Archer wins the grand final

[bottle]

go on the BBC. Go to the 606 League forum. All the British league fans

As if anyone here gives a sh*t what Stupor League fools think. Zero bragging rights?

2010 PREMIERS!!

No coverage of any refereeing controversy in the Aussie media. No mention of it by Roosters players and the majority of their fans (whoare showing a much greater acceptance, and as a result much greater dignity, than you ya whinger).
Aussie media and the majority of Roosters fans = credibility.
RugbyWhinger=nil

 

[MightyBronco]

To opposition fans of those spastic, god-awful clubs who could not win the premiership this year, thanks for turning out in record numbers. Just coming in here and seeing all the hate and excuses made me feel all gooey and warm on the inside. If it wasn't for your club being well, so damn terrible, we could not have done it. A big thank you to the NQ Cowboys board for rejecting the greatest coach of all-time. Thanks to the Melbourne Storm admin for pissing off an insider who turned around and leaked what everyone already knew. Big congratulations to the players, a truly champion team. Unlike a club like the Raiders, we don't rely on one man. Finally I'll be a bigger man than Hornby and thank the officials. Cheers boys first rounds on me.

This is why dragons fans are the most hated in the comp.

No idea whatsoever.

 

[Firey_Dragon]

This is why dragons fans are the most hated in the comp.

No idea whatsoever.

It was written tongue in cheek, in response to an idiotic thread.

 

[MightyBronco]

I know, it just came across so...so f**ked up....

 

[Firey_Dragon]

I know, it just came across so...so f**ked up....

In the context it was written it didn't come across that way. It was clear as day the poster didn't believe what was written from the opening line. He was clearly kidding. You shouldn't generalise so much though, very few, if any Dragon's have really come in anywhere to brag, more have defended the criticism of the game. Given the amount we've copped it all year, for winning I might add, it's been a pretty graceful win considering.

 

[goodsmeagol]

The ball was planted on Soward's thigh, please tell me how someone can "strike out" with their thigh and dislodge a ball?

He had a loose carry and lost the ball, the look on his face when he lost it told the story. That try was a farce, except the only difference between that and the dragons first try was he got to have 10 looks at it first.

Bad calls went both ways, I'm not going to deny that we were lucky with some calls, but to suggest the result would have been different is ludicrous. The Roosters forwards were completely out-muscled in the 2nd half and the Roosters didn't make enough of their opportunities in the first. That is why they lost, no excuses.

Try and take it all in, I'll go slowly. Soward "moved" his leg forward to impede Leilua's putdown of the ball, which is fine, but in doing so the ball moved from his leg and Anasta scored - where's the loose carry?
The only ludicrous thing is that you cant accept that while Saints played well in the second half, the dodgey calls they got in their favour, swung the game. Instead of being up 8 nil at half time, it was 8-6.
It's east to "outmuscle" a team when the ref's are demoralising them with bad calls.
You've obviously never played the game, otherwise you'd know the value of momentum.
Not excuses, just facts.

 

[goodsmeagol]

your boys scored 0 points in the last 60 minutes of the game. i know that's a tough reality pill to take.

.

Try and follow the argument. No points were scored because of dodgey ref calls.

 

[Willow]

It's east to "outmuscle" a team when the ref's are demoralising them with bad calls.

Oooh, two posts and two gems.

You've obviously never played the game, otherwise you'd know the value of momentum.

LOL! Snobbery thrown in for good measure.

That's code for, "I am right because I have the qualifications to be right!"

Not excuses, just facts.

And you're obviously taking the grand final result badly. Hurting and a sore loser. Just stating the facts.

 

[goodsmeagol]

Three bookmakers taking bets on the NRL Grand Final, Sportingbet, Centrebet and Betfair, have offered to refund money to all punters who wagered money on Tony Archer to win the Clive Churchill medal. Whilst they will also pay bets wagered on the medal winner, Darius Boyd, they will refund money placed on Archer as a goodwill gesture to their valuable customers. A spokesman from Centrebet said “whilst no one can deny that Darius Boyd had a terrific game, the most valuable player was definitely Archer. He was heavily involved in the lead up to all of their tries and without him they would not have had nearly as comprehensive a win.” Sportingbet had a similar attitude, saying that although Archer did most of his work in attack for the Dragons, that he made a valuable contribution in defence as well – “that try that he saved just before half time when he called the forward pass to Leilua was crucial. If he doesn’t make that call the Dragons could go to the sheds 8 points down. His work when the Dragons had the ball was there for everyone to see, but his defence was also awesome”. Betfair remarked that they had not seen as influential a game from a referee in a Grand Final and were surprised that Archer wasn’t awarded the medal by the judges, saying “he was forced into one penalty when Friend was almost decapitated, so you can’t really criticise him for that, and the only other penalty against the Dragons was in junk time. Pretty much apart from that he has had a perfect game”.

