The trouble with St. George Illawarra

[muzby]

Mate, it’s actually the reason that I’m not in here as much(plenty are probably happy about it).
My attitude is sports teams are like Ponzi schemes. You put money, emotion & hope in the belief you’ll get something out of it. Reality is you get a few crumbs that keep you holding out for more.

That’s not how a Ponzi scheme works at all..

 

[SBD82]

And where does the 1990s finish using this premise?

December 31, 1999, at 23:59:59.

 

[SBD82]

Point one is paradoxical to point 2.

So... an excellent summary of the thread then?

 

[SBD82]

Mate, it’s actually the reason that I’m not in here as much(plenty are probably happy about it).

No one in here is happy about anything ATM. And if they were, it wouldn't be about that.

 

[st penguin]

Point one is paradoxical to point 2.

It’s like trying argue with Zoolander

 

[muzby]

It’s like trying argue with Zoolander

Is that because he’s really really really really really really really really really

 

[getsmarty]

After reading another journalistic masterpiece by the Illawarra Mercury, it occurred to me that we have a coach who does not have a true grasp of reality.
To my dismay, this is what I read.
"It’s a scenario that seemed unthinkable even a month ago, but McGregor said his side’s belief hasn’t wavered despite the recent run of outs.

“When you’re going great, probably not going as good as people say, and when you’re going bad, you’re probably not going as bad as people say. That’s how footy works,” McGregor said.

“When you create what we did, we led the comp up until a month ago and we’re the only team that’s been in the top four [all season], I understand the [scrutiny].

“It’s good because we’ve built that. No one else had built it for us, we’ve built in ourselves and we’ve proven to anyone and everyone that we can beat any side. It’s important we finish what we started, and we’re in a position to do that.”

URL Link: https://www.illawarramercury.com.au...ragons-hit-reset-button-ahead-of-final-month/

We are still talking about leading the comp and being in the top 4....
I will avoid posting how I feel but rather open for comment.

Yep , couldn't believe it myself...to answer your title..." IT's an Old Boy's club"...who only seem to be interested in feathering their own nests...........LOL

 

[muzby]

really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really

 

[muzby]

really really really really ridiculously good looking?

 

[muzby]

Bah. Shaking my fist at you getsmarty!

 

[st penguin]

really really really really ridiculously good looking?

Just take off “ly good looking”

 

[getsmarty]

Bah. Shaking my fist at you getsmarty!

Sorry, couldn't help myself...

 

[getsmarty]

Pearls of wisdom

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/08/11/dragons-regroup-in-terrigal/

For those who missed it..........

That's really railroaded it...

 

[Willow]

Nothing happened to 1 AD. 1 AD to 9 AD wasn't a decade, it was only 9 years.

Ergo... 1 AD to 10 AD is a decade.

 

[Crush]

Pearls of wisdom

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/08/11/dragons-regroup-in-terrigal/

For those who missed it..........

That's really railroaded it...

He really is frustrating isn't he....

 

[Willow]

But we don’t talk about the 1990’s as the 190th decade.. it’s referred to colloquially as the 10 years that start in 1990

Just an excerpt from your wonderful post, but since when does colloquial reference become mathematical fact?

I get there was no year 0.. and I fully agree that 2000 was in the 20th century..

But we don’t talk about the 1990’s as the 190th decade.. it’s referred to colloquially as the 10 years that start in 1990.. if we did refer to decades as the 190th etc, then yes, 2000

a decade can be any period of 10 years, it all depends on where you start counting from (which in our numerical system, the start point is zero)

Eg a baby isn’t automatically 1 when it is born.. and if that baby was born in 1900, they would enter their 90’s in 1990..


Its all to do with the frame in which you are looking at the numbers.. the year 2000 was the last year of the 20th century, but it’s not a year of the 90’s

It's 90s, not 90's... sorry for being anal about the use of the English language but it kind of goes with the academic territory that you have ventured into.

I totally agree that 10 years can happen over any period, you are spot on there and that's not what I'm arguing. But let's not get that mixed up with the sequential order of the calendar, which is the accepted measure.

You are actually agreeing with me with your baby born analogy when you say, "a baby isn’t automatically 1 when it is born..."

The St George NSWRL first grade team were born in the season of 1921.

1921 was season No. 1
1922 was season No. 2
1923 was season No. 3
1924 was season No. 4
1925 was season No. 5
1926 was season No. 6
1927 was season No. 7
1928 was season No. 8
1929 was season No. 9
and 'lo and behold...
1930 was season No. 10

Our first season in the Big League actually works in well with the year dot. If our first season was in 1 AD, our first decade would conclude at the end of season 10 AD.

Yes... it is footy related.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

It’s like trying argue with Zoolander

Never seen it...no comment.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Just an excerpt from your wonderful post, but since when does colloquial reference become mathematical fact?


It's 90s, not 90's... sorry for being anal about the use of the English language but it kind of goes with the academic territory that you have ventured into.

I totally agree that 10 years can happen over any period, you are spot on there and that's not what I'm arguing. But let's not get that mixed up with the sequential order of the calendar, which is the accepted measure.

You are actually agreeing with me with your baby born analogy when you say, "a baby isn’t automatically 1 when it is born..."

The St George NSWRL first grade team were born in the season of 1921.

1921 was season No. 1
1922 was season No. 2
1923 was season No. 3
1924 was season No. 4
1925 was season No. 5
1926 was season No. 6
1927 was season No. 7
1928 was season No. 8
1929 was season No. 9
and 'lo and behold...
1930 was season No. 10

Our first season in the Big League actually works in well with the year dot. If our first season was in 1 AD, our first decade would conclude at the end of season 10 AD.

Yes... it is footy related.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.

 

[st penguin]

Ergo... 1 AD to 10 AD is a decade.

Just an excerpt from your wonderful post, but since when does colloquial reference become mathematical fact?


It's 90s, not 90's... sorry for being anal about the use of the English language but it kind of goes with the academic territory that you have ventured into.

I totally agree that 10 years can happen over any period, you are spot on there and that's not what I'm arguing. But let's not get that mixed up with the sequential order of the calendar, which is the accepted measure.

You are actually agreeing with me with your baby born analogy when you say, "a baby isn’t automatically 1 when it is born..."

The St George NSWRL first grade team were born in the season of 1921.

1921 was season No. 1
1922 was season No. 2
1923 was season No. 3
1924 was season No. 4
1925 was season No. 5
1926 was season No. 6
1927 was season No. 7
1928 was season No. 8
1929 was season No. 9
and 'lo and behold...
1930 was season No. 10

Our first season in the Big League actually works in well with the year dot. If our first season was in 1 AD, our first decade would conclude at the end of season 10 AD.

Yes... it is footy related.

Yeah agree with all this.

But 2000 still wasn’t in the nineties!

 

[Willow]

Yeah agree with all this.

But 2000 still wasn’t in the nineties!

lol. Never said otherwise mate. But welcome to the 1 AD Club.

At the end of the day, the Earth rotates.

Dim sims are steaming... footy is on soon...