3-2-1 Player Votes v. Cowboys

[canberra_raiders2k2]

I think alot of people just enjoyed seeing a more attacking flow from the raiders..its probably the most we have gone wide in a game for a very long time.

 

[Raider Azz]

carney's first half was pretty poor imo. he had a much better 2nd half, and also kicked the winning field goal which i think made alot of people forget about the 1st half. and then of course there are people like nick who just have no idea

 

[Kris_man]

I think alot of people just enjoyed seeing a more attacking flow from the raiders..its probably the most we have gone wide in a game for a very long time.

Bingo.

 

[paulquinn49]

TLL 3

Graham 2

Williams 1

 

[jed]

Not that it really matters by this stage, but...

3 TLL
2 Graham
1 Schif

 

[woodgers]

And once again I revert to the big picture which a lot of posters here lack entirely.

Sure, Howell did some good things but once again he cost us at crucial times. That knock on in goal was rubbish and he gave the Cowboys a chance in extra time through crap ball security again. His good points were taking a bomb when the ball was 90/10 his and that is where he made most his metres TR, off the run after that. His try was all Graham and my Granny would have fallen over the line for that. Besides those 4 things, he grew moss on his wing most the night.

Next we have people saying Carney did bugger all. Watch the replay, he was pretty damn good for a half playing in the Raiders colours. Can anyone here tell me when the ball hit Graham, Mogg and TLL on the fringes more? It was because we had a 5/8 prepared to promote the footy. I don't give half a f**k about the F/G, that isn't why he got points from me at all, it was because he uses the guys out wide that have the talent rather than stick the the 'train tracks' down the middle that the moron in the coaches box tells him. The irony of it all is that some people who said Carney didn't do much voted some of the outside backs and TLL for points....completely forgetting who was allowing them the space to do the business, then again that seems far outside their realm of League knowledge so explaining would be like talking to a wall.

Ed, I don't have to justify crap. I never said he was a world beater but called for his inclusion because he is the best at the club at getting the ball to the money men out wide that we pay big bickies to and barely see the ball. You and a couple of others have decided that he is no good so there is no point having the debate again.

Anybody who voted Howell over Carney should top the 'ignore' list forever. If he did more to contribute to that win then I'll give up debating because it is a lost cause.

Then again, there are the 'wind up' merchants on these boards who have a life so exciting that they feel the need to come on here and talk junk just to get a rise out of people. Either that or he is getting pity votes now.

 

[Poida_Raider]

yeppo..
6 - Tamworth!! GO TAMWORTH!!!

3 - Learoyd
2 - Graham
1 - Tongue

 

[edabomb]

And once again I revert to the big picture which a lot of posters here lack entirely.

Sure, Howell did some good things but once again he cost us at crucial times. That knock on in goal was rubbish and he gave the Cowboys a chance in extra time through crap ball security again. His good points were taking a bomb when the ball was 90/10 his and that is where he made most his metres TR, off the run after that. His try was all Graham and my Granny would have fallen over the line for that. Besides those 4 things, he grew moss on his wing most the night.

Next we have people saying Carney did bugger all. Watch the replay, he was pretty damn good for a half playing in the Raiders colours. Can anyone here tell me when the ball hit Graham, Mogg and TLL on the fringes more? It was because we had a 5/8 prepared to promote the footy. I don't give half a f**k about the F/G, that isn't why he got points from me at all, it was because he uses the guys out wide that have the talent rather than stick the the 'train tracks' down the middle that the moron in the coaches box tells him. The irony of it all is that some people who said Carney didn't do much voted some of the outside backs and TLL for points....completely forgetting who was allowing them the space to do the business, then again that seems far outside their realm of League knowledge so explaining would be like talking to a wall.

Ed, I don't have to justify crap. I never said he was a world beater but called for his inclusion because he is the best at the club at getting the ball to the money men out wide that we pay big bickies to and barely see the ball. You and a couple of others have decided that he is no good so there is no point having the debate again.

Anybody who voted Howell over Carney should top the 'ignore' list forever. If he did more to contribute to that win then I'll give up debating because it is a lost cause.

Then again, there are the 'wind up' merchants on these boards who have a life so exciting that they feel the need to come on here and talk junk just to get a rise out of people. Either that or he is getting pity votes now.

Well I can handle people saying Chalk would be better on the wing, that is a given. But when Zillman starts being mentioned it gets a bit stupid. He would be targetted with the high ball all night like Preston was when he defended on the wing. I know you're not suggesting Zillman should be on the wing, but if that's who people choose as a replacement for Howell I'd rather stick with Howell.

Once again you seem to think I am talking about you re:Carney, it's pretty much all directed at GE. He made a thread saying I was wrong about Carney not being ready for firsts, I replied I think he should be putting some performances in nearly two years after his debut. I'm merely stating one good performance by him garnishes so much praise, where if others did the same no-one would notice/care.

BTW I gave him a point and Howell none

 

[greeneyed]

Ed... what is directed at me again? I can't read every post.

 

[paulquinn49]

Ed... what is directed at me again? I can't read every post.

lies

 

[greeneyed]

:lol:

 

[PRKLCD]

And once again I revert to the big picture which a lot of posters here lack entirely.

Sure, Howell did some good things but once again he cost us at crucial times. That knock on in goal was rubbish and he gave the Cowboys a chance in extra time through crap ball security again. His good points were taking a bomb when the ball was 90/10 his and that is where he made most his metres TR, off the run after that. His try was all Graham and my Granny would have fallen over the line for that. Besides those 4 things, he grew moss on his wing most the night.

Next we have people saying Carney did bugger all. Watch the replay, he was pretty damn good for a half playing in the Raiders colours. Can anyone here tell me when the ball hit Graham, Mogg and TLL on the fringes more? It was because we had a 5/8 prepared to promote the footy. I don't give half a f**k about the F/G, that isn't why he got points from me at all, it was because he uses the guys out wide that have the talent rather than stick the the 'train tracks' down the middle that the moron in the coaches box tells him. The irony of it all is that some people who said Carney didn't do much voted some of the outside backs and TLL for points....completely forgetting who was allowing them the space to do the business, then again that seems far outside their realm of League knowledge so explaining would be like talking to a wall.

Ed, I don't have to justify crap. I never said he was a world beater but called for his inclusion because he is the best at the club at getting the ball to the money men out wide that we pay big bickies to and barely see the ball. You and a couple of others have decided that he is no good so there is no point having the debate again.

Anybody who voted Howell over Carney should top the 'ignore' list forever. If he did more to contribute to that win then I'll give up debating because it is a lost cause.

Then again, there are the 'wind up' merchants on these boards who have a life so exciting that they feel the need to come on here and talk junk just to get a rise out of people. Either that or he is getting pity votes now.

I agree with your points re carney. Don't forget he played # 6 - what did our number # 7 do? that's right, Carney outplayed Withers by actually standing in the backline and giving his backs some ball.

 

[dubby]

I agree with your points re carney. Don't forget he played # 6 - what did our number # 7 do? that's right, Carney outplayed Withers by actually standing in the backline and giving his backs some ball.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[woodgers]

What is the laughter for Dubby?

Do you think Linc played better on Saturday? Personally I don't but I wouldn't say he played badly either. He does often stop the backline plays by going himself, like a HOOKER would.

 

[dubby]

What is the laughter for Dubby?

Do you think Linc played better on Saturday? Personally I don't but I wouldn't say he played badly either. He does often stop the backline plays by going himself, like a HOOKER would.

The laughter is a reaction to the statement "that's right, he outplayed Withers".
I thought that comment was ridicules.

Linc had a solid game, he done his job and played with his usual guts and determination. I know Linc is a hooker playing half, i know he doesn't ahve the flair and style of other halves but he does the job consistently week in and week out. I feel Linc is critisized by alot of Carney supporters who would scapegoat any half who played ahead of Todd.

Germ runs alot from half too, so does TOngue. Where's the critisism there? Lincs runs from dummyhalf are not as disruptive to the backs as some make out.

Todd's first half was ordinary woodgers, anybody without discrimination would admit that. His second half was better, but I don't believe for one second Todd outplayed anybody on that team. They all put in together, thats what helped win the game.

 

[woodgers]

Well then we are getting into territory on what we want from a Half and that is probably inapproiate for this thread.

I thought his first half was good....i'm not sure why you say 'anybody without discrimination would admit that', I thought that was an unbiased opinion. I've never given him points before from memory.

but I don't believe for one second Todd outplayed anybody on that team. They all put in together, thats what helped win the game

Really? I find it interesting that you managed to allocate 3 votes then. Isn't that contridictory?

 

[Raider Azz]

wrong topic

 

[Poida_Raider]

good point azz!!... haha