Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 minutes ago, Kermit said:

I’m going to take what is apparently an unpopular side on this in that this league needs more of this physical, cunty play and good old-fashioned jealousy. Gets eyeballs, which they sorely need. I’d like to see her teammates get more feisty in protecting her, but overall I see this as a positive direction for the league. Shit, most successful leagues are fucking soap operas. Why should the WNBA be any different?

 

3 minutes ago, immamac said:

That's not why they get eyeballs though. 

I think the girls are already trying to go the Angel Reese route but fearless moderator is right. That’s not why we watch. Check the ratings when CC was out

Posted

I see this all the time everywhere, no one even knows their product or target audience anymore. Everything is a comissioned study to someone else or a bunch of analytics that don't actually work because garbage data makes garbage conclusions. Its the same reason AI is terrible at most things and only good at things that are bullshit and sound good. 

  • Like 2
Posted
8 hours ago, ztejas said:

I like Portnoy. He's an unapologetic asshole that sticks to his guns and displays integrity. He probably has some shitty beliefs but who doesn't. He also seems very on board with women's sports. 

I can immediately deduce a lot about someone that goes out of their way to shit on Portnoy or complain about what he does. It's a lazy fucking stance to take. I think he's fine. 

Would you call that a....Portnoy's Complaint? 

leo-di-caprio-django.gif

(You can probably deduce a lot about someone that goes out of their way to make a Philip Roth, titan of modern literary fiction, pun on a WNBA thread)

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
12 hours ago, Message Board User said:

Not sure what Clark did to get a tech here (Suns players got 3 but the one that cheap-shotted Clark to the ground got to stay in the game).

 

 

Hate crime

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Kermit said:

I’m going to take what is apparently an unpopular side on this in that this league needs more of this physical, cunty play and good old-fashioned jealousy. Gets eyeballs, which they sorely need. I’d like to see her teammates get more feisty in protecting her, but overall I see this as a positive direction for the league. Shit, most successful leagues are fucking soap operas. Why should the WNBA be any different?

Completely disagree, and I’ll even go so far as to say CC needs closer reffing like the NBA does for its stars. People turn into the NBA to see Steph Curry hit dimes from the logo or to watch Jordan make defenders look stupid.  Not to watch them get knocked around.

Trotting out a bunch of big girls to bruise each other is shit basketball and completely uninteresting. Watching CC run circles around the bruisers is appointment viewing. Just about anyone can claw someone’s eyes and call it defense. The Bad Boy Pistons these ladies are not. 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

The league has to decide what it wants to be. Does it want to be a game of skill and athleticism? Or a hard-nosed brutal test of aggression? Ice hockey has dealt with that question for decades, without really resolving it. 
 
The “mean girls” aspect is something new, though. 

Edited by statsman
  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, ztejas said:

I like Portnoy. He's an unapologetic asshole that sticks to his guns and displays integrity. He probably has some shitty beliefs but who doesn't. He also seems very on board with women's sports. 

I can immediately deduce a lot about someone that goes out of their way to shit on Portnoy or complain about what he does. It's a lazy fucking stance to take. I think he's fine. 

He's the perfect dumb guy. Doesn't know shit about fuck but isn't a piece of shit about most stuff (I could name some stuff he is real bad on but it doesn't really matter), isn't interested in making everyone else as dumb as he is a la Joe Rogan. Mostly cares about sports and pizza. I'd hoist a beer or 10 with him.

Posted
57 minutes ago, statsman said:

The league has to decide what it wants to be. Does it want to be a game of skill and athleticism? Or a hard-nosed brutal test of aggression? Ice hockey has dealt with that question for decades, without really resolving it. 
 
The “mean girls” aspect is something new, though. 

Agree, with the key difference being that chippy and aggressive hockey is a fantastic product that people want to watch. Put guys in pads and skates, let them hammer each other and drop gloves and you have gold. 
 

But this is still basketball. You can’t play it like hockey. Tall women plodding around court and shoving each other below the rim is a snooze. It would be if men were playing that way. 
 

