37 replies to this topic

[ParisSurtout]

I m amazed that no one mentioned the absence of Kyle Eastmond, the greatest attacking force in Super League, and Leon Pryce, an effective SL club player, from the St Helens lineup. St Helens were, at the last minute denied the presence of both their halves. The halves, if talented, are the brains behind any team's attack.

How could that loss of first choice halves, especially one as brilliant as Kyle Eastmond, not have had an impact on the result?

Edited by ParisSurtout, 07 August 2010 - 08:37 PM.

[terrywebbisgod]

It's been mentioned in the match thread, with most Leeds supporters saying the outcome would have been different if Pryce and Eastmond were fit.

[Padge]

I m amazed that no one mentioned the absence of Kyle Eastmond, the greatest attacking force in Super League, and Leon Pryce, an effective SL club player, from the St Helens lineup. St Helens were, at the last minute denied the presence of both their halves. The halves, if talented, are the brains behind any team's attack.

How could that loss of first choice halves, especially one as brilliant as Kyle Eastmond, not have had an impact on the result?

What ifs don't win or loose games, the game would have been different if different players were on the pitch, but it would have been different if there was a thunderstorm during the game or if the referee had worn a bucket on his head.

Leeds could have won by more if Eastmond and Pryce where on, who knows.

[terrywebbisgod]

What ifs don't win or loose games, the game would have been different if different players were on the pitch, but it would have been different if there was a thunderstorm during the game or if the referee had worn a bucket on his head.

Leeds could have won by more if Eastmond and Pryce where on, who knows.

Most of PS posts seem to be about "what if's" and "maybes".

[Blackpool Hawk]

Leeds looked 20% fitter than saints for me, and Graham had a shocker!

[goldcard]

I m amazed that no one mentioned the absence of Kyle Eastmond, the greatest attacking force in Super League, and Leon Pryce, an effective SL club player, from the St Helens lineup. St Helens were, at the last minute denied the presence of both their halves. The halves, if talented, are the brains behind any team's attack.

How could that loss of first choice halves, especially one as brilliant as Kyle Eastmond, not have had an impact on the result?

I'm amazed you haven't read the 2 threads.....



TBH, I'm not.

[ParisSurtout]

What ifs don't win or loose games, t he game would have been different if different players were on the pitch, but it would have been different if there was a thunderstorm during the game or if the referee had worn a bucket on his head.

Leeds could have won by more if Eastmond and Pryce where on, who knows.

Having just waded through the muck of your grammatically challenged and spelling impaired comment, I am still struggling to make sense of it.

Leeds could have won by more if Eastmond and Pryce were on? You had better go tell Eamonn McManus and Mick Potter about that insight into the role of playing talent in a game. They could have saved a lot of money and stress had they consulted with you.

It's been mentioned in the match thread, with most Leeds supporters saying the outcome would have been different if Pryce and Eastmond were fit.

Oh Padgy, while you are at it, go tell all the Leeds fans on the match thread about your special insight on the absence of Eastmond and Pryce.

Edited by ParisSurtout, 07 August 2010 - 09:23 PM.

[goldcard]

Having just waded through the muck of your grammatically challenged and spelling impaired comment, I am still struggling to make sense of it.

Leeds could have won by more if Eastmond and Pryce were on? You had better go tell Eamonn McManus and Mick Potter about that insight into the role of playing talent in a game. They could have saved a lot of money and stress had they consulted with you.

Oh dear.
Ed i makes both his annual typo's in 1 post, and you dive in.
You really do only read your own drive and threadsl, and take little notice of what goes on elsewhere.
When 's your curfew up?
Can't be long now.

[ParisSurtout]

Oh dear.
Ed i makes both his annual typo's in 1 post, and you dive in.

Oh dear

Are you the brother of Padge, and are you his keeper?

Padgy actually made four "typos" in that post:

1. "Loose" intead of lose"
2. "where" instead of "were"
3. He failed to start a new second sentence when needed (preferring to emote at a furious pace).
4. He failed to end the last sentence with a question mark.

Maybe he was writing with a bucket over his head?

I'm amazed you haven't read the 2 threads.....

TBH, I'm not.

Since you are the clever one who read both threads, maybe you should address the other substance of my response. Of course that requires you to read everything I wrote in my brief post. Do you have the attention span to do that? (Clue: it's the part that mentions the opinions of Leeds fans on the other thread).

