Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:44 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Erm yes as you have just shown there are always reasons other than perhaps this team is no longer strong enough.

Right so whenever we lose a game we can't debate about incidents in the game, errors made, players missing and how that effected us etc. Instead after every loss we just come on here and say it's because the team is no longer strong enough.

What was that people were saying about trying to change other people's views?

Sal Paradise wrote:

To suggest Handley and Sutcliffe were responsible for 24 points is simply desperation on your part.

How is discussing the reasoning why we conceded tries "desperation"?' Isn't it a bit hypocritical as well considering you and many others pointed at the Cuthbertson knock on that lead to the drop goal as a key issue? So why can't I do that with the tries?

Sal Paradise wrote:

The point about Briscoe has already been answered as for Hardaker the Wigan game at Magic highlighted he still has some issues defensively

Only you apparently think Hardaker has defensive issues, doesn't make it a fact though. And maybe they don't stop all 4 tries being scored, but if they stop two of them then that's still enough for the win.

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:18 pm  

G1 wrote:

I don't visit here as much as I used to but I don't recall you ever behaving like a di ck before.

What's changed?

Nothing. It happens when you're talked down to by people who seemingly spend their whole lives moaning, backtracking and generally being very hypocritical.

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:35 pm  

A few weeks ago, Phil Clarke was saying the Rhinos had re-invented the way Rugby League was played. This week everyone here is saying we're an ill-coached bunch of arse-heads...

If all these demi-gods of reason are at odds, where oh where do I go for the Truth??

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:15 pm  

loiner81 wrote:

Nothing. It happens when you're talked down to by people who seemingly spend their whole lives moaning, backtracking and generally being very hypocritical.

Kettle and pot I think!!

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:36 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Right so whenever we lose a game we can't debate about incidents in the game, errors made, players missing and how that effected us etc. Instead after every loss we just come on here and say it's because the team is no longer strong enough.

What was that people were saying about trying to change other people's views?

How is discussing the reasoning why we conceded tries "desperation"?' Isn't it a bit hypocritical as well considering you and many others pointed at the Cuthbertson knock on that lead to the drop goal as a key issue? So why can't I do that with the tries?

Only you apparently think Hardaker has defensive issues, doesn't make it a fact though. And maybe they don't stop all 4 tries being scored, but if they stop two of them then that's still enough for the win.

Nobody is suggesting debate is not allowed the point is you were berating others for making excuses when Leeds win I was merely pointing out your similar defence when they lose. You cannot have it both ways.

The desperation point was blaming Handley and Sutcliffe for 4 of the tries and to suggest Hardaker and Briscoe would have played immactulate games when there is tangible contra-evidence to the point.

If Sutcliffe was at fault for the tries against Cas then Hardaker was equally at fault against Wigan again you can't have it both ways

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Wed Jun 17, 2015 6:22 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Nobody is suggesting debate is not allowed the point is you were berating others for making excuses when Leeds win I was merely pointing out your similar defence when they lose. You cannot have it both ways.

Difference between talking about errors made, players missing, etc than it is to just say we won because the opposition played rubbish.

Sal Paradise wrote:

The desperation point was blaming Handley and Sutcliffe for 4 of the tries and to suggest Hardaker and Briscoe would have played immactulate games when there is tangible contra-evidence to the point.

I pointed out there involvement in the tries we conceded. If I can't do that then why can you blame Hardaker for those against Wigan and I can't?

"You can't have it both ways"

Also never said they'd have immaculate games but thinking that Hardaker wouldn't have allowed the 40/20 (which he's very good preventing) or Briscoe wouldn't have dropped that kick or wrongly drifted in for the 4th Cas try isn't exactly that far fetched now is.

Sal Paradise wrote:

If Sutcliffe was at fault for the tries against Cas then Hardaker was equally at fault against Wigan again you can't have it both ways

Difference is most would agree that his attempt on Millington was very poor and that Hardaker would've stopped the 40/20. Whereas only you and Hardaker other constant critic think he was at fault for the tries against Wigan, as you usually do find him at fault most weeks convientely.

People disagreed with you that Hardaker was at fault based on what they saw when watching the tries. You're not saying I'm wrong about Handley and Sutcliffe not doing good enough for those tries, you're just saying I can't point it out because it's desperation and that I should be saying the team isn't strong enough anymore instead.

Notice the key difference?

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Thu Jun 18, 2015 6:22 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

Difference between talking about errors made, players missing, etc than it is to just say we won because the opposition played rubbish.

I pointed out there involvement in the tries we conceded. If I can't do that then why can you blame Hardaker for those against Wigan and I can't?

