Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie
They also said she is still retired, not even a week ago.
They said one thing, than they said this, a week later. They were keeping her in training, so they were obviously giving it at least very serious consideration, for bringing her back. How is that not deceitful?
And how the hell have my 'assumptions' been off the board so far? What the fugg does that even mean?
Are you really that naive to believe the things you are saying?
You are probably the most ridiculous poster on all of DT.
|
You have the worst reading comprehension issues I have ever seen ...
It was assumed she was retired, and they constantly fielded the question--that's what the frig your assumptions got you---the inability to perceive the less-than -obvious ...
You also do not consider the possibilty that the Mosses were undecided about whether to retire her or not, and kept the horse in training until they did ??? And annoyingly fluffed direct answers ..
Your peurile comment about who is a ridiculous poster deserves you a hand mirror ...
I am at least willing to read or listen to caca and respond to it somewhat civilly without pitching monkey poo ...
Clearly you are not ...
It is hardly ridiculous to examine all possibilities when the probabilities are not made clear by the only people that count here---the connections ...
BTW---It was the headline in the racing publication that Zenyatta was still retired, made by the reporter . Read it