Talking Footy

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Looks like the Wanderers are smashing plenty of western Sydney nRL teams as well as the pathetic arse Raiders. After all this is soccer and rl heartland isn't it?

the youngest Western NRL side is Penrith , & they are 46 years old
impossible to make a comparison between the first year of one side & the 46th of another isn't it ....

however we do have 2 sides in their first year to look at don't we *********** ?
how are they stacking up against each other ?

according to eels the wanderers are better than any team below them on any other competitions ladder.

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Looks like the Wanderers are smashing plenty of western Sydney nRL teams as well as the pathetic arse Raiders. After all this is soccer and rl heartland isn't it?

the youngest Western NRL side is Penrith , & they are 46 years old
impossible to make a comparison between the first year of one side & the 46th of another isn't it ....

Wow Penrif really must be in trouble then

Wanderers > Penrif

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Looks like the Wanderers are smashing plenty of western Sydney nRL teams as well as the pathetic arse Raiders. After all this is soccer and rl heartland isn't it?

the youngest Western NRL side is Penrith , & they are 46 years old
impossible to make a comparison between the first year of one side & the 46th of another isn't it ....

however we do have 2 sides in their first year to look at don't we *********** ?
how are they stacking up against each other ?

according to eels the wanderers are better than any team below them on any other competitions ladder.

no
read the title of this thread cock brain
then look at the table displayed by eels
then read my post above

then give yrself an uppercut .... in that order

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

the youngest Western NRL side is Penrith , & they are 46 years old
impossible to make a comparison between the first year of one side & the 46th of another isn't it ....

however we do have 2 sides in their first year to look at don't we *********** ?
how are they stacking up against each other ?

according to eels the wanderers are better than any team below them on any other competitions ladder.

no
read the title of this thread cock brain
then look at the table displayed by eels
then read my post above

then give yrself an uppercut .... in that order

every team in the history of sport has cycled up and down in performance and results. The Wanderers started well and the Giants poorly. In 5 years time this could be completely the opposite. It means absolutely nothing thats why his OP is BS.

Stewie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Looks like the Wanderers are smashing plenty of western Sydney nRL teams as well as the pathetic arse Raiders. After all this is soccer and rl heartland isn't it?

the youngest Western NRL side is Penrith , & they are 46 years old
impossible to make a comparison between the first year of one side & the 46th of another isn't it ....

Wow Penrif really must be in trouble then

Wanderers > Penrif

if the wanderers spend most of the next 45 years closer to the bottom of A league tables then the top , like Penrith have in the NRL
& are averaging well over 11,000 fans
then your dribble may have some validity

but until then
lets keep it at 2 sides in their first year , in the same city ... in the same part of that city .. in the same year
& how they're stacking up against each other ... K dick wad ?

verdict

Wanderers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seriously its embarrasing how much they are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

the Midgets

Parra stadium finally has seen some success this season and the mob with this success still can't fill the joint.

Currently the WSW are averaging around the number of eels memberships sold so far for the 20XIII season.

We fans of the squeals are doomed aren't we?

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

the youngest Western NRL side is Penrith , & they are 46 years old
impossible to make a comparison between the first year of one side & the 46th of another isn't it ....

Wow Penrif really must be in trouble then

Wanderers > Penrif

if the wanderers spend most of the next 45 years closer to the bottom of A league tables then the top , like Penrith have in the NRL
& are averaging well over 11,000 fans
then your dribble may have some validity

but until then
lets keep it at 2 sides in their first year , in the same city ... in the same part of that city .. in the same year
& how they're stacking up against each other ... K dick wad ?

verdict

Wanderers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seriously its embarrasing how much they are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

the Midgets

what rubbish

the A league put together a better team on the field. Big deal. In 5 years time itll be completely different

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

according to eels the wanderers are better than any team below them on any other competitions ladder.

no
read the title of this thread cock brain
then look at the table displayed by eels
then read my post above

then give yrself an uppercut .... in that order

every team in the history of sport has cycled up and down in performance and results. The Wanderers started well and the Giants poorly. In 5 years time this could be completely the opposite. It means absolutely nothing thats why his OP is BS.

so is the title of this thread in the here & now ... not accurate ?
simple question

answer it ...

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Wow Penrif really must be in trouble then

Wanderers > Penrif

if the wanderers spend most of the next 45 years closer to the bottom of A league tables then the top , like Penrith have in the NRL
& are averaging well over 11,000 fans
then your dribble may have some validity

but until then
lets keep it at 2 sides in their first year , in the same city ... in the same part of that city .. in the same year
& how they're stacking up against each other ... K dick wad ?

verdict

Wanderers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seriously its embarrasing how much they are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

the Midgets

what rubbish
In 5 years time itll be completely different

what marcus was doing when posting this ...... [-o< [-o< [-o< [-o<

geez
what if yr wrong ?

I mean your predictions have been so accurate to date

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

no
read the title of this thread cock brain
then look at the table displayed by eels
then read my post above

then give yrself an uppercut .... in that order

every team in the history of sport has cycled up and down in performance and results. The Wanderers started well and the Giants poorly. In 5 years time this could be completely the opposite. It means absolutely nothing thats why his OP is BS.

so is the title of this thread in the here & now ... not accurate ?
simple question

answer it ...

For on field performance? Sure. As it is for 7 other a league teams, 10 AFL teams, 8 NRL teams, 8 NBA teams

When they began is irrelevant.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

but but but

Marcus
taking failure to new levels

are you sure youve responded to the correct post Dave? Where s the 'but' in that post?

Dave, taking stupidity to new depths...

well at times its hard to remember which of you f wits is ... derping it up with mind boggling stupidity
but no this one is yours
all yours
enjoy

The stupidity of these gimps knows no bounds raider..............

12112 Pax for the Sunday Wanderers vs Mariners game as of Friday night.

Wanderers------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Midgets...........

eelofwest wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

are you sure youve responded to the correct post Dave? Where s the 'but' in that post?

Dave, taking stupidity to new depths...

well at times its hard to remember which of you f wits is ... derping it up with mind boggling stupidity
but no this one is yours
all yours
enjoy

The stupidity of these gimps knows no bounds raider..............

says the guy who compares teams performances from completely different competitions

eelofwest wrote:

12112 Pax for the Sunday Wanderers vs Mariners game as of Friday night.

Wanderers------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Midgets...........

what is the largest crowd the Wanderers have played in front of this year?

Seems to me the Giants first game drew 38k =D>

Giants >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wanderers

Xman wrote:

eelofwest wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

well at times its hard to remember which of you f wits is ... derping it up with mind boggling stupidity
but no this one is yours
all yours
enjoy

The stupidity of these gimps knows no bounds raider..............

says the guy who compares teams performances from completely different competitions