add value to the assessment of fraudulent creditors, which reinforced the interest the Winners managed to generate in attributing the margin to their "focus" and "committment".
First Quarter: the Winners failed to fulfill expectations by recording a deficit that was a product of their inaccurate measures in aligning the means of production with their goals, which gave the Losers confidence in accounting for their competition, and unsustainable enterprise going forward.
Second Quarter: continuing their expensive measurements, the Winners accounted for their deficit and manufactured a margin through their viable business, which generated legitimate concern from the Losers over their generational decline in credible practices distributing the means.
Third Quarter: the Winners managed to generate concern from observers for the overall package, despite the industry of their business providing analysts reason to offer credit, which the Losers managed to stall through their unsustainable business and the liability of their distribution.
Fourth Quarter: led by the board to believe that their gain was in danger, the Winners managed to stimulate observers through the performance of a single asset, which allowed the Losers to gain a loss which reflected poorly on their performance, and managed to reflect the discrepancy in class.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners distributed credit for their profit evenly across the board and indicated to observers that the surge in productivity was a product of growth, which discounted the Losers' shortfall in class and the lack of viable targets in their structure, and poor vision going forwards.
First Quarter: the Losers managed the difficult conditions for sustainable growth poorly and struggled to manufacture a realistic target with a reliance on owning the means to produce zero gains. The Winners made use of viable strategy from their manageable targets to post sufficient return for their hard business in the property disputes.
Second Quarter: with the climate appearing to be rapidly worsening, the Losers negotiated their competitors' resilient strategy to do some business that delivered moderate gains. Benefitting from lucrative partnerships, the Winners managed to maintain their advantage despite slipping back on their earlier promise of a massive margin.
Third Quarter: the Losers earned themselves a narrow loss for the quarter after costing themselves earlier losses which they managed to diminish with a late flurry. The Winners managed to turn the cessation of the recession into immediate gains that they were forced to hand back after being held to account on the board, by their competitors.
Fourth Quarter: continuing their pressure on the board, the Losers slashed the deficit and had many observers turning to analysts for advice until their industry failed to produce the goods. Turning around the trend, the Winners added interest to the value of creditors' claims with the manufacture of goals registered at board-level through good business.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers delivered a result that they attributed to their costly investment in new ventures, which ultimately failed to produce any interest from observers. The Winners admitted that their gain in a difficult climate was a much needed boost to their investment in accounting for their competitors' business with solid business practices.
First Quarter: the Winners managed to negotiate an uncertain early exchange period to post excellent returns for their share of distribution across the board. The Losers posted early gains that lent interest to their creditors' dwindling confidence and sentiment.
Second Quarter: unchecked enterprise allowed the Winners to capitalise on their competitors' declining business with a significant advantage. In the favourable climate, the Losers gave observers cause to question the board and lent value to their failing sentiment.
Third Quarter: the Winners gave creditors reason to lose confidence that their organisation would run out of capital after production stalled. The Losers' perpetual instability gave value to the interest their creditors had invested in an optimistic outlook.
Fourth Quarter: despite the volatile conditions, the Winners manufactured massive gains through industry and distribution of their accurate forecasts. Despite the volatile conditions, the Losers' dwindling output and poor returns from their board resulted in a loss.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners' focus and accomplishments in a volatile climate lent interest to analysts' claims that the value of their product is set to raise interest. The Losers blamed the turnaround of their fortunes on the failure of their workers to capitalise on opportunity.
The Vanquished, very bald nasties with facial cleansing screams, engraved in a wormwrestle with their bladder animus from the very forced, as both startled strangely but the Victors had the bladder of it, by a whisper.
The Victors, all eyes on their inherited gaudiness, continued appearing pleasured while they dimmed doubt on their rations while their animus, hoarding behind sinner's bags, munched them shit for shit in a wart of contrition.
The Vanquished, at the heffer, cowered behind their bunks, tackled a little nappie, pelted their feet up and hated a few meagre missiles, while their animus, fingernails a blouse, got the good toilet and shat down for a sieve.
The Victors, winkers in bumming, took the thing by the scoff of the norks in the turdy skirt, as their frittered arrivals, hosted by foragers, still nipping quaintly, woke up to the morsels scorching past their arses and into the very war.
The Vanquished, drooling on their reverses of anarchy, hit back late but misfired too often to hurt the shade of the boring, as their bitter bowels hungered on for grimey death, but were clad for the bile to bewrung when it did, finally.
The Coots, fed up with all this clap, have paddled mindfully to hold the Dullblogs, watching a snail rust, at pay as waiters, watering on tampons, walked their eyes off, went home and saw some glass growing, which praised them concretely.
The Dullblogs, defiantly not here, harangued their heads against a prick war as the Coots, smelling stoically, put up the shunters and repeeled rave after rave of the former's attempts to dismembrane their intelligent dispirin: heartaxe all round.
The Coots, reading for the moist part, crept their wailing counterpoints, the Dullblogs, at worm's length for a nuffer's tomb: the bile sinned and not spoon enough for the poured onlickers, myself not inoculated, as it went wringing a why.
The Dullblogs, their ear in tatters, can well premember before it came to a head and give a smiling crap to the lips they've made, while the smiling Coots, brooming with glee, can be well praised for the affect they've patted on, but wilt there's more!
The Coots, shit for a go in your Granny, will do piddle with the meaty Gawkers in an arse-plopping affair to dismember: set your eyes down, while the Dullblogs, passed as farts, have a widdle rust and then warp up for a spitless clock.
The Dullblogs, a shudder of the shade they once wore, crammed the Swines, farting into absurdity; editing their ear and grafting their vowels a freak kiss in front. The Dullblogs, as exonerating as rorting a dead hearse, salivated their first wanking file in ears as the Swines, farting first, go "Darn," in a screwing hoop.
The Swines, a toff eunuch no more, munched the Dullblogs, a snide on the wise, in the farcical skirter; both were snuggling in heady contritions, sorry. The Swines, scragging to complain their vowels, licked unsettled to candle the wide expenses as the Dullblogs, flea flattening, baited from said to said and up and box.
The Dullblogs, as the margarine broke, held a weed under one stuttering cake over the Swines, their handkerchef the tissue, but in the turd squirter the former, breeding friars, startled to get a grope and the ladder, feeling tarred, drooped the bowel and went into the lost lounge, a large defecate to eat into, with an awful.
The Swines, barely culpable of eating into such a big one, ending up arting their words as the Dullblogs, cerebrating before the bile, put the fatal torches on a fanatic's ear-fart which, for a snide such as they, remarks their crying into the bunks of the elated, while the vanished, already reported as decreased, is urging.
The Dullblogs, nowhere to be sane, have to queer up for a shit at the granny, as sold as two mitts herself, and the only thong straddling on their thigh is the Coots, as mild as a hotty and twitchy as birth, in a pope-hopper. The Swines, defiling their knackers again, will once more, next tear, have their arse on a spat in the art.
Comments (1)
Add Comments