More positives...... : Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:21 pm  

"It's not all doom and gloom but we were way off the mark during the second half apart from the initial 10-minute period. Certainly things are not going for us and we have to stay strong. Hopefully the tide will turn. We scored a great try in the first half and then lose the guy who created it (Paul Deacon) with a head injury."

Well King Kanute, the tide has been in for weeks and if you did but know it it's over your head!

This guy could take positives from the Titanic sinking. Well the Bulls are the Titanic and the Captain hasn't seen the iceberg!......He seems fully intent on taking the ship down with him..

: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:25 pm  

but there's positives from hitting the iceburg. at least we'll be able to have cold drinks

: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:27 pm  

I made a joke outside of the game that McNamara would do the "there were positives to take out of it" line. I was joking, I really didn't think even he would do it after today.

Once again, never fails to prove me wrong.

I'm absolutely bloody sick of this crap.

: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:10 pm  

I found this part amusing !!

We were in control at the start and the stats will show we were in Hull KR territory for most of the game."

It doesn't matter if we were in their territory for the full 80 minutes, if we never cross the line

Does it ?

We were in control at the start and the stats will show we were in Hull KR territory for most of the game."

It's that why we conceded the tries

: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:13 pm  

Visage wrote:

I found this part amusing !!



It doesn't matter if we were in their territory for the full 80 minutes, if we never cross the line

Does it ?

"We were in control at the start"

Does he mean the kick off?

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:59 am  

Duckman wrote:

"We were in control at the start"

Does he mean the kick off?

Maybe the first 37 minutes, during which we were either level or in front.

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:08 am  

af wrote:

Maybe the first 37 minutes, during which we were either level or in front.

Aye. That will be it.

If we ignore the next 43 minutes then they might go away.

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:19 am  

af wrote:

Maybe the first 37 minutes, during which we were either level or in front.

I bet if we added up all the minutes we were in front in every match this season it wouldn't be too far off those minutes we were behind. The problem is that the minutes in which we are behind tend to come at the end of the game. Perhaps this is a tactical error and we'd be better off being level or in front at the end of matches?

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:30 am  

anarkik wrote:

I bet if we added up all the minutes we were in front in every match this season it wouldn't be too far off those minutes we were behind. The problem is that the minutes in which we are behind tend to come at the end of the game. Perhaps this is a tactical error and we'd be better off being level or in front at the end of matches?

Email Macca, quick.

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:32 am  

anarkik wrote:

I bet if we added up all the minutes we were in front in every match this season it wouldn't be too far off those minutes we were behind. The problem is that the minutes in which we are behind tend to come at the end of the game. Perhaps this is a tactical error and we'd be better off being level or in front at the end of matches?

It's an interesting idea. Perhaps someone could email it to the club.