Knights V's Goosters. MOM, FTS, Final Score.

[princessjen]

knights 32
goosters 16

FTS - Minichiello (however thats spelt)
MOM - Buderus

say no to a thrashing on live tv!

i missed last weeks game, why is carmont on the bench???

 

[keeney]

cos, hages is being stupid

 

[MC DUI]

say no to a thrashing on live tv!

I hate to be picky but the game isn't live.

 

[eddo]

Roosters 28 Knights 6
MOM Fittler
FTS GEEEEOOORRGGE

whoops, I see Matt has already called that score, make it 29/6 (Halftime field goal)

 

[~bedsy~]

Knights 16-14
FTS: Tahu
MOM: Danny

 

[Sweeper]

MOM - Fitter
FTS - Tahu

Roosters -54
Kinghts -6
_________________

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

Score-Goosters-44
knights-6
Fts-wing
Mom-Fittler
Gidley-Johns-Abraham-Kennedy-Simpson-Woolnough-Parsons
ennis NOt at 5/8 for lpng kicks
Their best vs Our best is a hell of a game but we just might have to settle for 'Do your best boys" and face Manly next week and move on from here.

 

[Misanthrope]

Score: Sydney 38 12
FTS: Ryan Cross
MoM: Brad Fittler :evil:

 

[ozzie]

Newcastle 20-18 in a hard fought battle - I think our SOO players will be a bit sick and sorry if not carrying injuries

 

[Doctor]

Some very good predictions this week.
Most people either picked a close Knights' win, or a Roosters' blow-out -- the latter eventuated.

Depending on whether a close scoreline is the best prediction, or whether the margin wins -- I've decided that a two-point difference is good enough.

The winner: Greg_Smith (50-4) -- very close to the 48-4 actual scoreline.

Highly honourable mentions to:

Sweeper (54-6) -- added an extra try
Antonius (48-2) -- didn't account for a try
Earl (46-4) -- very honourable mention here -- could have a case for a tied winner.
Also:

MC Dui (44-2)
Holla (44-6)

Did I miss anyone? These are my thoughts anyway -- you may decide to award duel winners, or change the preference on whether it's the closest score, or whether a correct margin wins the prize.

 

[les norton]

Is it a rule that it must go to a knights fan?

 

[thuganomics]

I think so, Im sure one of the cowboys fans would of got it last week.

 

[eddo]

Can I suggest a slightly more formalised rating system, say:
2 points for correctly picking the winner
1 point for correctly picking the margin.
1 point for each of the correct scores (= total 5 for getting it exact)
1 point for FTS
1 point for MOM.

In the quite offen event no one picks it, maybe
1 point for closest margin
1/2 point for closest score for each team.......

Ahhhh! stuff it. this is too techo! :?
Just keep doing what you're doing

 

[Doctor]

Can I suggest a slightly more formalised rating system, say:
2 points for correctly picking the winner
1 point for correctly picking the margin.
1 point for each of the correct scores (= total 5 for getting it exact)
1 point for FTS
1 point for MOM.

In the quite offen event no one picks it, maybe
1 point for closest margin
1/2 point for closest score for each team.......

Ahhhh! stuff it. this is too techo! :?
Just keep doing what you're doing

Good idea -- provided there is a designated referee each week. I can't be bothered doing the maths, but for this week I'd like to think that the list of contenders I've provided already would be a good guide for the winner, given that no-one correctly picked the first try or MOTM (who was the MOTM anyway?).

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

Congrats Greg!
50-4 was a gutsy pick.....maybe not

 

[antonius]

Oswin how is 50-4 closer than 48-2??
Not sour grapes or anything, just a question.
Congrats Greg Smith I'll pm the banner to you

 

[Greg Smith]

Thank You, for this prestigious award. I usually predict some stupid score to get a rise out of some of you guys. But this week i was actually serious, and i hate see how close i was.

 

[Doctor]

Oswin how is 50-4 closer than 48-2??

Quite simply, it accounts for a try by the Knights. By my reckoning, a 50-4 scoreline is more accurate -- but you're welcome to intervene Tony. I'm not the judge -- just throwing my two cents worth into the thread [ching ching].

 

[antonius]

50-4 is a goal too many. ;-) Both tips are incorrect by two points, as is Earls 46-4. :?