Bulldogs Lack of Sportmanship

[melon....]

I cant believ the pathetic excuses from Dogs fans. Whats this rubbish about Leeds playing 5 trials? GOOD ON THEM...unlike your rabble they prepared. If The Dogs prepared, or cared for that matter, they would have done an Easts, played a couple of trials and flogged Leeds. But you were outplayed.

Done an Easts?

Didn't Easts choke? Didn't they lose the 2004 Telstra Premiership Grand Final? Didn't they get beaten by *gasp* THE BULLDOGS?

Yeah we choked...how else could the Dogs win??!!!

No poor kid...Im talking doing an Easts by preparing and winning the WCC...you see you didnt do it and we did...thats why i referred to it...I know you cant look past 2004...but guess what Dodge? History is so over rated, and the now is what matters...and now you are not WCCs.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

The main thing that struck me about the game is what a bunch of Michael Hancock's ESL players are (something I've noticed many times before), always writhing and whinging and looking enraged that they've been tackled. Likewise, the commentators (how can anyone possibly claim that they aren't the worst commentators in history?? they are miles worse than Costigan and co) and the crowds piss and moan seemingly every time one of their players is tackled, that there's been a knee, and elbow, or slowing down the play the ball.

 

[RB30DETT]

Leeds club had a trial game 3 days before the WCC with a local non professional team and lost.

 

[loiner81]

Leeds club had a trial game 3 days before the WCC with a local non professional team and lost.

do your research muppet.

leeds play hunslet every year. hunslet are in division 1, they're not amateurs. leeds played 2 first teamers. the rest were academy lads.
leeds were 22-2 up when the first teamers were replaced in the first half. the game was a week before the wcc not 3 days.

leeds are champions of the world. if we had played a full side against hunslet and lost only 3 days prior and then beaten the bulldogs what would that say about your champions??

don't be bitter mate, it was a good game.

 

[loiner81]

ISame thing with the Dogs this year. As Gould said, they hadn't prepared for the match, they hadn't been working on ball skills etc, but rather Fitness. and thats what saw them come home really strong and nearly pinch the game from Leeds.

erm, you do realise this was leeds' first game too?? and the bulldogs had 10 gf players in the team against our very young team???
tony smith's already said IF we win the gf next season he'll be more than happy to take the rhinos down under for the wcc.

wonder what you're excuses would be if we won again.....

That is absolute crap.

You played the London Broncos a week before it.

Leeds as a club had played 5 trials ( academy included )

do you actually know what you're talking about or is someone in the uk feeding you this crap? like i sid before we played hunslet a week before. none of the leeds stars played, it was a run out for the academy lads. a 95% academy team played york a week before that and lost too. about half of leeds first team had a run out on december 26th's annual friendly local match with wakefield trinity.

 

[Southernsaint]

Leeds club had a trial game 3 days before the WCC with a local non professional team and lost.

So how does that make C*nterbury look?? :lol:

Have some respect for Leeds. They were better on the day...

 

[loiner81]

Its funny how people are speaking about the dogs lack of sportsmanship & especially at the end of the game when they knew the game was lost. Well who remembers the grand final last year when the roosters did the exact same thing trying to start a fight when they knew the game was gone. People just jumping on the dogs hating bandwagon, its a physical game we play & of course their's gonna be rough stuff, if you dont like it watch soccer or something else.

i know you're biased mate since you're a dogs fan but come on, anyone who saw that game saw some of the worst spoiler tactics ever witnessed in a rugby league game. IF we'd had russel smith reffing you'd have been down to 10 men by half time. im not saying leeds weren't physical either, both teams were but you've got some very sore losers in that team. especially since they were only treating it as a "warm up" :lol:

 

[loiner81]

Leeds club had a trial game 3 days before the WCC with a local non professional team and lost.

So how does that make C*nterbury look?? :lol:

Have some respect for Leeds. They were better on the day...

thank you southernsaint.

no one's saying leeds at their peak would beat bulldogs at their peak although we'd give it a better shot than the badly selected gb did against the kangaroos. just wish some of you guys weren't such sore losers. i'm actually very gracious in defeat, i have to be i've been a leeds fan for 25 years

 

[ali]

He's right though isn't he? If the NRL champs took the match seriously we would win all the time! But the doggies didn't, Folks catagorically stated that he placed only little importance on this match... last year the panthers sent all their players over, but sent them in cold and without much preparation... The year before, Ricky Stuart had decided he'd had enough of the poms trying to say their teams were better because they usually win the WCC, so he sent the roosters best side and organised 2 warm up matches. The result? The Roosters thrashing St Helens 38-0! It speaks for itself.

