2017 NRL Auckland Nines

Hayne didn't include Jesus in his dream team? #Surprised

filthridden wrote:Hayne didn't include Jesus in his dream team? #Surprised

Feeney is the worst player ive seen all day

Feeney hasn't improved much in the off season.

Knights in general making lots of simple errors. How do the tigers keep losing to them

That Jai Field is something else!! Amazing amount of talent

feeney is close to the worst first grade player I have ever seen. Deadset, when he got bowled by the foot I was laughing, could see it coming a mile away. If the spud ran forward and either caught it on the full or at least attacked the footy he would have got it. I fucking hate the fact that he is getting paid to play rugby league.

The Raiders no names looked good against the Cowboys @archer lulz - Sezer and Austin didnt play at all too
Cows Just short of the biggest winning margin of all time in the 9s against them. haha.

also, ponga looked awesome playing with these cowboys blokes.
will be interesting to see how he goes playing with newcastle's spuds

Pieman wrote:feeney is close to the worst first grade player I have ever seen. Deadset, when he got bowled by the foot I was laughing, could see it coming a mile away. If the spud ran forward and either caught it on the full or at least attacked the footy he would have got it. I fucking hate the fact that he is getting paid to play rugby league.

The Raiders no names looked good against the Cowboys @archer lulz - Sezer and Austin didnt play at all too
Cows Just short of the biggest winning margin of all time in the 9s against them. haha.

Oh, you're still going? Ok, If you insist on being put in your place again I guess I'll oblige. Let me go check the Cowboys vs Raiders Scoreline, it must be startlingly different to any of the teams who have "names" for you to think it helps your argument at all.

Oh ok, so the Raiders lost 35-6, yeah that's a ton more than the 32-11 loss the Dragons copped... good one chuckles, you showed me!

As for the other garbage, i might as well address that here as well.

Pieman wrote:yep I said it was pathetic to not send fg players

You also said the team itself was pathetic, just to be clear.

Pieman wrote:however I never said they wouldnt win a game

Ok you're right, you never explicitly said that. Only that they were the worst team and would come last, my mistake for taking the huge logical leap to that meaning 0 wins. I retract that one.

Pieman wrote:why brings the knights into it? I never said they had a good side? spot on most of their players wouldnt make any other side but At least brown sent some guys that actually play first grade. even so, the knights are hardly the yardstick.

if your argument is - you dont need regular first grade players to win or be successful at the 9's - then the bet should be - the raiders will finish higher than the cowboys in the pool, considering the amount of first grade regulars that green has sent.

in saying that - ive never made an online bet with a stranger on a forum, and I dont really plan on starting now

I didn't think this would require spelling out, but apparently i overestimated you. If you think the Raiders are the worst team sent, surely that means you're expecting the worst results to come from them. I said fine, why not contrast that to any other team, one like the Knights, as you support them and as you said "Brown sent some guys that actually play first grade".

The point I was making was not "you dont need regular first grade players to win or be successful at the 9's - then the bet should be", but that assessing teams based on the number of "guys that actually play first grade" is a pretty silly way to look at it. I mean Mataora and Barnett are both regulars in the Knights team and yet if we had hung on to them they'd likely still be in Mounties, right beside some of the blokes you were knocking.

That's not even starting on whether or not the guys Ricky had available to him (Croker, BJ, Rapana etc. are all recovering from injuries picked up either in the 4 nations or just before) would be better suited to the 9's format than Roache (A Junior All Black) and Cotric (tipped to force his way into the team sometime this year).

I could go on, but I'd be wasting my breath, you wouldn't even put your avatar up, to back up your words...

i actually missed that post until krump pointed it out. As I said in the other thread, Ive never made a "forum bet" and I am not going to start now.

mate the knights were the worst team in the comp last year, they even had 1 win and a draw. Being the worst doest mean you cant jag a win every now and then, which is exactly what the raiders did.

As of right now:
The Raiders have suffered the worse loss this weekend, and it was almost the worst loss in the 4 year history of the nines. They have had the biggest score against them this weekend,  almost had the biggest score in the 4 year history of the nines.

