: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:12 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

reminded me of catalans in their first year. they finished bottom then but look at how they've progressed.

I think that's a very fair analysis.

: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:19 pm  

Mintball wrote:

I think that's a very fair analysis.

why, thank you

: Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:16 pm  

Celtic will beat a few teams this year. They've got plenty of talent and play very attractive rugby when they throw the ball about.

I was surprised we got as many as 4,000 there last night. I'm a Salford season ticket holder but as soon as the game was switched to Valentine's Day my desire to remain attached to my wedding tackle exceeded my desire to attend the match.

: Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:46 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

You have to be worried about that attendance. First game of the season is always an inflated crowd, so it looks as though Salford are going to have around 3,000 'homies'. It's not enough.

4,000 clearly (as I'd be surprised if Celtic had 26 there*) which will, on better times and dates no doubt increase by a good few hundred maybe a thousand.

*that's not a dig at Celtic BTW.

: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:51 pm  

Questions need to be asked of Sky IMO. In the past few years we've been on TV at home against the likes of Harlequins, Catalans and Wakefield on a regular basis. Not only does it not present Salford in a good light but it doesn't present SL in a good light either. Clearly they want to meet their contractual obligations to the poop teams as early in the season as possible but some common sense wouldn't go amiss.

: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:33 pm  

Diavolo Rosso wrote:

Questions need to be asked of Sky IMO. In the past few years we've been on TV at home against the likes of Harlequins, Catalans and Wakefield on a regular basis. Not only does it not present Salford in a good light but it doesn't present SL in a good light either. Clearly they want to meet their contractual obligations to the poop teams as early in the season as possible but some common sense wouldn't go amiss.

Err yes