in: Br__e; Br__e > 2008-08-31;
| # Posted 2008-09-01 11:05:43 | |
| blairtrewin: | I thought it was a pretty good indication of what happens when a team with nothing to play for and only about 7 or 8 of its first-choice 22 on the field runs into a decent team that needs every point it can get. Of course, that logic fails miserably to explain the Port result...(By the way, could you bring yourself to support Port on Saturday?) |
| # Posted 2008-09-02 05:45:02 | |
| Br__e: | If that is the best that Essendon can manage, they are in a bit a of trouble. I tried to support Essendon but they hardly touched the ball.
I can't say that I supported Port, but I was happy when they won. |
| # Posted 2008-09-02 05:53:17 | |
| mouse136: | the bottom few teams showed no ticker on the weekend. I think they were all itching for mad monday (or saturday or sunday depending on when they played). The distance between the top 8 and the rest showed. |
| # Posted 2008-09-02 13:49:56 | |
| blairtrewin: | I'd be more worried if I thought that the team that took the field on Sunday would bear much resemblance to the one we will field next year. Realistically we dropped the bundle after losing the West Coast game ended our realistic finals hopes (as it turned out not even winning West Coast and the last three would have been enough). |
| # Posted 2008-09-04 10:50:17 | |
| phatmax: | Beacuse Essendon lost so badly Collingwood now have to play Adelaide at AAMI stadium, instead of St Kilda at a Melbourne venue. Maybe Knights dislikes Collingwood as much as everyone else. |
You must be logged in to add a message