it doesn't work that way - in life, most things happen without being quoted in a magazine..
actually, most things are written about.
its called history and its reported, verified, and documented.
there is nothing documentated about ronnie in 99, where as there is of yates in 93.
you still seem to think your opinion is the final say when nothing could be further from the truth.
even if ronnie disagrees with you without question and more or less says your a dilusional fan boy, you still value your word over his.
pathetic.
notice how all your NHL heroes are analysts for shows about hockey. they dont have ordinary people (this would be you) giving their opinions on espn.
why is that so hard to understand?
its has nothing to do with "visual evidence". that is only your interpretation of a picture, where as some people have a totallly different pov (ronnien included, lol).