: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:55 pm  

Batesy wrote:

I don't get this, surely bitterness would be "Sinfield is terrible" even after a good performance. When actually all Jonh is saying is that Sinfield had a good game, and know he needs to put on a good display to cement himself as an international player.

Why is that bitterness?

Take a look at my post on the page prior to this one, and you'll see a fair amount of bitterness from jonh

Batesy wrote:

(btw, Bitterness: resentment: a feeling of deep and bitter anger and ill-will.
Thats a definition of bitterness, I'd tell you to ask your english teacher but it's the weekend and I don't want you to look a fool for whole day just because you don't understand one word)

And you can keep your pathetic little snide comments to yourself thanks. Read the thread before you make a fool out of yourself.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:01 pm  

Batesy wrote:

Maybe he was looking for reasons as to why we haven't seen the best of Sinfield, you don't just turn up to Rugby games and be off your best after having a good season. Form just doesn't work like that in my experience

If he was looking for reasons as to Sinfield's poor performances he could have actually tried looking into it and using his knowledge of the game to back that up.
Its not necessarily about form.
Sinfield is the major playmaker at Leeds, at International level he hasnt been until he's been moved to hooker and can have more of an impact out of dummy half than at loose forward, without taking the ball away from the 2 half backs.

Jonh couldve come on and said Sinfield lacks pace to be a half back, which is probably true, but no he made up some rubbish about mental strength out of nowhere with nothing whatsoever to back it up and then is wondering why everyone is suggesting he doesnt know what he's on about.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:10 pm  

BigRob wrote:

If he was looking for reasons as to Sinfield's poor performances he could have actually tried looking into it and using his knowledge of the game to back that up.
Its not necessarily about form.
Sinfield is the major playmaker at Leeds, at International level he hasnt been until he's been moved to hooker and can have more of an impact out of dummy half than at loose forward, without taking the ball away from the 2 half backs.

Jonh couldve come on and said Sinfield lacks pace to be a half back, which is probably true, but no he made up some rubbish about mental strength out of nowhere with nothing whatsoever to back it up and then is wondering why everyone is suggesting he doesnt know what he's on about.

Do not confuse having a different opinion of a player to you as bitterness.

Why would i be bitter exactly what is there to be bitter about?

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:14 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

So basically you're agreeing with me other than that Sinfield's best position for his country is hooker. Well you're entitled to your opinion of course but the fact that everyone agrees on this, including the national coach (and his ex club coach, no less!) and Sinfield himself, would suggest that it does make it correct. Alternatively your lone voice is espousing the one true and correct opinion. I'll leave it to your good self to decide the reality of the situation.

Were you watching last night? Sinfield played half the game at 9 and the other half at 13 both equally impressive. The difference is that the game plan last night was for Sinfield to be the main playmaker. The number on his back made no difference. Whether he plays at acting half back or central organiser he is a class act. He also was our real leader on the field last night constantly talking and encouraging the other players and calling the moves.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:16 pm  

jonh wrote:

Why would i be bitter exactly what is there to be bitter about?

The he gets in ahead of your curly haired rag doll.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:24 pm  

Head High Tackle wrote:

The he gets in ahead of your curly haired rag doll.

Locky is not a hooker, there is room in the team for both of them.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:35 pm  

jonh wrote:

Locky is not a hooker

Neither is Sinfield. It just turns out he's a better hooker than any of the 'proper' British hookers in SL.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:36 pm  

jonh wrote:

Do not confuse having a different opinion of a player to you as bitterness.

Why would i be bitter exactly what is there to be bitter about?

Are you seriously telling me this

jonh wrote:

he has never let his country down unlike Sinfield

jonh wrote:

Funny how Sinfield Wilkin and McGuire look like World beaters vs the French but offer next to nothing vs the best in the world.

jonh wrote:

lack the levels required to take it to the International performance, but have enough to cope with the domestic game where there full ability is rarely tested.

jonh wrote:

i am highlighting the fact that they lack in this department to transform there ability to be top International players.

jonh wrote:

mental toughness and strength, McGuire lacks this as does Sinfield

jonh wrote:

but he has much to do to prove me wrong. He now has to kick on and do it next week and in the next series in which he plays.

jonh wrote:

it is now up to Sinfield after all the false dawns to truly establish himself as an International player.

Doesnt come across as just a tad bitter? Even after 2 very good performances against the 2 best nations in the world?
You seem happy enough to condemn Burrow and McGuire on less.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:41 pm  

BigRob wrote:

Are you seriously telling me this














Doesnt come across as just a tad bitter? Even after 2 very good performances against the 2 best nations in the world?
You seem happy enough to condemn Burrow and McGuire on less.

It comes over as a realistic assessment of some of our current and past Internationals.

As i have said all the way through I also rate these players as Sl players but not as International players.

Sinfield may yet prove me wrong if he is able to continue with his current level of performance.

Although i dont think his performance against Australia was fantastic, he was poor in the fist half like most of the rest of them but much better when moved from 13 so i would say he has thus far had a game and a half's worth of good performances. Long may it continue England need it to as his style at hooker complements our 2 exciting halves and aids them with there deficiencies.

: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:51 pm  

jonh wrote:

It comes over as a realistic assessment of some of our current and past Internationals.

jonh wrote:

As i have said all the way through I also rate these players as Sl players but not as International players.

No sorry I forgot, only Tomkins and O'Loughlin are rated as International players and have the correct mentality for it.

jonh wrote:

Sinfield may yet prove me wrong if he is able to continue with his current level of performance.

Which is a higher level of performance than Tomkins so far. Surely now Myler should be brought back in to replace him. Thats how it works at international level.

jonh wrote:

Although i dont think his performance against Australia was fantastic, he was poor in the fist half like most of the rest of them

Except Tomkins

jonh wrote:

but much better when moved from 13 so i would say he has thus far had a game and a half's worth of good performances.

Im sorry, was he playing all game at hooker last night?

jonh wrote:

Long may it continue England need it to as his style at hooker complements our 2 exciting halves and aids them with there deficiencies.

Thats the first sensible thing you've said regards Sinfield on this thread.