The WNBA old guard has a curious conception, against all evidence, that they always had a great product and now CC is getting everyone to notice that.  No. CC is creating a new great product for them. Time to get on board. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
2 hours ago, Kermit said:

I’m going to take what is apparently an unpopular side on this in that this league needs more of this physical, cunty play and good old-fashioned jealousy. Gets eyeballs, which they sorely need. I’d like to see her teammates get more feisty in protecting her, but overall I see this as a positive direction for the league. Shit, most successful leagues are fucking soap operas. Why should the WNBA be any different?

Thinking the league needs to be shitty and physical like it's always been is definitely a choice. The league needs more play like Caitlin and Paige bring which is an exciting fast pace style of game play that is closer to the mens rather than junior high boys basketball.

Posted

The problem with needing more skilled players is that they simply don’t exist. There is one player in this league who anyone cares to watch. The skill level to make the women’s professional league palatable to a general audience is null and void. Even in a vacuum of sports, I would rather watch paint dry than to watch a Clark-less women’s basketball game. At least with villainous drama, my sloth-brained attention is captured. Even if you turned up the pace, increased the shooting, there would be a multitude of turnovers and clanked shots. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Kermit said:

The problem with needing more skilled players is that they simply don’t exist. There is one player in this league who anyone cares to watch. The skill level to make the women’s professional league palatable to a general audience is null and void. Even in a vacuum of sports, I would rather watch paint dry than to watch a Clark-less women’s basketball game. At least with villainous drama, my sloth-brained attention is captured. Even if you turned up the pace, increased the shooting, there would be a multitude of turnovers and clanked shots. 

That's far better than watching an Angel Reese type game where she's clanking the fuck out of layups and a black hole of offense. The amount of talent coming out that is coming out and up the pipeline now is closer to Clark than the old WNBA big bitches clanking 5 ft shots.

Posted
21 minutes ago, Kermit said:

The problem with needing more skilled players is that they simply don’t exist. There is one player in this league who anyone cares to watch. The skill level to make the women’s professional league palatable to a general audience is null and void. Even in a vacuum of sports, I would rather watch paint dry than to watch a Clark-less women’s basketball game. At least with villainous drama, my sloth-brained attention is captured. Even if you turned up the pace, increased the shooting, there would be a multitude of turnovers and clanked shots. 

A legit question to me is why hasn't there been an increase in the overall skill level and athleticism among the bigs  in women's basketball?

Not trying to be funny, not trying to troll anyone, serious question.  

Clark's skills are not unique to the game of basketball so why don't we see higher developed skills coming out of college?  

There has been a ton of money poured into women's collegiate sports, the WNBA is almost 30 years old so this isn't new or just catching on.

As far as big, I watched parts of two TCU games last year,  one versus ND and the other South Carolina and I couldn't believe how unathletic the bigs seemed on the floor. Prince played flat footed, heck the other bigs the same.  It was as if I was watching female clones of Bill Robizine and yet if I watch women's volleyball in college I see multiple players over 6' who can get up off the floor and play above the eight foot net.

I am not expecting a 6'3-4" post to drop step and dunk like I see in can commonly see in a guys' high school game, but in those two games the bigs are playing below the net.  

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Agree, with the key difference being that chippy and aggressive hockey is a fantastic product that people want to watch. Put guys in pads and skates, let them hammer each other and drop gloves and you have gold. 
 

But this is still basketball. You can’t play it like hockey. Tall women plodding around court and shoving each other below the rim is a snooze. It would be if men were playing that way. 
 

The WNBA old guard has a curious conception, against all evidence, that they always had a great product and now CC is getting everyone to notice that.  No. CC is creating a new great product for them. Time to get on board. 

Ever remember anyone beating the crap out of Gretzky or lemiuex?  Yzerman?  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, PGFrog said:

A legit question to me is why hasn't there been an increase in the overall skill level and athleticism among the bigs  in women's basketball?

Not trying to be funny, not trying to troll anyone, serious question.  

Clark's skills are not unique to the game of basketball so why don't we see higher developed skills coming out of college?  

