I don't think we can win but.....

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
John link said:
If we take the attitude like Qld does where no-one expects us to win we might pull off a huge upset.
GO THE EAGLES

I agree.
There are many finals games where the thered hot fave got beat. Manly in 1997 GF, Parrain 2001, Rooters in 2003.

yes, they are grand finals, but they are the royal chokers.they lsot to tigers in 05 and parra beat them in the corresponding game last year when 1st v 8th.

its long odds, but anything can happen.
 
But unfortunately we don't have an Andrew Johns or Ben Kennedy like the Knights had in 2001. Even with our injuries, if we had both of these two players in their prime it would be a different story
 
Moops link said:
But unfortunately we don't have an Andrew Johns or Ben Kennedy like the Knights had in 2001. Even with our injuries, if we had both of these two players in their prime it would be a different story

we have a jamie Lyon and an Anthony watmough though!
 
XX Deleted link said:
[quote author=Moops link=topic=185202.msg292615#msg292615 date=1284019583]
But unfortunately we don't have an Andrew Johns or Ben Kennedy like the Knights had in 2001. Even with our injuries, if we had both of these two players in their prime it would be a different story

we have a jamie Lyon and an Anthony watmough though!
[/quote]

In 2001, BK wasn't on one leg and with all due respect to Jamie Lyon, he is no Andrew Johns.
 
Moops link said:
[quote author=XX Deleted link=topic=185202.msg292618#msg292618 date=1284020076]
[quote author=Moops link=topic=185202.msg292615#msg292615 date=1284019583]
But unfortunately we don't have an Andrew Johns or Ben Kennedy like the Knights had in 2001. Even with our injuries, if we had both of these two players in their prime it would be a different story

we have a jamie Lyon and an Anthony watmough though!
[/quote]

with all due respect to Jamie Lyon, he is no Andrew Johns.
[/quote]
Well maybe we should load Killer up full of disco bicky's then..:)
 
In 2001, BK wasn't on one leg and with all due respect to Jamie Lyon, he is no Andrew Johns.
[/quote]

Yeah your right there. Jamie isn't a drug ****ed idiot is he.
 
Who cares, it is still in the book. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em...It is all about the premiership tally. No one will remember the circumstances in 40 years!
 
Lyon is the greatest centre on the earth today and watmough is a DNA freak we have the cattle to knock the fagons off we just have to believe we can!
 
XX Deleted link said:
Lyon is the greatest centre on the earth today and watmough is a DNA freak we have the cattle to knock the fagons off we just have to believe we can!

Kennedy will always be better than Watmough. In their prime, who would you sign, seriously?
 
bullcrap choc is better than BK, BK was a leader and a motivator, he was the one always putting his hand up and doing the hard yards, he was always consistent and played with passion and pride. I remember watching him play for us and nearly every hit up he wouldd be garantee getting past the advantage line.

There is a reason why in 2006 he was voted in Manlys Dream team selected by MWSE

you will find him on the bench at number 15


Choc full credit to him for his pride and passion but if he had a bit more brains, stable hands and genuine leadership (not just yelling at players and patting them on the back) then maybe one day he could be in that dream team.
 
Choc can hardly walk let alone run and was a shadow of himself on Sunday. Klller limped off and was busted up afterwards. We need Lazarus on Sunday to be any hope!!!
 
The BK Manly had was what, 32-33 ?

Watmough is still only 27 or so, still a long, long way to go in his career
 

Members online

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom