Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:46 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

From yours, maybe! The 2010 Grand Final was the height of entertainment, I'm sure. Well, if you were a Wigan fan anyway. But to me it summed up just what had been wrong with the team for at least a season and a half.

If what you need for you to consider Saints to be exciting and entertaining is a shed full of injuries, poor ball control, poor tactics, poor personnel choices, poor discipline, (relatively) poor defence, limited attacking options (except when Pryce and Eastmond brought their individual skill to the show) and failure to win trophies then I think you'll find yourself in a minority.

Listen love you struggled to realise that Soliola's squad number does not necessarily equate to what position he will play next year. Now if you find that difficult to comprehend I have to assume that you find other matters of rugby league difficult to comprehend and therefore have to regard the remainder of your posts as being utter twaddle.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:57 am  

McClennan wrote:

Rubbish. Last year was one of the most entertaining and exciting I've seen from our point of view.

There were some exciting games I grant you, but the brand of rugby we played wasn't particularly so. The chronic lack of pace and flair meant that our only way to the line was to barge over from close range.

We haven't been an entertaining side to watch since 2005; whether we have been in entertaining 'games' is irrelevant to the point.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:50 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

So you are disputing all those factors then? No surprise there!

We happened to have some very committed players who didn't give up. It shows what can be done with a team of committed players. However, commitment alone won't win a Grand Final and all those factors I mentioned were shown up in their glory during the Grand Final.

No good getting to Grand Finals only to keep losing them.

But aside from all that, the point was about enjoyment.

All are factors during various parts of the season, but if we were as bad as you make out we were we wouldn't have finished second, nor would we have been in the grand final. You are over egging the pudding.

The 4N final showed what can happen to an excellent team with a few players missing and we went into the GF against the form team of the competition with no half backs and were still competing in it until the last 20 mins or so.

I enjoyed most of last year, the majority of games were close affairs that were in doubt with 10-15 mins to go. We saw some decent tries and good defence throughout the year. The most boring games were those that ended up with high scores and loads of tries, such as Salford at home, the kind of game that was every other week in the early 2000's. I watched them then and enjoyed them, but prefer hard fought games now.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:21 pm  

D.D. wrote:

We haven't been an entertaining side to watch since 2005; whether we have been in entertaining 'games' is irrelevant to the point.

Well I disagree. Last year was one of the most entertaining and exciting I've experienced from a Saints point of view. It was probably the season I enjoyed the most since the all-conquering 2006 team.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:36 pm  

McClennan wrote:

Well I disagree. Last year was one of the most entertaining and exciting I've experienced from a Saints point of view. It was probably the season I enjoyed the most since the all-conquering 2006 team.

We weren't exactly 'the entertainers' in 2006 either. The 'functionilists' maybe.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:38 pm  

D.D. wrote:

We weren't exactly 'the entertainers' in 2006 either. The 'functionilists' maybe.

I would have said that 2006 was more 'Rise Of The Machine' as we dominated from start to finish. It was awesome stuff.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:12 pm  

McClennan wrote:

Listen love you struggled to realise that Soliola's squad number does not necessarily equate to what position he will play next year. Now if you find that difficult to comprehend I have to assume that you find other matters of rugby league difficult to comprehend and therefore have to regard the remainder of your posts as being utter twaddle.

Bless. Those who have no argument always slide into the personal. I am very, very glad you regard the remainder of my posts as being 'utter twaddle'. That means you won't bother replying from now on, I assume? Excellent.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:18 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

All are factors during various parts of the season, but if we were as bad as you make out we were we wouldn't have finished second, nor would we have been in the grand final. You are over egging the pudding.

Not at all. I said those were the factors which meant I disagreed with McClennan's suggestion that last season was the most exciting. We were talking about finding the season exciting, remember.

I enjoyed most of last year, the majority of games were close affairs that were in doubt with 10-15 mins to go.

Indeed, but to achieve that - with certain exceptions - we had to watch Saints play poorer RL overall, the aspect of the season I didn't enjoy. That's not to say we sometimes didn't play well - we did. And we were sometimes very exciting to watch. And some of the matches were very exciting. But I'd much rather the reason have been other teams rising to our former standard rather than watching our overall standard slip, which overall it did do.

It's all down to preference. I too prefer hard fought, exciting matches, but without the poor defence, poor handling, poor discipline, etc, that IMO marred so many of our performances.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 6:31 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Not at all. I said those were the factors which meant I disagreed with McClennan's suggestion that last season was the most exciting. We were talking about finding the season exciting, remember.

But name a team or a season (bar Saints 2006 which was pretty much a one off) where those factors never occur at some points in the season. Those factors occur every year with every team, to highlight them as a sign of an unexciting season means that you'd never find a season exciting.

Indeed, but to achieve that - with certain exceptions - we had to watch Saints play poorer RL overall, the aspect of the season I didn't enjoy. That's not to say we sometimes didn't play well - we did. And we were sometimes very exciting to watch. And some of the matches were very exciting. But I'd much rather the reason have been other teams rising to our former standard rather than watching our overall standard slip, which overall it did do.

I take it that you are comparing us to our 2006 incarnation? Because you've just described pretty much every season for any team bar Saints 2006 and Wigan in their 80's heydays.

It's all down to preference. I too prefer hard fought, exciting matches, but without the poor defence, poor handling, poor discipline, etc, that IMO marred so many of our performances.

I think, and always have done in these discussions, that you're being overly harsh. We lost players to injuries in a lot of games this year, finishing 1 or 2 interchanges down in a match. That can have an effect on the best team in the world, as Saturdays game showed.

Re: Forum title & banner - Move with the times, no? : Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:11 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

But name a team or a season (bar Saints 2006 which was pretty much a one off) where those factors never occur at some points in the season. Those factors occur every year with every team, to highlight them as a sign of an unexciting season means that you'd never find a season exciting.

*sigh*

I can't be bothered.

All I'm saying is that if I had to choose between 2006 and 2010 in terms of excitement levels, give me 2006 any day of the week. 2010 was just a lower standard and that's why we had so many close games. Quite often we were total bollox to watch in 2010. If you and McClennan and whoever else thinks that was exciting well good for you. I'm happy not to be in your club!