Dragon Fanatic said:
Carlnz ripped me hard with stats i'll concede.
Well done. Shame you couldn't manage it before digging deeper.
Dragon Fanatic said:
You implied that because the Lions won it was good for the game, not because it was closely contested.
Now you're putting words into my mouth. lol... you really should cut your losses.
This is what I said, and I'll say it again... try and read it this time:
It goes without saying that the closer the big three (that's GB, NA and Aust in case you're wondering) get on the football field, the better it will be for the international game.
Its not rocket science.
I believe a close competition is a good competition... got it yet?
And
from that standpoint the result is good for the game - that being the bit you've latched onto and completely misinterpreted.
Try and look at the entire Test match arena and not this single game, and you may be able to comprehend my meaning.
Dragon Fanatic said:
The quality was poor please concede that because that my friends is fact.
LOL! @ the 'buddy' and 'friends' stuff.
Its a bit hard to concede when you've got nothing. Your notion of 'fact' has already been discredited.
It was good game, a tense encounter with some entertaining plays. The poms were deserving winners and finished the stronger of the two teams.
If you want to be miserable about it, that's your problem.