Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Teen-Gu » Mon, 09 Jun 1997 04:00:00


Canberra 70 Halifax 06

Adelaide 50 Salford 08

Say no more.

Ashley Klein

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8623/sleague.htm

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Paul McNal » Mon, 09 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

>Canberra 70 Halifax 06

>Adelaide 50 Salford 08

>Say no more.

>Ashley Klein

>http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8623/sleague.htm

Dunno about the Fax game but I wasn't happy with the Reds performance.
16-8 down with 58 mins gone you expect more in the last 20....

One way traffic after  that but I thought we were growing in
confidence until then...

Walters had a fine game but Adelaide are far from the best team we've
played this year yet we come up with that result.

Be different at Salford I'm telling you. The team doesn't seem to have
confidence away from home any more.

Paul

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Colin Franc » Tue, 10 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

>Canberra 70 Halifax 06

>Adelaide 50 Salford 08

>Say no more.

>Ashley Klein

>http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8623/sleague.htm

Even the Warriors (That great multiracial team of inferior league
palyers) thrashed St Helens.  hell it must be like playing and under
age team when playing against the pom teams.
****Remove NOSPAM from my address when replying******
Neurotics build dream castles, psychotics live in them
and psychiatrists collect the rent.

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Michael Burk » Tue, 10 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Quote:


>>Canberra 70 Halifax 06

<Snipt>

Quote:
>Dunno about the Fax game but I wasn't happy with the Reds performance.
>16-8 down with 58 mins gone you expect more in the last 20....

It's hard to be positive about the Halifax game.  The best I can say
is that it was fun to watch from a narrow Raiders' fan perspective.
It told us nothing about the Raiders that we didn't already know.  On
their day they are capable of doing that to all but the best
Australian teams if the opposition drops their defensive guard.  It's
just that we haven't seen much of it so far this year, what with
injuries and lack of form.

With the ball in their hands, Halifax looked like a reasonable team at
times.  However, they didn't have it in the Raiders' half of the field
often enough, or have sufficient attacking skills, to offset their
incredibly awful defence.  They were a tad unlucky not to score
another once or twice, but then so were the Raiders.  

Furner had an off day with the boot or the score would have been even
more embarrassing, as it undoubtedly would also have been if Daley,
Mullins and Nadruku had been playing.  If you reckon Stuart & co
putting Nagas through yawning gaps in the defence got to be a bit of a
bore in the end, imagine the outcome with two other equally effective
attacking options to go with, with Daley to direct traffic on the
other side of the field.

Quote:
>Walters had a fine game but Adelaide are far from the best team we've
>played this year yet we come up with that result.

>Be different at Salford I'm telling you. The team doesn't seem to have
>confidence away from home any more.

Well, jet-lag and hubris will be a factor working against the
Australian teams, no doubt about that, but don't bet your hard-earned
on the the home side, whoever they are.  

I didn't see any of the other games, but if Halifax are even slightly
competitive in the British competition, then Rugby League in the UK
(and, hence, everywhere else) is in deep do-do.

Mike
************************************************************************
Mike Burke


Compuserve: 100351,2307
(Replies by email: delete "spambuster")
************************************************************************

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Paul McNal » Tue, 10 Jun 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

>Even the Warriors (That great multiracial team of inferior league
>palyers) thrashed St Helens.  hell it must be like playing and under
>age team when playing against the pom teams.

Piss off. Salford and Wigan both thrashed St Helens. they're having a
bad patch...

Your results against our bottom 2 (Cas & Paris) in England were hardly
convincing were they?

Paul

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Steve Morri » Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>> >Even the Warriors (That great multiracial team of inferior league
>> >palyers) thrashed St Helens.  hell it must be like playing and under
>> >age team when playing against the pom teams.

>>***off. Salford and Wigan both thrashed St Helens. they're having a
>> bad patch...

>> Your results against our bottom 2 (Cas & Paris) in England were hardly
>> convincing were they?

>No, our teams saved that for the games against your top sides, as has
>been shown with the weekend's scores. Oh, and yes, we know Wigan beat
>Canterbury. We just hate Canterbury as we much as Wigan to care for it.

>avery

Your teams saved that for the top sides????

So can we assume the following results reflect the differences between
the strength of RL in the three countries?

Our top five sides

Bradford first: Lost to a last minute try after dominating the whole
second half.

Leeds second: Still a developing side, Leeds do play badly from time to
time. London beat them 40-16 a few weeks ago

Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
lesson.

London fourth: Despite a penalty count of 9:2 and a forward pass on the
third try London lost by 20 points at Brisbane; a smaller margin than
some of the ASL teams have done.  

Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
the Kiwi's are not your team.

Steve Morris

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Paul Matthe » Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:00:00

On Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:12:12 +0100, Steve Morris

Quote:

>Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
>instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
>lesson.

What was the oft repeated phrase "Eric Highes can't coach defence"?

Paul Matthews
http://www.triton.u-net.com

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Henry F Franci » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Bradford first: Lost to a last minute try after dominating the whole
> second half.

> Leeds second: Still a developing side, Leeds do play badly from time to
> time. London beat them 40-16 a few weeks ago

> Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
> instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
> lesson.

> London fourth: Despite a penalty count of 9:2 and a forward pass on the
> third try London lost by 20 points at Brisbane; a smaller margin than
> some of the ASL teams have done.

> Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
> Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
> the Kiwi's are not your team.

> Steve Morris

Gee, it's just all positive stuff for the losing sides isn't it?.
The only team who deserved their win was Wigan,What a one eyed ***ER.
 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Henry F Franci » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> On Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:12:12 +0100, Steve Morris

> >Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
> >instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
> >lesson.

> What was the oft repeated phrase "Eric Highes can't coach defence"?

> Paul Matthews
> http://www.triton.u-net.com


It really should be said that Canberra and Adelaide thrashed Halifax and
Salford,not the poms.
Whatever the outcome the Aussie influence is the winner.
 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Henry F Franci » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Bradford first: Lost to a last minute try after dominating the whole
> second half.

> Leeds second: Still a developing side, Leeds do play badly from time to
> time. London beat them 40-16 a few weeks ago

> Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
> instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
> lesson.

> London fourth: Despite a penalty count of 9:2 and a forward pass on the
> third try London lost by 20 points at Brisbane; a smaller margin than
> some of the ASL teams have done.

> Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
> Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
> the Kiwi's are not your team.

> Steve Morris

But a pommy team full of aussies is english.(another one eyed
statement.)The Paul Brothers are poms I suppose.
Kiwis cheer for the weaklings for one reason,you know,we all know.
 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Greg Pankhur » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00


:Your teams saved that for the top sides????
:
:So can we assume the following results reflect the differences between
:the strength of RL in the three countries?
:
:Our top five sides
:
:
:Bradford first: Lost to a last minute try after dominating the whole
:second half.

They lost to the 4th placed team who are struggling with injuries....

:Leeds second: Still a developing side, Leeds do play badly from time to
:time. London beat them 40-16 a few weeks ago

Got thrashed by the 9th placed team (26-0 after 30 minutes)........go the
Cowboys :-)

:Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
:instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
:lesson.

To me Canterbury lost the game thru shithouse handling and poor last play
options.....they didn't have any problem what so ever in making
yards.....Wigan deserved the win definitely though.....Canberra & Brisbane
will give them a touch up

:London fourth: Despite a penalty count of 9:2 and a forward pass on the
:third try London lost by 20 points at Brisbane; a smaller margin than
:some of the ASL teams have done.  

Why didn't you mention the 2 lucky tries London scored ? (ie. Lockyer
failing to secure the ball and the strip on Lazarus, which should have gone
back to the initial knock-on).....in the wash up though they were no where
near Brisbane

:Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
:Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
:the Kiwi's are not your team.

This is the best arguement you can form ??? My only comment is Auckland
currently run last in the Telstra cup.....

The bottom line is the European teams are on for a ***....couldn't
happen to a nicer lot of people :-)

Greg
_____________________________________________________________________

PhD Student                                   Phone: + 61 2 9351 3905
Biochemistry Department                         Fax: + 61 2 9351 4726
University of Sydney  NSW 2006  Australia
_____________________________________________________________________
 "I would rather inject human faeces into my own eyeball rather than
  listen to this band"                       Reviewer, Rolling Stone
_____________________________________________________________________

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Henry F Franci » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00

:some of the ASL teams have done.

Quote:

> Why didn't you mention the 2 lucky tries London scored ? (ie. Lockyer
> failing to secure the ball and the strip on Lazarus, which should have gone
> back to the initial knock-on).....in the wash up though they were no where
> near Brisbane

That would be unbiased Greg,you do not use that word and Steve Morris in
the same sentence.
Quote:
> :Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
> :Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
> :the Kiwi's are not your team.

> This is the best arguement you can form ??? My only comment is Auckland
> currently run last in the Telstra cup.....

> The bottom line is the European teams are on for a ***....couldn't
> happen to a nicer lot of people :-)

> Greg
> _____________________________________________________________________

> PhD Student                                   Phone: + 61 2 9351 3905
> Biochemistry Department                         Fax: + 61 2 9351 4726
> University of Sydney  NSW 2006  Australia
> _____________________________________________________________________
>  "I would rather inject human faeces into my own eyeball rather than
>   listen to this band"                       Reviewer, Rolling Stone
> _____________________________________________________________________

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Steve Morri » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
>:some of the ASL teams have done.