I agree Latte.

Roosters where the last team to really give it to them.

Penrith went over, thinking of it as a trial and didn't perform because they hadn't trained specifically for the match. And did not spend enough time there to prepare.

Same thing with the Dogs this year. As Gould said, they hadn't prepared for the match, they hadn't been working on ball skills etc, but rather Fitness. and thats what saw them come home really strong and nearly pinch the game from Leeds.

Every team that has gone over there since when Newcastle won the comp has taken it fairly seriously. Every year it is reported in the paper how serious they are taking it, and how they are going to have a better preparation that the previous year's NRL champ who were beaten. Remember all the stuff about the Dogs and not wearing sunnies to avoid jet lag etc. Check the reports of when Penrith went over, they were taking it very seriously.

And also if you check the reports prior to the Roosters vs St Helens match, you'll see how widely criticised St Helens were for their lack luster preparation. They went into the game on the back of a only one trial, a cross code exhibition game against Sale RU, where only one half of league was played.

This game played pre-season will always be a lottery. To shut up Gould and co, I really hope next year's match is in Aus. I'll be in attendance if its in Sydney.

 

[ali]

i said go bailey once, get over it mate.

he is a thug, he hit someone with a glass over the head, of course hes a thug.

but the dogs were doing it too, it wasnt one sided. i was going for leeds, bailey would smash Matuia.

but i think both should jave been sent for spells all the same.

This is wrong. Can the mods please edit it. Leon Pryce was the player who did something similar to this.

Bailey was sent to gaol for brawling with a lower grade League player and was guilty of kicking him on the ground.

 

[Timmah]

Isn't Chev Walker an ex-convict?

Anywho, loiner and others seem to be debating the fact that we Dogs fans don't agree that Leeds were better (obviously to get a bite I'm guessing). This isn't true, Leeds were the better team until about the 55th minute, then they fell apart and the Dogs put 4 on the board in the final quarter. We let a big lead happen that we shouldn't have and paid that price. Nowhere have I or will I discredit Leeds, they did an excellent job to stay out in front given how strongly we came home.

and melon, once again it's showing that you can't get over the fact that your side was beatn by a better rugby league side on the day. You can rant about the WCC all you like, but you're the jealous and bitter one who's supporting one of the less successful clubs over the last 30 years.
Keep your Clayton's TP and WCC real close merkin, it's all you'll get.

 

[Charge]

Isn't Chev Walker an ex-convict?

Anywho, loiner and others seem to be debating the fact that we Dogs fans don't agree that Leeds were better (obviously to get a bite I'm guessing). This isn't true, Leeds were the better team until about the 55th minute, then they fell apart and the Dogs put 4 on the board in the final quarter. We let a big lead happen that we shouldn't have and paid that price. Nowhere have I or will I discredit Leeds, they did an excellent job to stay out in front given how strongly we came home.

and melon, once again it's showing that you can't get over the fact that your side was beatn by a better rugby league side on the day. You can rant about the WCC all you like, but you're the jealous and bitter one who's supporting one of the less successful clubs over the last 30 years.
Keep your Clayton's TP and WCC real close merkin, it's all you'll get.

Over the last 30 years it is the ESL clubs who have proved the better in the WCC.

 

[Timmah]

Good for them. I'm tearing strips off Easts, IDGAS about how successful the ESL clubs have been - Melon was being a genius and I'm trying to get him to realise what a bitter old chestnut he is.

 

[strong_latte]

I cant believ the pathetic excuses from Dogs fans. Whats this rubbish about Leeds playing 5 trials? GOOD ON THEM...unlike your rabble they prepared. If The Dogs prepared, or cared for that matter, they would have done an Easts, played a couple of trials and flogged Leeds. But you were outplayed.

Done an Easts?

Didn't Easts choke? Didn't they lose the 2004 Telstra Premiership Grand Final? Didn't they get beaten by *gasp* THE BULLDOGS?

They did, but they also went and flogged St Helens 38-0 in the 2003 WCC after getting the shits with pommy morons trying to say their dominance in the WCC means the ESL is better quality than the NRL! Get it?

 

[strong_latte]

Every team that has gone over there since when Newcastle won the comp has taken it fairly seriously. Every year it is reported in the paper how serious they are taking it, and how they are going to have a better preparation that the previous year's NRL champ who were beaten. Remember all the stuff about the Dogs and not wearing sunnies to avoid jet lag etc. Check the reports of when Penrith went over, they were taking it very seriously.

