Jump to content


Paid Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

About unfitfinlay

  • Rank
    Card Filler
  • Birthday 09/10/1980

Recent Profile Visitors

6,957 profile views
  1. unfitfinlay


    To be fair, the first attempt in 1997 was someone's idea of a joke. Or an attempt to get him killed. I can imagine Tory HQ went "Central Fife. Well, we aren't going to win there..Oh! You know what would be REALLY funny.....". That campaign sums Rees-Mogg up to me. He drove about one of the poorest areas in the country, in mummy's Mercedes, and told poor people it was their own fault that they were poor and that they were "the scourge of the earth". He had no idea the kind of danger he was putting himself in, and probably still doesn't. He's so rich that he's never had to deal with the consequences of his actions.. I'm honestly not sure whether he's underachieved or overachieved. Sure, he's got the background, but the only relatable thing about him is the "18th Century throwback" gimmick and THAT only lasts until you look at his policies/voting record and realise that it's not a gimmick. He really is a backwards cunt.
  2. unfitfinlay


    Labour aren't really "The Left" though. They are just as splintered and divided as the Tories. If not more so. A significant amount of Labour politicians were campaigning against Corbyn from the moment he entered the leadership contest. It's not surprising he didn't win considering his own Party have been calling him "unelectable" and trying to get rid of him for years. Corbyn has lost me on Brexit though. He seems to have fallen into the exact same trap that his predecessors did. Thinking "Everything will be okay if I can just get into power" and ignoring anything that's inconvenient to that goal. Refusing to even consider a second vote, and doing the "I could get a better deal" thing is just fucking arrogant. We've pissed the EU about for two years, they aren't going to rip everything up and start all over again with only three months to go. Why the fuck would they?
  3. unfitfinlay

    Dave Meltzer

    Supposedly when Bischoff was there, he'd buried Russo so much to Spike that they told Dixie that they didn't want him involved in any way. I'm not sure if Bischoff's ever confirmed that or not but that's what was going around at the time. Whatever the reason, when Mike Johnson reported that Russo was still involved, Russo denied it, did the whole "the dirt sheets know nothing" bit and, then accidentally sent Johnson an email of booking notes meant for Mike Tenay. Johnson reported that he'd been sent the email. Russo CONTINUED to deny he was involved, claimed the email was a prank and shat all over Johnson and PWinsider for "printing anything". Johnson then went "I can publish the email if you'd like?" and Russo backed down, apologised and claimed that *TNA* had told him he had to keep his involvement secret and he was just respecting their wishes. It might not have been Spike but clearly someone important didn't want him involved with TNA at that point or there would be no need for secrecy. The Spike deal did collapse soon after that though, which might be why people assume the two are related.
  4. unfitfinlay

    Dave Meltzer

    This. Even in that video, Russo doesn't acknowledge WHY he was lying, repeatedly, about working for TNA at the time. If it wasn't a big deal then why was it so secret? Why did he level similar insults at Mike Johnson for reporting his involvement? Johnson said at the time he would've ignored the accidental email if Russo hadn't publicly accused him of making it all up. You're really not getting this are you? He doesn't just report third hand stories. Like other journalists, he has sources to confirm stuff. If one says "X is going to happen" then he can go to his other sources for confirmation. If he doesn't get that confirmation then he either doesn't report it or clarifies that it's unconfirmed. Of course, other sites then copy that, leave out the clarification and make it look like Meltzer reported it as fact but that's another issue. He does have the sources too. In his report about the Benoit tragedy he acknowledged that Benoit was one of his sources and The Rock has flat out written into the Observer before. Christ, did WWE not fire someone for speaking to Meltzer before? The guys name escapes me but he went to ROH afterwards. The main thing that gives Meltzer credibility in my eyes, though, is how even his critics speak about him. For example, Bischoff on 83 weeks will insist that Meltzer knew nothing and was only putting two and two together based on what he saw on screen. Then later he'll insist that WCW HAD to "work the boys" because "everyone was talking to Meltzer". Bret, too. He slams Meltzer in his book for "never being in the ring" but then crows about all the high ratings he gets given.
  5. unfitfinlay

    The Official UKFF RAW Thread...

    Doubt it. They never asked Ric for permission when they had Paige take that awful, needless shot at Reid Flair. He admitted he cried when he saw it. If they were willing to shit on the dead son of one of their legends without even saying "Is this cool....?" then exploiting Roman's illness is a given. Didn't AAA have Antonio Pena's ashes be defended like a title for a bit? I could see Vince going down that road.