So that means that the terrible team they sent has put on the worst performance in the comp this year so far, and almost the worst performance in the history of the comp. (Ignore the 'almost' stuff if you want tho mate, even though its true, because I am ignoring the "if' these guys played for who ever they would be where ever stuff.)

They are coming second last in their pool, and prob will stay that way, considering that souths side looks like it doesnt want to be there. Even so, the raiders only beat them on the bell because walker gifted them the match. Good on them for winning though, and not having the worst win/loss record in the comp, thats a testament to young blokes having a go.

So to reiterate, as of this moment, the only thing I have said that isnt 100% correct, is that they will come last in their pool. Which they still might, or might not. Raiders play the roosters tomorrow who have looked OK, and souths play the cowboys who have looked amazing, so I would guess that they will end up in the same position by the end of the pool games. If thats how it ends, then good on them, its a massive overachievement for the raiders no names and a massive under achievement for souths. If they lose though, and the bunnies beat the cowboys because the cows have already made the quarters and they rest blokes etc - everything I have said will be right.

soz

Ok, I probably almost understand what it is you are trying to change the argument to now. Raiders are 2nd last in their pool, equal with or better than half of the teams who attended, but you were 100% correct.
You. Nailed. It.

Archer wrote:Ok, I probably almost understand what it is you are trying to change the argument to now. Raiders are 2nd last in their pool, equal with or better than half of the teams who attended, but you were 100% correct.
You. Nailed. It.

Seriously? I havent changed anything.

I said everything besides "they will come last in their pool" is correct. They are coming third in the pool and still may come last, and currently have the worst for and against in the entire comp. They have a terrible side there and have put in the worst performance this weekend and almost put in the worst performance in the history of the comp. I stand by saying that its pathetic of stuart to not send more regular first graders, and even the ones he sent have barely even played.

If the raiders manage to win their game today and make it to the quarters, ill happily admit I was wrong. Hell, if they come third in their pool, which they prob will, I will still admit that they went better than I thought they would (even after putting in the worst performance of the comp and jagging a win because of a bad mistake from souths) But until then, I stand by my prediction of them having the worst team there, and if they come last in their pool, you can eat a hot steaming pile of monkey shit.

Also, how is coming third out of four equal to or better than half of the teams that attend They are equal to every other team coming third, and worse than anyone coming second or first

.

Guys, banter aside, I have more pressing issues.

Sit on my arse in the A/C watching 9's or go to the beach for a dip and a perve?

Pieman wrote:

Also, how is coming third out of four equal to or better than half of the teams that attend They are equal to every other team coming third, and worse than anyone coming second or first  

.

I mean this says it all. Can you really not figure this maths out? 2/4 teams are in a better position then them and 2/4 are in the same position in their group or lower (hint, those coming 3rd are the ones that are the same position, those coming 4th are the ones in a worse position).

bluetige wrote:Guys, banter aside, I have more pressing issues.

Sit on my arse in the A/C watching 9's or go to the beach for a dip and a perve?

press record and beach it my friend

Archer wrote:
I mean this says it all. Can you really not figure this maths out? 2/4 teams are in a better position then them and 2/4 are in the same position in their group or lower (hint, those coming 3rd are the ones that are the same position, those coming 4th are the ones in a worse position).

50% of the comp is in a better position than them.
25% are equal.
25% are worse.

How does that come out as them being equal to or better than half of the teams there, when 50% of the teams are in a better position? If you said, we are in a better position than 1/4 of the teams there and equal to 1/4, I would agree but to say you are better than half the teams there is just wrong when half the teams are ahead of them on their respective tables.
And that is ignoring their competition worst for and against.

Almost had it big fella but you bolded the wrong word. I'm really surprised you have doubled down on this. Once again I'll give you some clues, try bolding the word in between 'equal' and 'better'. Or maybe if I explain it another way it will sink in. Half the teams attending are either in the same position or worse.

but they are not in a position that is equal to or better than half the teams there
they are in a better position than 25%
the same position as 25%
and in a worse position than half the teams there.

so your phrase should have been - we are in a better position than a quarter, equal to a quarter and in a worse position than half the teams there

Someone please get his minder