'14 // R2 // Sun // Knights 20-26 Raiders // Hunter

[Noname36]

Why would Super League have anything to do with it?

The Broncos 1997 trophy is just as irrelevant as yours.

When did I say it wasn't? You're the one trying to take comps off clubs just because you're insecure about your own team's success.

I've got to side with Canberra on this one. Sorry, Newcastle. Ever since Johns packed it up, you guys have been fat whales floundering in shallow waters with the likes of Gidley being the top dogs. I called it very early on that the squad would fail Bennett and so far, it categorically has.

Say what you want about Canberra, their club is a trainwreck at the moment too but they know how to spot a good junior.....And then they know how to lose them as quickly as they found them.



NRL Stats recognizes Super League Bile, so like it or not, there are two Premiership sides in 1997. One just happens to be the far superior footy team.

Big shocker there lol. You death ride us every time you post about the club. Why would this be any exception?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

:lol: Our success has nothing to do with it. Even if that joke of a premiership did count, the Knights still come up short against the Raiders.

I guess you just need to take anything you can get when you support Newcastle.

 

[Noname36]

Lol I think I hit a nerve.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Yeah mate, you got me ;-)

 

[VictorTheViking]

What, no slinging insults?? This thread is a poor imitation of its predecessors

 

[Rod]

Here's the real 1997 decider.

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/games/1998/199805010414.html

Oh wow. This is a good one.

I'm looking forward to seeing the team who beats the Roosters in Round 8 given last years trophy.

 

[bileduct]

When did I say it wasn't? You're the one trying to take comps off clubs just because you're insecure about your own team's success.

Huh? Insecure about the history of a club that has been more successful than the Knoughts?

Just like recognising two premierships in 1997, that doesn't make any sense.

 

[bileduct]

Oh wow. This is a good one.

I'm looking forward to seeing the team who beats the Roosters in Round 8 given last years trophy.

There weren't two separate competitions last year so it wouldn't really matter.

 

[Rod]

Yeah because your one made so much more sense :roll:. Awarding a title for something that happened 8 months later.....

 

[bileduct]

Yeah because your one made so much more sense :roll:. Awarding a title for something that happened 8 months later.....

It's the first time the 1997 "premiers" met each other. You even had home ground advantage but you still lost.

But that's okay, it can be as equally meaningless as the 1997 "premierships".

 

[Noname36]

It's the first time the 1997 "premiers" met each other. You even had home ground advantage but you still lost.

But that's okay, it can be as equally meaningless as the 1997 "premierships".

What's your point? Manly were supposed to smash us on the day but they didn't. Absolutely no proof Brisbane would have either. Anyone can beat anyone on the day.

And there's a huge different between that and round 8 the following year. My God, is that all you've got?

 

[Rod]

It's the first time the 1997 "premiers" met each other. You even had home ground advantage but you still lost.

So what. Seriously. You judge teams on what happens the following season? That is pretty dumb, even by the logic you've displayed so far.

Thankfully the record books aren't as stupid, and don't take Round 8 results into account when awarding premierships.

 

[Rod]

What's your point? Manly were supposed to smash us on the day but they didn't. Absolutely no proof Brisbane would have either. Anyone can beat anyone on the day.

Exactly. The 'Brisbane would have smashed you' is one of my favourites of the straw-clutching arguments. Manly were supposed to smash us as well. Look how that turned out.

Oh but Brisbane beat us in a round robin game 8 months later :lol:.

 

[perverse]

At least arguing about the distant past makes the Raiders fans feel a bit better about the woeful state of their club and team.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

At least arguing about the distant past makes the Raiders fans feel a bit better about the woeful state of their club and team.

There's something wrong at club level?

We didn't need a fat miner to bail us out.

Check this out http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-top-20-most-valuable-australian-sports-brands-2013-12

Can't see the Knights listed there.

 

[bileduct]

My God, is that all you've got?

That's what I think when I look at the Knoughts huge collection of 1 premiership.

 

[Noname36]

There's something wrong at club level?

We didn't need a fat miner to bail us out.

Check this out http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-top-20-most-valuable-australian-sports-brands-2013-12

Can't see the Knights listed there.

The Raiders brand is worth that much and yet your side has still been so consistently unsuccessful for the past 20 years?

Wowza.

 

[Noname36]

That's what I think when I look at the Knoughts huge collection of 1 premiership.

lol you guys:

"The Knights premiership isn't a real premiership"

"The Raiders wooden spoon isn't a real wooden spoon"

Sorry mate, but the history books don't re-write themselves just because you don't like the content.

 

[Rod]

That's what I think when I look at the Knoughts huge collection of 1 premiership.

A premiership every 12.5 years as opposed to every 10.7. You guys are absolutely streaking away :sarcasm:.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

The Raiders brand is worth that much and yet your side has still been so consistently unsuccessful for the past 20 years?

Wowza.

So have Penrith and Parramatta but that wasn't the point was it.