There has been a ton of money poured into women's collegiate sports, the WNBA is almost 30 years old so this isn't new or just catching on.

As far as big, I watched parts of two TCU games last year,  one versus ND and the other South Carolina and I couldn't believe how unathletic the bigs seemed on the floor. Prince played flat footed, heck the other bigs the same.  It was as if I was watching female clones of Bill Robizine and yet if I watch women's volleyball in college I see multiple players over 6' who can get up off the floor and play above the eight foot net.

I am not expecting a 6'3-4" post to drop step and dunk like I see in can commonly see in a guys' high school game, but in those two games the bigs are playing below the net.  

 

I coached girls basketball for a while years ago.  Coming from the men's game I had many of these same questions even back then. First, don't equate skill and athleticism.  While they often go hand in hand in the best player they aren't necessarily the same thing. I watch Texas and some random games and I would submit that the skill level among bigs is quite high.  The biggest difference in the volleyball vs basketball is contact.  Elite female players are really good at using their lower bodies to steal your power.  When I coached I interned a few college players from around Austin who wanted to get into coaching and I found that playing against them was an enlightening experience in the use of hip and ass pressure and contact to disrupt your movement and dampen your athletic advantage.  

Now don't get me wrong, women generally aren't great leapers and the bigger they are the worse it gets.  The women's game is never going to be as athletic as the men's but skill levels are getting closer every year as the women's game become more popular and gets better coaching and training.  Men will almost always be able to overpower women, but shooting and touch aren't that much different IMO. The best bigs in the women's game are all about body position, establishing space, and touch around the basket.  I prefer the men's game because it's faster and cleaner because men are built for power and speed.  Women are built for endurance and stability.  Those differences aren't going to change any time soon. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, PGFrog said:

A legit question to me is why hasn't there been an increase in the overall skill level and athleticism among the bigs  in women's basketball?

Not trying to be funny, not trying to troll anyone, serious question.  

Clark's skills are not unique to the game of basketball so why don't we see higher developed skills coming out of college?  

There has been a ton of money poured into women's collegiate sports, the WNBA is almost 30 years old so this isn't new or just catching on.

As far as big, I watched parts of two TCU games last year,  one versus ND and the other South Carolina and I couldn't believe how unathletic the bigs seemed on the floor. Prince played flat footed, heck the other bigs the same.  It was as if I was watching female clones of Bill Robizine and yet if I watch women's volleyball in college I see multiple players over 6' who can get up off the floor and play above the eight foot net.

I am not expecting a 6'3-4" post to drop step and dunk like I see in can commonly see in a guys' high school game, but in those two games the bigs are playing below the net.  

 

I think some of it is where the women choose to play (and their parents). Bluntly: for years the face of women’s basketball has been psychopaths like Summit or Mulkey, the game is “physical,” and the fan base heavily lesbian. Without judgment, you are only appealing to a small slice of potential players. 
 

I think a lot of athletic and competitive girls did get steered into volleyball or tennis. Look, Sharapova was 6’2 of fast-twitch muscle and coordination, don’t tell me she couldn’t have destroyed on the court. Venus Williams could have been the best PG of all time.  Its like when people ask where the next great American heavyweight is. He’s an all-pro DE for the Cleveland Browns. The previous generation’s CC was trying to win Wimbledon. 
 

Players in the pipeline can change the image and grow the game.  But the league has to get shit together. Eye-raking? Come on, that’s not physical or hard-nosed basketball. That’s some catty, talentless bullshit. Most women and girls are not here for that stuff. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
16 hours ago, Message Board User said:

Not sure what Clark did to get a tech here (Suns players got 3 but the one that cheap-shotted Clark to the ground got to stay in the game).

 

 

To attmept to control the game...it didn't work. The shove was probably the only thing she did, and it was justifiable IMO.

16 hours ago, ztejas said:

Look - I love me some CC but that's some clickbait bullshit. Yes, Clark got a T. The Sun got 2 Ts and a flagrant 1. 

