1 win out of 4 GF's

[UPTHEGUTSBUTTS]

Stats dont lie ..

1 win out of 4 starts this decade... rooster = good week in week out BUT once we startr talikin Grand Finals ..

CHOCKERS

 

[m0j0]

Chockers? As in very full? Sorry? I don't get your point.

Oh, you mean Chokers?

Hmmm, well let's take each one at is merits:
2000 - We were never a chance. Brisbane were always going to win, regardless who they played. Can hardly consider it choking when you're a massive underdog.
2002 - Well, we won. Nuf said.
2003 - That could be considered a choke. I'll give you that one.
2004 - Again, going into the game as underdogs, most people didn't think we were a chance (me included). I'm surprised we got as close as we did.

You could be correct however. It's kind of similar to the Knights when they've come up against the Roosters in finals football in recent times. They tend to choke when it really matters. I think the record since 2000 in this category is much the same as our GF record.

 

[Raider_69]

mate the answer is an always has been Finch

00 - Broncs were shoe ins
02 - no finch
03 - finch
04 - finch
05 - 6. Soward 7. Firman = PREMIERSHIP FOR THE CHOOKS

 

[Cammo]

The Roosters have at least been in there with a chance at all but 1 game this decade. That is a pretty big effort for any club.

 

[Sterling]

Chockers? As in very full? Sorry? I don't get your point.

Oh, you mean Chokers?

Hmmm, well let's take each one at is merits:
2000 - We were never a chance. Brisbane were always going to win, regardless who they played. Can hardly consider it choking when you're a massive underdog.
2002 - Well, we won. Nuf said.
2003 - That could be considered a choke. I'll give you that one.
2004 - Again, going into the game as underdogs, most people didn't think we were a chance (me included). I'm surprised we got as close as we did.

You could be correct however. It's kind of similar to the Knights when they've come up against the Roosters in finals football in recent times. They tend to choke when it really matters. I think the record since 2000 in this category is much the same as our GF record.

2002?? won half a comp thanx .... everyone knows that! .... so its 1/2 out of 4 = chokers! :lol: :lol:

 

[m0j0]

2002?? won half a comp thanx .... everyone knows that! .... so its 1/2 out of 4 = chokers! :lol: :lol:

1/2 a comp? You get one team virtually eliminated for fielding an illegal team and that becomes half a comp. If you want to go all mathematical, then we won 14/15 (or 93%) of a comp. But then again, we did manage to beat 100% of the legal teams.

The only half comp I can think of was '97.

 

[m0j0]

Stats dont lie ..

1 win out of 4 starts this decade... rooster = good week in week out BUT once we startr talikin Grand Finals ..

CHOCKERS

Actually, if you want to talk chokers, I think the biggest chokers of the past 5 years would have to be the Eels in 2001. They were bigger favourites than any of the recent Roosters GF appearances. They should've won that one wearing blindfolds. Got so nervous they starting choking on their own vomit.

Good thing for me I saw that one coming - made nearly $500 out of that game.

 

[^ Pando]

Don't worry about Sterling. He trolls the Dogs board as well. :?

 

[Greenblooded]

Sterling wrote:

2002?? won half a comp thanx .... everyone knows that! .... so its 1/2 out of 4 = chokers!

I bet you wouldn't call it half a comp if the Eels had one it.

 

[Grantwhy]

Stats dont lie ..

1 win out of 4 starts this decade... rooster = good week in week out BUT once we startr talikin Grand Finals ..

CHOCKERS

Actually, if you want to talk chokers, I think the biggest chokers of the past 5 years would have to be the Eels in 2001. They were bigger favourites than any of the recent Roosters GF appearances. They should've won that one wearing blindfolds. Got so nervous they starting choking on their own vomit.

Good thing for me I saw that one coming - made nearly $500 out of that game.

I don't think the Roosters have been chockers, but with 1 Premiership from 4 Grand Finals in the last 5 seasons, maybe there could be a comparsion with the imfamous "Collywobbles" :?:

 

[DIEHARD]

You only won in 2002 because the Dogs were stripped of points and you had to play a soft Kiwi side in the Grand Final. :lol: :lol:

 

[Grantwhy]

You only won in 2002 because the Dogs were stripped of points and you had to play a soft Kiwi side in the Grand Final. :lol: :lol:

a win is a win and you can only play the other team that makes the Grand Final . (ps: it's not the Roosters fault the Bulldogs didn't make it in 2002)

Mock another teams GF win and you leave your own team' GF win open to being mocked.

 

[dice]

I would classify being in a winning position and making 14 errors in the 2nd half as a bit of a choke. I wouldn't classify any of the other grand final losses as a choke.

 

[eelsta]

roosters only lost by 3 points for gods sake hardly a choke does everyone who loses choke #-o

 

[gregstar]

FFS roosters! you win whenever i pray for losses - so all the time! so WTF is goin on when i want you to win?

 

[Wobbygong]

3 points is as good as 50 points when it comes to a Grand final, I'd say going into half time with a lead and then comming out not even looking like scoring in the second half is a choke, just ask Finchy!

 

[pyro]

The thing is we did look like scoring in the last 20 minutes. We just kept dropping the ball when we looked the goods. There was no lack of effort in any of the GF we've been in though. Especially this year (except Hodges).