: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:40 pm  

Ginger Hobbit wrote:

It is exactly the same thing. He said we should keep the same team as the Wakey game, because of the performance that day. What performance?

Wakey were a pish poor side on the day and are no comparison to a great Saints side. Only a numpty would think differently.

Only you have made that comparison though, albeit in slightly broken English, so that's OK. It is not "exactly the same thing." If it were, you would never be able to use recent form to pick a team unless you played the same opposition 2 weeks in a row. Only a person with no capacity for lateral thought would think it was.

If the coach's view of the best 17 were selected for the last game, regardless of who it was against, and all members of that team performed to the standard expected, what cause is there to drop them just because the opposition is better? None of them were selected from outside the 1st team squad after all.

Otherwise you might suggest dropping someone who did the job in the last game, against whatever opposition, in favour of somebody who didn't. Why does your way make any more sense oh wise one?

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:41 pm  

John D H wrote:

Long and Fa'asavalu out for Saints.

Gives Leeds the edge now imo.

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:43 pm  

Tony Soprano wrote: http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/603 Thats a big loss for Saints, I think we may have a chance now. Massive loss for us. Will be a very, very close match. Your pack are very physical, they will take it to us all day long.

Tony Soprano wrote: http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/603 Thats a big loss for Saints, I think we may have a chance now. Massive loss for us. Will be a very, very close match. Your pack are very physical, they will take it to us all day long.

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:48 pm  

Ginger Hobbit wrote:

Burp!

Why have you started using this alias again after leaving it dormant for two years?

Anyone who feels the need to post under an alias for the purposes of taking the pi55 out of Lawrie is below Fekkwitt level and hardly worthy of the benefit of my knowledge.

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:51 pm  

G1 wrote:

Why have you started using this alias again after leaving it dormant for two years?

Anyone who feels the need to post under an alias for the purposes of taking the pi55 out of Lawrie is below Fekkwitt level and hardly worthy of the benefit of my knowledge.

Would you care to "out" the ginger hobbit by revealing their identity, for those of us not in the know?

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:52 pm  

Ginger Hobbit wrote:

Oooops another one to add to the fekwit brigade.

Yes I am a fekwit for suggesting playing the same side two games in a row after a very good performance. Im obviously crazy.

Ginger Hobbit wrote:

Would you have said the same had we played Featherstone the other week?

If the same team that played against Wakey had played against Fev then yes I would.

Ginger Hobbit wrote:

Considering the oppossitions effect it is a similar comparison.

Eh?

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:53 pm  

El Diablo wrote:

Would you care to "out" the ginger hobbit by revealing their identity, for those of us not in the know?

Lets see if he makes a fool of himself a bit more first.

Clearly he didn't have the cahones to tackle the alpha male under his true identity.

Mwah ha ha ha ha.

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:59 pm  

G1 wrote:

Lets see if he makes a fool of himself a bit more first.

Clearly he didn't have the cahones to tackle the alpha male under his true identity.

Mwah ha ha ha ha.

Gareth, are you self-nicknaming again?

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:00 pm  

G1 wrote:

Why have you started using this alias again after leaving it dormant for two years?

Anyone who feels the need to post under an alias for the purposes of taking the pi55 out of Lawrie is below Fekkwitt level and hardly worthy of the benefit of my knowledge.

boom boom.

: Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:02 pm  

i hope i'm proved wrong but i think it's a big mistake not using thackery.
wakey were there for the taking, saints won't be. as i say, i hope smith proves me wrong but i'm not happy about it