Re: 2016 predictions : Fri Dec 04, 2015 6:34 pm  

Dave K. wrote:

Another great post.

just look at his username, explains all

dont see much in rovers signings to say they will improve on last season

Re: 2016 predictions : Fri Dec 04, 2015 6:48 pm  

number 6 wrote:

We had close results last season being on the wrong side of them, 3 more wins would have seen us top 4, losses teams in the bottom 4 didn't help either

3 of your wins were also by 4 or less points so that logic can go both ways.

Re: 2016 predictions : Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:23 pm  

number 6 wrote:

Finished 7th before the split last season, pack has improved this season, I'd be happy if we get 4th to 6th


We had close results last season being on the wrong side of them, 3 more wins would have seen us top 4, losses teams in the bottom 4 didn't help either

Yeah I see what you meen like if we had won an extra 10 games we would have won the LLS

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 12:54 am  

Dave K. wrote:

Another great post.

Almost as good as yours. Top 4 my ar$e

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 9:41 am  

moto748 wrote:

Agreed. Same goes for people writing Cas off.

I'd be happy to take bets on Hull finishing above either the Giants or Cas.

Warrington, Catalans, and Hull. What do those three have in common, eh?

I don't know what do those three have in common?

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 9:45 am  

1. St Helens
2. Wigan
3. Leeds
4. Warrington
5. Huddersfield
6. Catalans
7. Castleford
8. Hull FC
9. Hull KR
10. Salford
11. Widnes
12. Wakefield

Probably won't be far off, though Cas could finish in top four. in 2016 Warrington are effectively 'starting again' as the all-Brit halfback policy they tried after Briers' s retirement did not work. If the new structure clicks early they could do well, but a lot of new players to bed in at once may lead to disappointment.

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 9:52 am  

SirStan wrote:

3 of your wins were also by 4 or less points so that logic can go both ways.

But we won those games so it doesn't really. The games ww list v cas away for instance we should have won but we had a winger who couldn't or would defend

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 10:54 am  

number 6 wrote:

But we won those games so it doesn't really. The games ww list v cas away for instance we should have won but we had a winger who couldn't or would defend

So, the close games you lost could have gone the other way but, the close games as you won couldn't?
Fantastic dullard logic on show there.

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 12:10 pm  

number 6 wrote:

But we won those games so it doesn't really. The games ww list v cas away for instance we should have won but we had a winger who couldn't or would defend

Look at this for instance.

At BV Wakey beat you by small margin. You say that could've gone the other way.

At the KC you beat us by a small margin. But you say that can't have gone the other way.

Re: 2016 predictions : Sat Dec 05, 2015 12:32 pm  

Willzay wrote:

Look at this for instance.

At BV Wakey beat you by small margin. You say that could've gone the other way.

At the KC you beat us by a small margin. But you say that can't have gone the other way.

He is good, isn't he?