Screenshot_20250617_193954_ESPN.thumb.jpg.456d0785d4ea392be857a1db9cc87bb0.jpg

Also - something I couldn't help but just wonder - who is the most popular female athlete of all time and when does CC eclipse her? Is it Serena? That's the only non-Olympian I can think of who was a megastar like this. I don't think any of our soccer players were huge household stars like this. 

Shit - it may already be CC. 

Serena is the only one close overall...

Biles is the closest to her now as a well know household name.

And I'd say Rousey at her peak...for those 5 years or so she was as big a star, maybe bigger.

15 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Biles is probably closest female Olympian to the conversation 

True.

14 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Ronda Rousey had incredible cultural influence for about a year including some deeply stupid speculation about her potential to fight men.  Before CC she was one of the few woman athletes capable of getting general men sports fans interested and talking about her or tuning in just to watch her. 
 

CC, if the league can keep her healthy, has the biggest potential. 

Yep was thinking the same.

13 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Refs let it get out of hand but good to see Anthony Mason out there for the Fever


forgive the jackasses posting the videos 

The thing is Sophie absolutely Hard Fouled Sheldon...and a flagrant was worthy too.  But it was NOT some horrendous dirty play that Sheldon should have reacted like that to.

6 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

It’s one unforced error after another. I cannot really fathom the stupidity of a league seeing its golden goose get roughed up repeatedly while doing nothing about it. Just the dumbest people possible in charge. I almost half expect for Silver to step in and run the league himself instead of watching the brain trust continue doing what they’re doing.

It's so crazy to me...they are putting so much effort into "She's just like anyone else and will be treated the same" that's it's become a point where they are being worse to her than they should, and she just has to take it...and if she comes back then she looks bad.

Posted

Clark really needs to get a team together for an off season Euro tour. I remember when the Oklahoman had that headline after a bad Durant game- “Mr. Unreliable”. LeBron said, “Do they not realize he can be a free agent?”

The WNBA needs to have it shoved in their face that their most marketable player has options. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Drew said:

To attmept to control the game...it didn't work. The shove was probably the only thing she did, and it was justifiable IMO.

 

Sheldon and CC have history back in the B1G.   

 

Additionally, there was some jawing and a push from CC prior to the shot to the face.   CC is chippy as fuck and there is nothing wrong with that.   She's not the innocent victim that many want to make her out to be.   She's a competitor.   She shit talks and gets handsy too.     

Everyone who watches the league knows that Marina Mabrey is ALWAYS on edge and ready to go.   No surprise that she ran up and jumped into the BS.

 

 

 Not trash talk like the title says but she acknowledges that she and Sheldon go back.

 

 

Posted

I 100% believe that there is a large contingent of WNBA players (maybe even a majority) that would rather the league go back to where it was a few years ago (when nobody watched or cared) than let CC be the face of the league and MVP.

These women are the most cut off nose to spite the face motherfuckers I've seen in quite some time.  They absolutely detest CC. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted

The over reaction by the three opposing players after the eye gouge was not normal. They snapped at the first chance they got

 

Eye poker bumps a semi blinded clark, #2 comes in hard with a finger in CC’s face, and Icebox comes in late with the full body check sending the one eyed clark to the floor lol. 
 

It was clearly personal for them. 

Posted
15 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

It was clearly personal for them. 

Absolutely.  Just look at the face of Mabrey after cheap-shotting Clark - it's the look of a schoolyard bully who feels they need to teach a lesson.  This was done purely out of malice as opposed to coming to the defense of a teammate.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

There are certain things that aren't in the action of playing the game that need to result in fines and suspensions.

Stop the bullshit, or tolerate it.  You decide what your league is.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Message Board User said:

I 100% believe that there is a large contingent of WNBA players (maybe even a majority) that would rather the league go back to where it was a few years ago (when nobody watched or cared) than let CC be the face of the league and MVP.

These women are the most cut off nose to spite the face motherfuckers I've seen in quite some time.  They absolutely detest CC. 