And also if you check the reports prior to the Roosters vs St Helens match, you'll see how widely criticised St Helens were for their lack luster preparation. They went into the game on the back of a only one trial, a cross code exhibition game against Sale RU, where only one half of league was played.

This game played pre-season will always be a lottery. To shut up Gould and co, I really hope next year's match is in Aus. I'll be in attendance if its in Sydney.

So what? The roosters only had 2 warm up matches and neither of them were against credible opposition! St Helens did prepare and weren't able to get any where near easts! On the other hand the Bulldogs were missing the nucluis of their team and still managed to get within 7 points of leeds!

 

[Charge]

I cant believ the pathetic excuses from Dogs fans. Whats this rubbish about Leeds playing 5 trials? GOOD ON THEM...unlike your rabble they prepared. If The Dogs prepared, or cared for that matter, they would have done an Easts, played a couple of trials and flogged Leeds. But you were outplayed.

Done an Easts?

Didn't Easts choke? Didn't they lose the 2004 Telstra Premiership Grand Final? Didn't they get beaten by *gasp* THE BULLDOGS?

They did, but they also went and flogged St Helens 38-0 in the 2003 WCC after getting the sh*ts with pommy morons trying to say their dominance in the WCC means the ESL is better quality than the NRL! Get it?

St Helens are a very stange team. One week they will batter a team, eg they beat Leeds by 50+ in May last year, and then a few months later will loose to the same team by 70 points (against Leeds last July/August time).
They are hot and cold personified.

 

[Timmah]

:evil:

That's one thing that shits me. Refer to it properly.

The WCC played in Feb 2003 was the 2002 WCC (Easts were 2002 WCCs)
The WCC played in Feb 2004 was the 2003 WCC (Wigan (i think) were 2003 WCCs)
The WCC played in Feb 2005 was the 2004 WCC (Leeds were2004 WCCs)

I know it's pedantic but how can a team be WCCs of a given year if it's the only first class competition RL match played since the New Year?

And S_L, what melon seems to be missing is that yes we did lose fairly and were outplayed between minutes 1 and 60. But he's levelling the criticism in such a way that is to bring down Canterbury - a far more successful team since 1980 than his has been.

 

[strong_latte]

Over the last 30 years it is the ESL clubs who have proved the better in the WCC.

How much interest is generated over the WCC in Australia though? Virtually none! There's no hype in the press, barely a word about it in the papers ever after the results are in and public support is virtually nil! The WCC is just there to make the poms feel better about forgetting what it's like to win an ashes series ;-) . You'd think with 4 less teams to fill in their comp that their champs would have had way more deapth than the dogs going in to the match, but even a dogs side that had no Sherwin, Mason, O'Meley, Price and a whole cast of other players that made them so strong in 2004 they still managed to get within just under a converted try of leeds.

 

[Charge]

:evil:

That's one thing that sh*ts me. Refer to it properly.

The WCC played in Feb 2003 was the 2002 WCC (Easts were 2002 WCCs)
The WCC played in Feb 2004 was the 2003 WCC (Wigan (i think) were 2003 WCCs)
The WCC played in Feb 2005 was the 2004 WCC (Leeds were2004 WCCs)

I know it's pedantic but how can a team be WCCs of a given year if it's the only first class competition RL match played since the New Year?

And S_L, what melon seems to be missing is that yes we did lose fairly and were outplayed between minutes 1 and 60. But he's levelling the criticism in such a way that is to bring down Canterbury - a far more successful team since 1980 than his has been.

It was Bradford in 2003, but I agree with what you are saying.

 

[Charge]

Over the last 30 years it is the ESL clubs who have proved the better in the WCC.

How much interest is generated over the WCC in Australia though? Virtually none! There's no hype in the press, barely a word about it in the papers ever after the results are in and public support is virtually nil! The WCC is just there to make the poms feel better about forgetting what it's like to win an ashes series ;-) . You'd think with 4 less teams to fill in their comp that their champs would have had way more deapth than the dogs going in to the match, but even a dogs side that had no Sherwin, Mason, O'Meley, Price and a whole cast of other players that made them so strong in 2004 they still managed to get within just under a converted try of leeds.

It doesn't get mentioned much in Aus cos you rarely win. Country's press often doesn't mention stuff that they are bad at, instead focusing on what they are good at. As Gould says, it makes the NRL look like an inferior comp which is bad for business. Hiding it and playing it down is the best way to protect business interests.