Edited by ParisSurtout, 07 August 2010 - 09:41 PM.

[Padge]

Having just waded through the muck of your grammatically challenged and spelling impaired comment, I am still struggling to make sense of it.

Leeds could have won by more if Eastmond and Pryce were on? You had better go tell Eamonn McManus and Mick Potter about that insight into the role of playing talent in a game. They could have saved a lot of money and stress had they consulted with you.



Oh Padgy, while you are at it, go tell all the Leeds fans on the match thread about your special insight on the absence of Eastmond and Pryce.

At least intelligence is my default mode, yours appears to be fekwit.

[ParisSurtout]

At least intelligence is my default mode, yours appears to be fekwit.

Glad that Brother Goldcard got you up off the couch.

If that is the entire substance of your response, then I can just declare victory and go home.

Thanks.

Edited by ParisSurtout, 07 August 2010 - 09:50 PM.

[Padge]

Glad that Brother Goldcard got you up off the couch.

If that is the entire substance of your response, then I can just declare victory and go home.

Thanks.

You've got some front, I'll give you that, having a go at my response after the pathetic response you gave earlier.

Fekwit was being kind to you.

[Riversiderontour]

Glad that Brother Goldcard got you up off the couch.

If that is the entire substance of your response, then I can just declare victory and go home.

Thanks.

my word
you would think someone this shockingly arrogant would have a display picture to match.

I cant wait for the Dresden Pheonix RLFC thread, One would assume the OP will disappear "toute de suite"

[Wilderspoolmemories]

Since you are the clever one who read both threads, maybe you should address the other substance of my response. Of course that requires you to read everything I wrote in my brief post. Do you have the attention span to do that? (Clue: it's the part that mentions the opinions of Leeds fans on the other thread).

I know goldcard personally,and I can vouch that he is quite a clever fella and does indeed have the required attention span to read your post. He quite possibly chooses not to though,given that you continually spout complete and utter rubbish! I personally believe your posts should be treated with the complete and utter contempt which they undoubtedly deserve,and goldcard most probably feels the same.

[1976PMJwires]

If
But
Maybe

now add to the list Fekwit

PS go and disappear forever

[JohnM]

Oh dear

Are you the brother of Padge, and are you his keeper?

Padgy actually made four "typos" in that post:

1. "Loose" intead of lose"
2. "where" instead of "were"
3. He failed to start a new second sentence when needed (preferring to emote at a furious pace).
4. He failed to end the last sentence with a question mark.

Maybe he was writing with a bucket over his head?

Since you are the clever one who read both threads, maybe you should address the other substance of my response. Of course that requires you to read everything I wrote in my brief post. Do you have the attention span to do that? (Clue: it's the part that mentions the opinions of Leeds fans on the other thread).

"When someone makes a mistake -- whether it's a spelling error or a spelling flame, a stupid question or an unnecessarily long answer -- be kind about it. If it's a minor error, you may not need to say anything. Even if you feel strongly about it, think twice before reacting. Having good manners yourself doesn't give you license to correct everyone else. If you do decide to inform someone of a mistake, point it out politely, and preferably by private email rather than in public. Give people the benefit of the doubt; assume they just don't know any better. And never be arrogant or self-righteous about it. Just as it's a law of nature that spelling flames always contain spelling errors, notes pointing out Netiquette violations are often examples of poor Netiquette. (S. Virginia, Netiquette.(1997) http://www.albion.co...ok/index.html)"

[goldcard]

Oh dear

Are you the brother of Padge, and are you his keeper?

Padgy actually made four "typos" in that post:

1. "Loose" intead of lose"
2. "where" instead of "were"
3. He failed to start a new second sentence when needed (preferring to emote at a furious pace).
4. He failed to end the last sentence with a question mark.

Maybe he was writing with a bucket over his head?





Since you are the clever one who read both threads, maybe you should address the other substance of my response. Of course that requires you to read everything I wrote in my brief post. Do you have the attention span to do that? (Clue: it's the part that mentions the opinions of Leeds fans on the other thread).

TBH, I try not to read too many of your posts, a bit like Wezza's.
I suspect you're his alter-ego.
BTW, I'm not related to Ed, and live around 170 miles from him.
I make far more typo's than him, it just seemed odd you fly in at a couple of minor ones.
His points were valid, too.

[hindle xiii]

I think this thread should be renamed 'Well done ParisSurtout' for derailing it.

(Shame Lee had a premature cry!)