I do not disagree.  It seems as though there is a very large contingent of those affiliated with the WNBA (players, coaches, etc.) who do not really understand the business of sports entertainment.  We sports fans will pay to watch those who are among the best in the world at what they do.  The NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL have evolved to highlight and protect its stars - the money makers.

Clark is among the best in the world at what she does.  Moreover, she's one of the most pleasant, deferential, and respectful players in any league.  And that's why we pay to watch.  The data supports that she's the biggest draw, and many of her colleagues are too ignorant or arrogant to believe that she's a rising tide that can lift all boats.  Rather than hate her and beat her up, the players should embrace her and try to emulate some of her off-court behavior.  It is not weakness to say "She's really good.  We go way back.  I like her game," or the like.  It's becoming another part of that rising tide.  Compete fairly on the court; embrace and emulate her off-court behavior; profit.  I honestly think many of these players might just be too stupid to realize that jumping on her bandwagon would be self-beneficial.

Posted
14 minutes ago, boilerhorn said:

I do not disagree.  It seems as though there is a very large contingent of those affiliated with the WNBA (players, coaches, etc.) who do not really understand the business of sports entertainment.  We sports fans will pay to watch those who are among the best in the world at what they do.  The NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL have evolved to highlight and protect its stars - the money makers.

Clark is among the best in the world at what she does.  Moreover, she's one of the most pleasant, deferential, and respectful players in any league.  And that's why we pay to watch.  The data supports that she's the biggest draw, and many of her colleagues are too ignorant or arrogant to believe that she's a rising tide that can lift all boats.  Rather than hate her and beat her up, the players should embrace her and try to emulate some of her off-court behavior.  It is not weakness to say "She's really good.  We go way back.  I like her game," or the like.  It's becoming another part of that rising tide.  Compete fairly on the court; embrace and emulate her off-court behavior; profit.  I honestly think many of these players might just be too stupid to realize that jumping on her bandwagon would be self-beneficial.

It’s because the WNBA has never had to stand fiscally on their own two feet: Make it a purely self funded league and they might change tune. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

The over reaction by the three opposing players after the eye gouge was not normal. They snapped at the first chance they got

 

Eye poker bumps a semi blinded clark, #2 comes in hard with a finger in CC’s face, and Icebox comes in late with the full body check sending the one eyed clark to the floor lol. 
 

It was clearly personal for them. 

100%.  Did they do this to taurasi or Stewart?  Are they doing it to bueckers?  These ladies would be in boarding group E on Southwest or taking a greyhound if it weren’t for clark

23 minutes ago, boilerhorn said:

I do not disagree.  It seems as though there is a very large contingent of those affiliated with the WNBA (players, coaches, etc.) who do not really understand the business of sports entertainment.  We sports fans will pay to watch those who are among the best in the world at what they do.  The NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL have evolved to highlight and protect its stars - the money makers.

Clark is among the best in the world at what she does.  Moreover, she's one of the most pleasant, deferential, and respectful players in any league.  And that's why we pay to watch.  The data supports that she's the biggest draw, and many of her colleagues are too ignorant or arrogant to believe that she's a rising tide that can lift all boats.  Rather than hate her and beat her up, the players should embrace her and try to emulate some of her off-court behavior.  It is not weakness to say "She's really good.  We go way back.  I like her game," or the like.  It's becoming another part of that rising tide.  Compete fairly on the court; embrace and emulate her off-court behavior; profit.  I honestly think many of these players might just be too stupid to realize that jumping on her bandwagon would be self-beneficial.

Some of these gals think they should be paid like their male counterparts 

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, boilerhorn said:

I do not disagree.  It seems as though there is a very large contingent of those affiliated with the WNBA (players, coaches, etc.) who do not really understand the business of sports entertainment.  We sports fans will pay to watch those who are among the best in the world at what they do.  The NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL have evolved to highlight and protect its stars - the money makers.