>> Why didn't you mention the 2 lucky tries London scored ? (ie. Lockyer
>> failing to secure the ball and the strip on Lazarus, which should have gone
>> back to the initial knock-on).....in the wash up though they were no where
>> near Brisbane

>That would be unbiased Greg,you do not use that word and Steve Morris in
>the same sentence.

Go on Greg together we (us Aussies) can show these (them) poms.

--
Steve Morris

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Steve Morri » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>> Bradford first: Lost to a last minute try after dominating the whole
>> second half.

>> Leeds second: Still a developing side, Leeds do play badly from time to
>> time. London beat them 40-16 a few weeks ago

>> Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
>> instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
>> lesson.

>> London fourth: Despite a penalty count of 9:2 and a forward pass on the
>> third try London lost by 20 points at Brisbane; a smaller margin than
>> some of the ASL teams have done.

>> Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
>> Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
>> the Kiwi's are not your team.

>> Steve Morris

>Gee, it's just all positive stuff for the losing sides isn't it?.
>The only team who deserved their win was Wigan,What a one eyed ***ER.

Ooh getting a bit hot in the kitchen? ooh getting a bit hot under the
collar?

Why not get your son on line, perhaps he can explain how to use your
newsreader. I think you would enjoy the whole experience more if you
understood the concept of debate. I make a point you add your views,
someone else says what they think, so on and so forth.

Why debate when you can use big words like ***er, in capitals so we all
see it. Anarchy in the Southern Hemisphere...its exciting, life must be
spot on in Alice Springs if writing ***er in capitals is how you get
being thrown out of the UK out of your system.

Or wait don't tell me your son did it!!!! as you both use the same ID
and email address and sig file how can we tell?  

Still, HEY JUDE

Steve Morris

 
 
 

Canberra and Adelaide thrash the Poms

Post by Steve Morri » Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>> Bradford first: Lost to a last minute try after dominating the whole
>> second half.

>> Leeds second: Still a developing side, Leeds do play badly from time to
>> time. London beat them 40-16 a few weeks ago

>> Wigan third: Played a purely defensive game, stifled all their attacking
>> instincts and despite a close scoreline gave Canterbury a defensive
>> lesson.

>> London fourth: Despite a penalty count of 9:2 and a forward pass on the
>> third try London lost by 20 points at Brisbane; a smaller margin than
>> some of the ASL teams have done.

>> Saints fifth: beaten by a Kiwi not an Aussie side, given that the
>> Warriors cheer for pom teams over Aussie teams I think we can say that
>> the Kiwi's are not your team.

>> Steve Morris

>But a pommy team full of aussies is english.(another one eyed
>statement.)The Paul Brothers are poms I suppose.
>Kiwis cheer for the weaklings for one reason,you know,we all know.

MMMM

three postings to this part of the thread?

Busy night again?

Exciting life?

"Kiwi's cheer for weaklings," strange use of the word weaklings, pommie
teams may be ***but are rarely physically weak or bottlers, this is a
very revealing word when used out of context. It tells me (and probably
everyone else on the group) a lot!

Is this how it goes?

" I'm not a weak pommie I'm a real Aussie, just to prove how much of an
Aussie I am I'll show you that I hate pommies even more than real
Aussies"

If kiwi's always cheered weaklings wouldn't it provide a dilemma for
them when they played Aussie teams at RU? We are kiwi's but we always
cheer for the weaklings, so do we cheer for the kiwi's or the aussie's?

You make a lot of sweeping generalisations about whole nations kiwi's
poms, why not try to actually understand the posting that you reply to
before you post.

Your latest effort is almost incomprehensible

"

Quote:
>But a pommy team full of aussies is english.(another one eyed
>statement.)The Paul Brothers are poms I suppose.
>Kiwis cheer for the weaklings for one reason,you know,we all know.

"

But a pommie team full of aussies is English??? statement or question??

Are you saying that ESL players are in large part Australian and
therefore the ESL teams are Australian? Is your hypothetical statement
(or question) a one eyed statement?

As tedious as it is for me to point out the incredible number of factual
errors in your postings there are just too many to ignore. It would be
churlish for me to criticise your use of grammer and puntuation (9
errors in the above three lines).

Someone should tell you that both the Paul brothers are eligible to play
for England? Perhaps that's the point you were making?

Who knows, GET BACK to the point.

--
Steve Morris