Hilarious :lol:
It's becoming pretty obvious that all the Saints fans were so desperate for a premiership that they dont care how they got it. Come on guys, just admit that it was handed to you and we'll all move on

 

[skeepe]

Hilarious :lol:
It's becoming pretty obvious that all the Saints fans were so desperate for a premiership that they dont care how they got it. Come on guys, just admit that it was handed to you and we'll all move on

Why would they admit something that isn't true?

 

[Firey_Dragon]

Try and take it all in, I'll go slowly. Soward "moved" his leg forward to impede Leilua's putdown of the ball, which is fine, but in doing so the ball moved from his leg and Anasta scored - where's the loose carry?
The only ludicrous thing is that you cant accept that while Saints played well in the second half, the dodgey calls they got in their favour, swung the game. Instead of being up 8 nil at half time, it was 8-6.
It's east to "outmuscle" a team when the ref's are demoralising them with bad calls.
You've obviously never played the game, otherwise you'd know the value of momentum.
Not excuses, just facts.

Most geniused excuse ever. Soward didn't "push" the ball out, it was planted on his leg and leilua lost control. Have the rules changed at some point and players aren't allowed to touch the ball if you're a defender now? If Soward kicked it out, or raked it out I would agree with you but at no point did soward apply pressure to remove the ball. It was planted on the top of his thigh and leilua lost it cold. You're an absolute imbecile if you think otherwise.

For the record, I don't think the Roosters had that much momentum in the first half either, it was a close fought contest. The Roosters forward pack just didn't pull their weight in the 2nd half, you can put whatever spin on it you want. Winners are grinners and some Rooster's fans are terrible losers.

For the record, I've played the game since I was 6, all the way up until I was 28. In all that time it was always easier to blame the ref rather than accept my own shortcomings, but you know what, I don't care because we're premiers.

 

[Willow]

Why would they admit something that isn't true?

But how can you say that skeepe? You must be another one who has never played the game. lol.

 

[skeepe]

But how can you say that skeepe? You must be another one who has never played the game. lol.

Must be, at least according to an account that appears to have been created for the sole reason of posting wild ramblings in this very thread.

My knees would beg to differ, but I'm sure smeagol knows better.

 

[Willow]

Must be, at least according to an account that appears to have been created for the sole reason of posting wild ramblings in this very thread.

My knees would beg to differ, but I'm sure smeagol knows better.

Don't talk to me about knees. lol.

Well I learnt something today. Apparently it's all about being demoralised and losing momentum - an epic tale of tragedy and heartbreak.

It used to be about the football man.

 

[Firey_Dragon]

Don't talk to me about knees. lol.

Well I learnt something today. Apparently it's all about being demoralised and losing momentum - an epic tale of tragedy and heartbreak.

It used to be about the football man.

Times are a changing. A team is no longer judged on how they bounce back from adversity but if they are flogged, then the opposition are cheats.

It's funny how things like the push in the back on Perrett, the Roosters had a chance to defend that "bad" call yet it took them only one set to concede a try. It's all about momentum, if you let in tries, you lose it.

 

[dice]

Times are a changing. A team is no longer judged on how they bounce back from adversity but if they are flogged, then the opposition are cheats.

It's funny how things like the push in the back on Perrett, the Roosters had a chance to defend that "bad" call yet it took them only one set to concede a try. It's all about momentum, if you let in tries, you lose it.

I wonder if Gasnier try called in-touch and BJ try allowed whether you would have the same opinion... and please don't give me the 26-0 2nd half bs because we all know Saints would have been the ones having to take all the risks with the slippery ball if they were that far behind.

 

[Firey_Dragon]

I wonder if Gasnier try called in-touch and BJ try allowed whether you would have the same opinion... and please don't give me the 26-0 2nd half bs because we all know Saints would have been the ones having to take all the risks with the slippery ball if they were that far behind.

Gasnier's try wasn't a try, nor was Leilua's. I'm not disputing any of that. Both of them were farcical (my opinion wouldn't changed if it were reversed). Both were blatant errors. The rest were judgement calls, that could have gone either way. The Roosters beat themselves, they allowed easy meters and failed to defend their line when they needed to. The errors came as a result of that, nothing more, nothing less.

The Dragon's defensive line let Carney run from sideline to sideline, and he was ineffective as a result.

Both teams got some pretty poor calls, Roosters just let the Dragon's capitalise on them more.

 

[taxidriver]

I wonder if Gasnier try called in-touch and BJ try allowed whether you would have the same opinion... and please don't give me the 26-0 2nd half bs because we all know Saints would have been the ones having to take all the risks with the slippery ball if they were that far behind.

i'm happy to concede Saints got a few favourable calls

but then you got plenty of your own.

if you can't see that well then your either blind or just very bitter

 

[n r l f a n]

omg are the roosters still whinging

 

[bottle]

and please don't give me the 26-0 2nd half

26-0 second half.
Every team in the finals held to nil in the second half by Saints.
At half time the Roosters had had 56% of the ball and completed 15-16 sets to the Saints dozen or so. A good proportion of that was inside Saints' half. Plenty of attacking chances on the line. Saints had made double the errors. They had their chances, but superior defence thwarted them. Same story the whole year, look at the table.
Saints rightful Premiers!!