Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:36 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

You're consumed by this result. I was pi$$ed off mightily at the time, but over the course of the season we did better than them and ultimately the win earned them only the right to being embarrassed by Wigan the following week, despite Vella saying they (Rovers) would win the Grand Final. A loss by 17 points when we lost our HB pairing on 58 seconds is not really a "humiliation".

Cheer up. Morgan will be on the back page of the HDM in approximately 5 weeks with his annual article on Rovers doing the double - Mullan can just get last year's and do a "find and replace" 2010 for 2011. That should cheer you up. Your favourite massive signing Mason will be here in the meantime so that should provide a further distraction.

Shame about your second paragraph again, maybe you support Rovers since you spend so much time on their board?

In answer to your first point, if I am 'consumed' by that result it's because it's the result that meant they had a better season than us! As I'm sure you well understand SL is a single competition comprised of a league format and then playoffs, not the separate league and premiership format of old. It's really irrelevant to me that we finished above them in the league as they got further than us in the playoffs and therefore bettered us in the overall competition, regardless of what happened to them in the next playoff round.

Imagine we were leading a match from the 1st to the 79th minute, we then conceded a try in the final minute and lost the game... the way you look at it you'd be saying we'd had a more succesfull game than the opposition

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:46 pm  

garry brindley wrote:

Shame about your second paragraph again, maybe you support Rovers since you spend so much time on their board?

Priceless - look at you getting all riled up and "resorting" to this nonsense. The difference, cockle, is that the content of my posts is not 70% slating FC balanced by 30% praising Rovers.

garry brindley wrote:

In answer to your first point, if I am 'consumed' by that result it's because it's the result that meant they had a better season than us! As I'm sure you well understand SL is a single competition comprised of a league format and then playoffs, not the separate league and premiership format of old. It's really irrelevant to me that we finished above them in the league as they got further than us in the playoffs and therefore bettered us in the overall competition.

Imagine we were leading a match from the 1st to the 79th minute, we then conceded a try in the final minute and lost the game... the way you look at it you'd be saying we'd had a more succesfull game than the opposition

There are 2 competitions. You seem overly eager to dismiss our major final appearance in 2008 to focus on the league performance and, very specifically, the relative position vs Rovers. To focus on the overall league campaign and the relative postion at the end of it vs Rovers in 2010 is therefore entirely appropriate if you are allowed to dismiss a CC final appearance at Wembley as meaningless.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:48 pm  

garry brindley wrote:

Shame about your second paragraph again, maybe you support Rovers since you spend so much time on their board?

In answer to your first point, if I am 'consumed' by that result it's because it's the result that meant they had a better season than us! As I'm sure you well understand SL is a single competition comprised of a league format and then playoffs, not the separate league and premiership format of old. It's really irrelevant to me that we finished above them in the league as they got further than us in the playoffs and therefore bettered us in the overall competition, regardless of what happened to them in the next playoff round.

Imagine we were leading a match from the 1st to the 79th minute, we then conceded a try in the final minute and lost the game... the way you look at it you'd be saying we'd had a more succesfull game than the opposition

In 2008 Melbourne storm finished first in the NRL, they were beaten in the first round of the play offs by the NZ Warriors (who finished eigth). Did they have a better season?

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:50 pm  

east hull FC fan wrote:

In 2008 Melbourne storm finished first in the NRL, they were beaten in the first round of the play offs by the NZ Warriors (who finished eigth). Did they have a better season?

They were "top dogs" in Melbourne. Very important that for our good friend Mr Brindley - all that matters in fact.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:00 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Priceless - look at you getting all riled up and "resorting" to this nonsense. The difference, cockle, is that the content of my posts is not 70% slating FC balanced by 30% praising Rovers.

There are 2 competitions. You seem overly eager to dismiss our major final appearance in 2008 to focus on the league performance and, very specifically, the relative position vs Rovers. To focus on the overall league campaign and the relative postion at the end of it vs Rovers in 2010 is therefore entirely appropriate if you are allowed to dismiss a CC final appearance at Wembley as meaningless.

Pretty vague stuff,I seem to have you on the ropes According you you I've 'slated' Houghton and Reece Lynn... I challenge you to delve into that database of yours and find just one quote?

I'm not really sure what you're getting at with the challenge cup thing, it's a great competition to win but rarely requires anything like the number and quality of performances that it takes to get to a SL grand final. Are you honestly suggesting that beating Bradford away and then Wakey can somehow negate the evidence of an abysmal SL performance? If you want to talk about CC performances though I recall being knocked out at home in the first round two seasons running.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:01 pm  

east hull FC fan wrote:

In 2008 Melbourne storm finished first in the NRL, they were beaten in the first round of the play offs by the NZ Warriors (who finished eigth). Did they have a better season?

Depends how their playoff system works I guess. Combining our league standings with playoff results means we finished 7th in the competion and Rovers finished 6th or 5th I believe.

I know many try to argue this but there's no disputing we were paid prize money for finishing 7th, a mate of mine emailed the RFL about it.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:03 pm  

garry brindley wrote:

Yes.

So, for clarity, you are saying that because Warriors beat the Storm in the play offs they (the Warriors) had the better season?

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:05 pm  

east hull FC fan wrote:

So, for clarity, you are saying that because Warriors beat the Storm in the play offs they (the Warriors) had the better season?

I misread what you were saying and corrected myself, see above.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:09 pm  

smudgersmith wrote:

What has this to do with Monaghan?

I do apologise for going off topic but the thread veered off a few pages back due to the constant belittling of everything black and white from our new dobbin friend.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:10 pm  

garry brindley wrote:

Pretty vague stuff,I seem to have you on the ropes According you you I've 'slated' Houghton and Reece Lynn... I challenge you to delve into that database of yours and find just one quote?

I'm not really sure what you're getting at with the challenge cup thing, it's a great competition to win but rarely requires anything like the number and quality of performances that it takes to get to a SL grand final. Are you honestly suggesting that beating Bradford away and then Wakey can somehow negate the evidence of an abysmal SL performance? If you want to talk about CC performances though I recall being knocked out at home in the first round two seasons running.

You've been pretty sarcastic about Lyne's performances, sneering that you must have missed his brilliant efforts. As a 17-year-old academy international, surely any self-declared FC fan would be backing him to the hilt and be proud of what he's achieved so far? You've said to those referencing Houghton being on the brink of international selection that there are at least 7 better hookers than him in the competition. "Slating" may have overstated it, but you clearly don't rate him as a better than average SL hooker.

What I'm getting at with the CC thing is this. There are 2 competitions. You dismiss us getting to the final of one out of hand as an irrelevance, yet losing to Rovers, also a one-off game, is consuming you. You're being entirely inconsistent.