Clark is among the best in the world at what she does.  Moreover, she's one of the most pleasant, deferential, and respectful players in any league.  And that's why we pay to watch.  The data supports that she's the biggest draw, and many of her colleagues are too ignorant or arrogant to believe that she's a rising tide that can lift all boats.  Rather than hate her and beat her up, the players should embrace her and try to emulate some of her off-court behavior.  It is not weakness to say "She's really good.  We go way back.  I like her game," or the like.  It's becoming another part of that rising tide.  Compete fairly on the court; embrace and emulate her off-court behavior; profit.  I honestly think many of these players might just be too stupid to realize that jumping on her bandwagon would be self-beneficial.

Maybe they are playing 4D chess and took what Bill Burr said to heart. 
 

Women would rather watch females tear each other apart (Real Housewives etc) than come together for a common goal.

*well I guess they have a common goal now 

Edited by ChickenSandwich
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Burr: Ladies, If you could just support the WNBA the same way you support a fat chick that's proud of her body and is no longer a threat to you, that league would be doing better numbers than the NBA.

Posted
2 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

100%.  Did they do this to taurasi or Stewart?  Are they doing it to bueckers?  These ladies would be in boarding group E on Southwest or taking a greyhound if it weren’t for clark

 

ask yourself what is in common between the 3 players you mention...

Posted (edited)

I honestly think that the majority lesbian and BIPOC league must view Caitlin, and by extension all the new fans, as colonizers. We are all Chiquita Banana corporation and they are the wild and beautiful uncultivated lands occupied by a primitive style and game.

Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven for the WNBA old guard, it seems.

Edited by Vegas64
Posted
13 hours ago, Iceman said:

There are certain things that aren't in the action of playing the game that need to result in fines and suspensions.

Stop the bullshit, or tolerate it.  You decide what your league is.

they should fine her 1% of her salary.  there is a change machine in the lobby if she needs to break a five 

Posted
4 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

White. UConn lesbians who have pleaded fealty to the wnba.  Of course imo if Clark were black she’d be revered by the wnba.  

Auriemma kept her off the Olympic team(I know he wasn't the head coach).  UConn mafia is real.  If Bueckers starts going off she won't be beat up like Clark.

Liberty have Stewart so Ionescu is protected.

Fever need to draft a UConn player for Clark protection.

Posted
4 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

Auriemma kept her off the Olympic team(I know he wasn't the head coach).  UConn mafia is real.  If Bueckers starts going off she won't be beat up like Clark.

Liberty have Stewart so Ionescu is protected.

Fever need to draft a UConn player for Clark protection.

Looks like that player is Cunningham so no need

 

i think Clark wanted to play at UConn as well but Paige took her spot 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

image.png.5c12e3f5fd8f9a47161e65c413a48c19.png

 

LOL they really want to get players in line then adjust the fine amounts because that's a laughable amount. 

NBA fine for a flagrant is a minimum of $2,000, but I think I read the minimum for a player with no experience is $1.1M+ so that is tip money at the strip club.

Mabrey makes $200K+ a year so $400 is nothing.

Fines in all honesty really don't do much in professional sports.  Now, suspending so they miss a game check is a bit more of a penalty, but even with Mabrey in a 40 or so game season that is still not a big hit. 

Posted

The other thing is that Clark herself should get up and be a part of the altercation instead of heading the other direction. Especially if she’s a big talker.  So far, great play hasn’t done anything to stop the behavior. 

Posted
42 minutes ago, Deej said:

If it's 400 bucks and no suspension, one or more of Clark's teammates need to beat Mabrey down the next time they play. 

This is really the only way to handle this shit imo

 

The Untouchables (1987) – @spockvarietyhour on Tumblr

Posted
40 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The other thing is that Clark herself should get up and be a part of the altercation instead of heading the other direction. Especially if she’s a big talker.  So far, great play hasn’t done anything to stop the behavior. 

3 on 1. She was right to bail. Other team wins if she is ejected 

 

Wayne G didn’t need to throw hands to get respect

Posted
1 minute ago, ChickenSandwich said:

3 on 1. She was right to bail. Other team wins if she is ejected 

 

Wayne G didn’t need to throw hands to get respect

Gretzky had Semenko. CC needs a goon.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...