BANANA SKIN? : Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:17 pm  

No slip ups now Rovers.......need to prepare for Wakey like they did Saints. Excellent chance to get 6 points from the next three games......possibly 8 from four.

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:19 pm  

I think calling it a banana skin is being disrespectful to Wakey tbh.

The league, albeit at an early stage, looks so competitive that i dont think there are "banana skins" anymore

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:25 pm  

Irregs #16 wrote:

I think calling it a banana skin is being disrespectful to Wakey tbh.

The league, albeit at an early stage, looks so competitive that i dont think there are "banana skins" anymore

it wasnt meant to be disrespectful to anyone but after last fridays result it would be easy to get carried away facing any team at home......especially a game Rovers would be expected to win.

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:29 pm  

rovers r red wrote:

it wasnt meant to be disrespectful to anyone but after last fridays result it would be easy to get carried away facing any team at home......especially a game Rovers would be expected to win.

by whom?

Wakey are 3 from 4, only losing to leeds like yourselves, and beat you last time out at CP. Even with their injury problems they managed to d1ck (i know they are performing badly) Warrington and win away at Wigan

I think its even but I think Rovers may just sneak it by 4 points or so!

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:31 pm  

Irregs #16 wrote:

by whom?
Wakey are 3 from 4, only losing to leeds like yourselves, and beat you last time out at CP. Even with their injury problems they managed to d1ck (i know they are performing badly) Warrington and win away at Wigan

I think its even but I think Rovers may just sneak it by 4 points or so!

by justin, the players & the majority of Rovers fans.

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:33 pm  

rovers r red wrote:

by justin, the players & the majority of Rovers fans.

Well thats a given, would they ever go into a game expecting to lose??

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:47 pm  

Irregs #16 wrote:

Well thats a given, would they ever go into a game expecting to lose??

hope not.....just answering your question.

[Mild Rover]

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:58 pm  

Its not a banana skin as such, just the first time rovers will enter a game as favourites - not massive favourites, but I think the bookies will have us ahead, for what that is worth. Wakey have started well but have mounting injury problems and Rovers have home advantage. They therefore have to guard against overconfidence after the great win at Saints.
I think the OP is making the point that Rovers have often surprised the 'big' teams in SL, but not backed it up in games that looked more winnable on paper - we are hoping that will change this year.

The only real banana skins this year, IMO, are Celtic and Salford. Leeds and Saints (could the latter be entering a Bradford-esque rebuilding period though? Very little experience outside the first 17.) remain the only teams for whom defeat is a real surprise. The rest are all very close, which is why I think Rovers could possibly finish as high as fourth or fifth - if they can improve against the likes of Wakefield, Cas, Quins etc. And avoid too many injuries, of course.

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:03 pm  

This is the type of game we will go into expecting to get 2 points and be disappointed if we don't, unlike Leeds and Saints who we would expect to get beat by.

These are the type of games we have lost in the last 2 years, against teams who we see as our rivals for a 5 to 8 finish, I would put Hudds, Quins, Wakey, Cats and possibly Hull into this bracket.

If we are to show true, playoff and higher playoff finish potential then its these games we need to win and not pin our hopes on a one off win at saints (albeit a very good and welcome one) as a guide to our future finish spot.

: Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:52 pm  

Irregs #16 wrote:

I think calling it a banana skin is being disrespectful to Wakey tbh.

The league, albeit at an early stage, looks so competitive that i dont think there are "banana skins" anymore

"Is this the right room for an argument?"