"You can't have it both ways"

Also never said they'd have immaculate games but thinking that Hardaker wouldn't have allowed the 40/20 (which he's very good preventing) or Briscoe wouldn't have dropped that kick or wrongly drifted in for the 4th Cas try isn't exactly that far fetched now is.

Difference is most would agree that his attempt on Millington was very poor and that Hardaker would've stopped the 40/20. Whereas only you and Hardaker other constant critic think he was at fault for the tries against Wigan, as you usually do find him at fault most weeks convientely.

People disagreed with you that Hardaker was at fault based on what they saw when watching the tries. You're not saying I'm wrong about Handley and Sutcliffe not doing good enough for those tries, you're just saying I can't point it out because it's desperation and that I should be saying the team isn't strong enough anymore instead.

Notice the key difference?

Not once have you suggested that Leeds have been out played - both games against Warrington this was the case, your excuse was Bentham - notice a key difference?

Briscoe has proved his frailty so to suggest he wouldn't have dropped a ball close to his own line isn't backed up by reality? As for Hardaker there have been tries this season where forwards have run over him too and he has conceded 40/20's so who is to say he would have stopped Millington either? So suggesting they would have not prevented either is not so far fetched either when you base it on evidence not on blind obedience!!

Difficult to argue Handley was at fault not sure Sutcliffe was the sole contributor to the Millington try.


Those two incidents count for 12 points which other errors did they make that count for the other 12?

Some disagreed some agreed about Hardaker and the Wigan game especially the Williams try - that is debate.

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:23 am  

Fetlar wrote:

If all these demi-gods of reason are at odds, where oh where do I go for the Truth??

I can't offer you directions to the true path but I know I definitely wouldn't start with Phil Clarke.

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:57 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Not once have you suggested that Leeds have been out played - both games against Warrington this was the case, your excuse was Bentham - notice a key difference?

I notice that blaming Bentham for both Warrington defeats would be quite a stretch......considering James Child was the ref at Headingley. That you've taken me expressing an opinion on Bentham as me blaming him for the defeats is your mistake not mine.

Sal Paradise wrote:

Briscoe has proved his frailty so to suggest he wouldn't have dropped a ball close to his own line isn't backed up by reality?

Yes because Briscoe dropped that ball vs Catalans it must mean he'll drop everything else that comes near him.

Sal Paradise wrote:

As for Hardaker there have been tries this season where forwards have run over him too and he has conceded 40/20's so who is to say he would have stopped Millington either? So suggesting they would have not prevented either is not so far fetched either when you base it on evidence not on blind obedience!!

Ok so when you point out the times Hardaker hasn't stopped something it's "evidence".....when I point out the number of times he has stopped attackers and 40/20 it's "blind obedience"........you really are quite ridiclous.

Sal Paradise wrote:

Difficult to argue Handley was at fault not sure Sutcliffe was the sole contributor to the Millington try.

Those two incidents count for 12 points which other errors did they make that count for the other 12?

Sutcliffe not stopping the 40/20 that lead to the scrum for the 2nd score and Handley coming in when McGuire had his guy covered allowing Solomona the walk in just after halftime. As I said before they might not have stopped all 4 but I back them that they stopped at least 2 of them which was the difference between a win and a loss.

Sal Paradise wrote:

Some disagreed some agreed about Hardaker and the Wigan game especially the Williams try - that is debate.

Seemed like the only two to agree was yourself and Juan but then again you two always feel everything is Hardaker's fault. Surprised you two haven't blamed him for 9/11 or the death of Princess Diana.

Personally I think our first choice FB and RW who are of International standard would've done better than a makeshift FB and a young winger everybody agrees is showing the effects of his longer than expected run in the first team. Hardly the craziest suggestion but seems unacceptable to you and that I need to instead just say we are completely sh*t and that's why we lose games.

Re: For the love of God,Allah or whoever-McDermott GO!!! : Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:12 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

Personally I think our first choice FB and RW who are of International standard would've done better than a makeshift FB and a young winger everybody agrees is showing the effects of his longer than expected run in the first team. Hardly the craziest suggestion but seems unacceptable to you and that I need to instead just say we are completely sh*t and that's why we lose games.

I don't agree with your constant excuses for defeats, but I do agree with the above. Handley was as clearly at fault for the Cas try at start of second half as he was for the last. Sutcliffes efforts for the 40/20 and the tackle on Millington were poor.

I also agree with tvoc's suttle dig though, which gets lost on some posters who continually defend the team. Cas were also missing their first choice fullback and winger too.