Another sterling contributionKing-Eliagh wrote:Drac?Raiderdave wrote:Drac wrote:Raiders just lost by 64 points. In a low scoring sport, they lost by 64 points. They aren't a second year team full of rookies. They aren't in an expansion market training out of tin sheds. They lost by SIXTY FOUR POINTS. In contrast GWS lost by less to Collingwood, Essendrug, and Geelong, all top eight teams.
If GWS are toxic, what on Earth are the Raiders? At least the Giants show occassional glimpses of the future. The young talent they have is mind-boggling, and it's often simply their inabilty to run out final quarters that is costing them wins (especially aganst Collingwood and Essendon). The Raiders have no such excuse.![]()
:_<> :_<>
![]()
![]()
![]()
you complete f wit
the Raiders had won their previous 12 games at home in a row
based on the present strike rate for the midgets ... it will take them 6 years just to equal this amount of wins ... AT ALL VENUES![]()
the Raiders have won ten games this year
10 times the number those bumbling orange cockheads have![]()
:_<> :_<>
![]()
the Raiders have beaten the Storm & the ladder leading Roosters this year
the Midgets would not get to within 120 pts of the top few sides in the VFL if those sides were fair dinkum
the Raiders played finals in 2012 are in 7th spot in 2013 with 5 rounds left & may well play finals again in 2013
the Midgets are last .... by a long way .. in the weakest lamest VFL comp in memory
they will be last again in 2014
& will be lucky to avoid get out of the bottom 4 in the next 3 years
but yeah
the 2 sides are comparable![]()
![]()
![]()
:_<> :_<>
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
the retardation
the dribbling outta control .... retardation![]()
:_<> :_<>
![]()
![]()
> What's wrong with you?
