: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:13 am  

isaac1 wrote:

The optimism on here does seem a little OTT. I have stayed away from here because of the same people saying the same things. half of the people shouting that Mcnamara needs sacking, and the other half saying that we should back whatever decisions the club makes no matter what.

That's all on the one thread now - just avoid it

isaac1 wrote:

FWIW I think Bird is a great signing. But a week ago, people were saying Jeffries deserved a better run in the side and him and a fit Deacon would be a match for most sets of halves. Now, a very good (if morally questionable) stand off signs for us and we are going to win trophies!!

"Win trophies" is a bit much, but it is a signing good enough to get people excited isn't it?

isaac1 wrote:

I realistically think that a fit squad can finish 3rd, then who knows. remember my first son was born in 2003, my second in 2005 and the wife is due another in May!!! It's written in the stars!

What are you doing next season? You seem to score a lot more than Nero . . .

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:27 am  

DISA wrote:

I am not dissagreeing with that one. You have good halves.

But halves alone do not win games. You need a good pack, with good finishing backs, and more importantly a good game plan.

Your pack is weaker than a lot of teams, your wingers and fullback are pish poor. And most importanly you have a very poor coach dictating your game plan.

Some posters need to reread this thread, and learn in future to take head out of botty before posting.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:28 am  

DISA wrote:

:WHISTLE:

Some posters need to reread this thread, and learn in future to take head out of botty before posting.

Indeed. For example

Earlier, DISA wrote:

I am not dissagreeing with that one. You have good halves. .

Our big issue so far this season has been we are so very far from having good halves, and the Hull game, - where Thorman and to a lesser extent Horne were the difference between winning and losing illustrated this perfectly. TBF Jeffries played a lot better and hopefully his form will continue to improve. Deacon however has started 2009 off in a terrible fashion and while he wasn't as bad as at Wigan (he couldn't be) he was still in comparison utterly anonymous.

Earlier, DISA wrote:

Your pack is weaker than a lot of teams,

. Easily as good a pack as any in the league. Not even an arguable point.

Earlier, DISA wrote:

your wingers and fullback are pish poor. .

Platt - whatever he is, and he polarizes opinions - is certainly not pish poor, just prone to brainstorms. Tadulala is a very decent, pacy, hard working winger who runs the ball in hard, is not lazy, defensively he is sound, and has a good record in SL. Sheriffe so far does look way off the pace, I would agree, but that's just one of the backs, unless you think Halley is pish poor I say your statement is at least 75% inaccurate.

Earlier, DISA wrote:

And most importanly you have a very poor coach dictating your game plan.

Well, yadda yadda, but for that let's stick with any one of the 783 other McNamara threads.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:50 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Indeed. For example


Our big issue so far this season has been we are so very far from having good halves, and the Hull game, - where Thorman and to a lesser extent Horne were the difference between winning and losing illustrated this perfectly. TBF Jeffries played a lot better and hopefully his form will continue to improve. Deacon however has started 2009 off in a terrible fashion and while he wasn't as bad as at Wigan (he couldn't be) he was still in comparison utterly anonymous.

. Easily as good a pack as any in the league. Not even an arguable point.


Platt - whatever he is, and he polarizes opinions - is certainly not pish poor, just prone to brainstorms. Tadulala is a very decent, pacy, hard working winger who runs the ball in hard, is not lazy, defensively he is sound, and has a good record in SL. Sheriffe so far does look way off the pace, I would agree, but that's just one of the backs, unless you think Halley is pish poor I say your statement is at least 75% inaccurate.


Well, yadda yadda, but for that let's stick with any one of the 783 other McNamara threads.

I think you have one of the strongest packs in the league, but out of interest how do you think the Hull pack looked yesterday? Did we match, beat, or fall short of yours??

Will it surpass your pack when lauaki and hopefully crocker come into the side?

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:55 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Indeed. For example


Our big issue so far this season has been we are so very far from having good halves, and the Hull game, - where Thorman and to a lesser extent Horne were the difference between winning and losing illustrated this perfectly. TBF Jeffries played a lot better and hopefully his form will continue to improve. Deacon however has started 2009 off in a terrible fashion and while he wasn't as bad as at Wigan (he couldn't be) he was still in comparison utterly anonymous.

. Easily as good a pack as any in the league. Not even an arguable point.


Platt - whatever he is, and he polarizes opinions - is certainly not pish poor, just prone to brainstorms. Tadulala is a very decent, pacy, hard working winger who runs the ball in hard, is not lazy, defensively he is sound, and has a good record in SL. Sheriffe so far does look way off the pace, I would agree, but that's just one of the backs, unless you think Halley is pish poor I say your statement is at least 75% inaccurate.


Well, yadda yadda, but for that let's stick with any one of the 783 other McNamara threads.

And you wonder why you are struggling?

We had this argument on page one. You do not have a strong pack, you have good names on paper. And Tadulala is not a very decent winger. Platt is pish poor, certainly no worse fullback in super league.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:00 am  

DISA wrote:

And Tadulala is not a very decent winger.

Twenty-three tries in a struggling side last year would suggest otherwise but don't let facts get in the way of a good opportunity to talk b.ll.cks.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:01 am  

Irregs #16 wrote:

I think you have one of the strongest packs in the league, but out of interest how do you think the Hull pack looked yesterday? Did we match, beat, or fall short of yours??

Will it surpass your pack when lauaki and hopefully crocker come into the side?

I thought the contest between the packs was a good one. On the day, I'd say Hull's pack came out marginally on top, but honours were pretty even, although Hull's pack was playing with more and more confidence as the game wore on.

We also had Lynch returning from injury so he was nowhere near full match fitness, Langley returning from injury. Crocker won't get in unless he signs for Catalans. In answer to Lauaki, we have Solomona to return at some point (how we could have done with one of his match-breaking specials on Sunday) and so yes, I reckon as a unit we do have the best pack, but Hull are putting together a very strong and skilful pack too and more to the point they work well together.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:02 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I thought the contest between the packs was a good one. On the day, I'd say Hull's pack came out marginally on top, but honours were pretty even, although Hull's pack was playing with more and more confidence as the game wore on.

We also had Lynch returning from injury so he was nowhere near full match fitness, Langley returning from injury. Crocker won't get in unless he signs for Catalans. In answer to Lauaki, we have Solomona to return at some point (how we could have done with one of his match-breaking specials on Sunday) and so yes, I reckon as a unit we do have the best pack, but Hull are putting together a very strong and skilful pack too and more to the point they work well together.

Thanks for your reply!!

And FWIW, i think Crocker will be here soon!

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:05 am  

Irregs #16 wrote:

Thanks for your reply!!

And FWIW, i think Crocker will be here soon!

Well, after the Bird debacle, nothing . . . absoluetly NOTHING . . . would surprise me about the Border "Agency".

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:09 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Well, after the Bird debacle, nothing . . . absoluetly NOTHING . . . would surprise me about the Border "Agency".

I think the difference is that Bird is currently involved with the trial process whereas Crocker was fined approx £90 for affray, and applied online without all the testimonies from MP's, Melbourne, and Hull FC's plans for him in the local community

Fingers Crossed Though!