The greatest front row rotation of the salary cap era.

[jonno_knights]

Why does anyone care about a 6 man prop rotation...

Teams typically play with 4 props. And take out one or two props through injury, and that rotation is normally much weaker, and would be the case with Souths if Sam Burgess gets injured.

Also look at the big minute props these days. Graham/Tolman, Hunt/Merrin, Douglas/Myles, Scott/Tamou etc. Teams can easily get away with 3 man prop rotations, and Souths wouldnt even come close.

Bulldogs in 2005 would smash it. Mason, O'Meley, Myles, Asotasi. And Armit + A fence post to make up the 5th and 6th in your quota. Swap Myles for Steve Price, and you have the 2004 pack, which was even better.

 

[M2D2]

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

Laugh all you like Pal. Petro is old, exposed and extremely lazy and is playing busted. I dont rate Luke that highly at all. But Petro is f**king horrific since Origin and playing on past glory.

 

[Silent Knight]

You can expect more threads like this one to appear because the LOL@5(c)uff$ threads no longer serve as an ego check to contain the sheer stupidity of Goldenrod.

Enjoy more pro-Souffs threads in the future LU.

 

[Mr Saab]

Yes alright alright. Now that I've thought about it a bit there are some pretty good prop rotations around now and in the past. Maybe I got this one wrong. It happens. I'm not flawless.

True, you are not flawless...you are just a waste of oxygen

 

[firechild]

I can honestly say as a Knights fan i look back on the 1997 Grand Final game with pride and nostalgia but the trophy itself - na. Half a comp and a drugs scandal to boot - it's a tarnished win for me. The 2001 GF meant much more.

Mucho respect. :thumn

 

[firechild]

Outside of 97, Manly was the only ARL team to win a premiership in the 90s............yeah you had all the good teams :roll:

5 out of the top 8 sides in 1996 were ARL aligned, 6 of the top 10 in 1998 were ARL aligned plus Melbourne who did not compete in 1997. Super League had some real quality. :roll:

 

[dogslife]

You can expect more threads like this one to appear because the LOL@5(c)uff$ threads no longer serve as an ego check to contain the sheer stupidity of Goldenrod.

Enjoy more pro-Souffs threads in the future LU.

You and Muzby need to up your efforts mate

 

[dogslife]

5 out of the top 8 sides in 1996 were ARL aligned, 6 of the top 10 in 1998 were ARL aligned plus Melbourne who did not compete in 1997. Super League had some real quality. :roll:

Brisbane would have still blitzed a combined comp, they basically had half the Australian side in 98

 

[Walt Flanigan]

5 out of the top 8 sides in 1996 were ARL aligned, 6 of the top 10 in 1998 were ARL aligned plus Melbourne who did not compete in 1997. Super League had some real quality. :roll:

That's your argument against Premierships? :lol:

Melbourne were a news limited owned team made up of former Reds and Mariners. Sure as sh*t not an ARL team.

*edit* The 3 worst teams in 96 & 98 were ARL aligned...........add that to your book of irrelevant facts.

 

[Ziggy the God]

* The views expressed in this thread are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, the South Sydney Rabbitohs or the general supporter base.

x2

Bunniesman, how about you get a fork and stick it in a powerpoint.

 

[firechild]

That's your argument against Premierships? :lol:

Melbourne were a news limited owned team made up of former Reds and Mariners. Sure as sh*t not an ARL team.

You're claiming that Sewer League was a superior competition. 1) Melbourne weren't part of it so that argument is moot, noone is claiming they weren't SL aligned. 2) the ARL had a better spread of talent which shows by the fact they made up more finals places before and after 1997.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

You're claiming that Sewer League was a superior competition. 1) Melbourne weren't part of it so that argument is moot, noone is claiming they weren't SL aligned. 2) the ARL had a better spread of talent which shows by the fact they made up more finals places before and after 1997.

1) No I didn't. I said that SL had the best teams.

2) Fine......take Melbourne out and the ARL still only have 1 premiership outside 97.

3) Better spread of talent? Why were bottom 3 in 96 & 98 all ARL teams?

 

[firechild]

1) No I didn't. I said that SL had the best teams.

2) Fine......take Melbourne out and the ARL still only have 1 premiership outside 97.

3) Better spread of talent? Why were bottom 3 in 96 & 98 all ARL teams?

1) Best team...maybe...Manly dominated the 2 seasons prior to 1997 and would have continued to do so had it not been for SL tearing out some key players. Brisbane were lucky they weren't affected like some other clubs were. Outside of Brisbane who were the best teams? Cronulla? Hardly, Canberra? they didn't do much before or after SL.

2) Penrith winning a premiership in 1991 doesn't make them a good team in 1997. Likewise Canberra were a shadow of there former selves by 1997. They won nothing after 1994.

3) Better spread because Brisbane were the only truly quality side in SL, they were always going to win in 1997 with the likes of Manly and St George removed as competition.

 

[Loudstrat]

Because Hunter, Adelaide and Perth were punted :lol:

If Traitor League was so good, how come PNG did better in the nines? :lol: @ Simon Gillies playing for Australia

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Because Hunter, Adelaide and Perth were punted :lol:

If Traitor League was so good, how come PNG did better in the nines? :lol: @ Simon Gillies playing for Australia

Yeah the 1997 ARL Test Matches were awesome :sarcasm:

 

[Walt Flanigan]

1) Best team...maybe...Manly dominated the 2 seasons prior to 1997 and would have continued to do so had it not been for SL tearing out some key players. Brisbane were lucky they weren't affected like some other clubs were. Outside of Brisbane who were the best teams? Cronulla? Hardly, Canberra? they didn't do much before or after SL.

2) Penrith winning a premiership in 1991 doesn't make them a good team in 1997. Likewise Canberra were a shadow of there former selves by 1997. They won nothing after 1994.

3) Better spread because Brisbane were the only truly quality side in SL, they were always going to win in 1997 with the likes of Manly and St George removed as competition.

You do realise that St George finished 10th in 1997? In a comp with 12 teams? Yeah they would have put Brisbane to the sword!

You seem to be ignoring the Bulldogs who won the thing in 95. Played in the 94, 95 and 98 Grand Finals and took out the minor premiership in 93 and 94.

I'll pay that Canberra disappeared post Super League........but prior? No way.

 

[juanfarkall]

A little surprised that nobody has mentioned the fact that Dunniesman is already talking about next season.
Normally talking about next season is the domain of those whose season has effectively ended, not those whose team has a fair chance of making the 4 this season.

Does this mean that Dunniesman has already given up on the Rabbits for 2012 ?

 

[Vic Mackey]

I don't think souths will lose another game in my lifetime

 

[Lambretta]

Enough is enough

This thread is proof that BM is nothing more than a f**king troll whose sole task is to get people to hate Souths.

I'm f**king sick to death of him, his stupid threads and his utterly pointless need to make every conversation about him and his useless opinions on South Sydney.

Please moderators - ban the f**king turd permanently.

 

[dogslife]

If only being universally unpopular were enough to get banned