Irony

Derubbishdese

The word brawl implies more than one person, otherwise it would be a fight. Therefore unless you know differently, don't put all the blame on Diouff just because of reputation.

According to Sky Sports, Serbian officials are blaming Danny Rose for what happened the other night, when the world knows he was involved, but not responsible for the outcome.

A fight with one person? I want to watch one of those!

Difference here is Diouf has a reputation for trouble, Danny Rose does not. Whilst I have yet to see a report that states Diouf caused the problem, every report I have seen has him involved. It may not be fair justice but after the career he has had, can people honestly be blamed for coming to conclusions because of Diouf's mere presence? Taking sanctions against him of course requires more than this.

Irony is actually a stadium roof that cannot be closed if its raining too hard

In Rugby League a brawl was always described as a fight with more than one player from each side. In other words, two players may start a "fight" but the unwritten law is that everyone else piles in to make it difficult for the ref to send anyone off.

If you want to see a fight with one person, youv'e met ionly, he could start a "brawl" and be the only one involved. Mind you if it was him on one side and five on the other, I would always take ionly, even in his later years.

Yes Yankee, very - very wise. I am registered crackers so you have known for many years, and seriously as a rugby coach and front row forward, you are perfectly correct. One in all in, no messing and look after your mates. If the game gets abandoned then the club pays as opposed to a singular player walking. I have played although briefly in three matches that ended as a brawl and the clubs paid, I also walked on a couple of occasions and one such walk in the end cost me £200.