No , you were wrong , very wrong , AGAIN , you can ' pretend ' all you want , just for once in your miserable bloody boring existence on theses boards admit

YOU WERE WRONG

I hope you brought a sleeping bag and a flask, it's gonna be a long wait......................

It isnt really. It isnt good or bad. There is no real positive or negative to it. HKA built a team of semi-pro players to win a semi-pro league, almost universally they exchanged semi-pro players for pro players to compete in a pro league.It is exactly what anyone would expect them to do. I havent changed anything. I have simply repeated exactly what I said. I never said HKR came up with only 3/4 players. I simply listed 12 players who signed for HKR in 2007. The fact you originally read it incorrectly isnt anything to do with me, and the fact I have pointed out your error to you is in fact the opposite of changing my argument, it is restating the orignal argument.

Yes, i forgot to include Netherton. Other than that the principle was correct.

Unless you would like to explain to the class what part of this quote

made you think I was saying only 3 players played for HKR in 2006 and in 2007? Because I really cant see it.

Unless of course you think it is 2007 now?

Nothing new Smokey talking bollax and being owned then backtracking to suit his own agenda

Hull Kingston Rovers first choice 13 in 2007 looked something like this:

1. Cockayne
2. Steel
3. Dyer
4. Goddard
5. Ford

6. Murrell
7. Webster

8. Vella
9. Fisher
10. Tangata-Toa

11. Netherton
12. O'Neil
13. Cooke

4/13 who were signed after promotion. I'd say we built that team in the National League.

Er, I'm getting a bit confused here - what's slagging off HKR got to do with expanding SL to 15 clubs? Not that I've any objection in principle to slagging off HKR, you understand.

A quick bit of maths reveals these players played 221 games between them , which is exactly half of the available total number of places in a 26 game season , so my suggestion they took up around 60 percent of a club is wrong , out by 10 percent , however it is a lot closer to your suggestion they took up three players

It's called ' thread drift ' , it's what happens when Smokey makes completely inaccurate claims and is then proved wrong , again



To save you reading through it all the ' drift ' came about because I claimed that it was possible to build the bulk of a team in the Championships to take up to SL with P and R , and others suggested it wasn't , I then used HKR s 2006/07 squad as an example , Smokey disagreed

Interestingly enough I would say the same applies to a fan base , much easier to build one with P and R in the Championship , than with licencing , as a supporter of a club that can't manage to build one in SL either way , what's you opinion on that ?

HKR were full time professionals in the season they got promoted. Along with Widnes and Leigh that year if I am not mistaken. So, here's where you change the definition of what you meant by pro players now Smokey, to make it fit your argument after you have been proved to be incorrect.....again.

You are correct Rovers were FT for season 2006.

As were Leigh , players who moved on from us that year to SL were Scott Grix , after one season at Widnes , Ricky Bibey , Richard Moore , eventually Aaron Heremaia , made it to the NRL with the Warriors

Is there a reason you think hull kr played fewer games than everyone else in 2007?

its funny that you are so desperate for me to be wrong that you have completely invented something i said just so you can pretend it is true?

its almost sweet in a way.

that simply cant be true,

of the players who were signed for 2007,

Cooke played 13 of 14 games he was available for, ward played 20 of 27, o'neill 20 of 27, Gannon played 23, vella played 22, Dyer played 26, Bauer 12, Hardman 20, Lennon 15, Chester 21, Tandy 12 (of 13) Lovegrove 9,

Well what definition do you think I have given to pro players before? If im changing it i surely must have given you one before, otherwise i couldnt possibly change it could i?

Lets see if you actually have a point or are just joining in with Starbugs sweet desperation.

Well i presumed you meant someone who plays rugby for a living full time.

And if you did, that would mean that you were wrong with this post werent you?

ahh yes, the starbug approach of making a presumption (usually wrong) then getting all confused and blaming the other person when that (usually wrong) presumption is shown to be wrong. He has taught you well.

from memory the entire squad wasnt full time, but yes the statement was wrong.

In 2006 three clubs ran what could be described as FT squads in NL 1 , this entailed having a squad of players training during the day ( rather than after normal working hours ) big enough to put out a team on a regular basis , and the money paid to those players being the primary source of income for those players

Those clubs were HKR , Widnes and Leigh , HTH

That is lovely.

Yes it is

Hull KR went full time in August 2005. Prior to that we only had 5 players who where full time. We where knocked out the playoffs by Halifax with a certain Ben Fisher running the show. So we went out signed Ben fisher stayed fulltime for the 2006 season and the rest as they say is history.

Run out of stuff to say.

Praise the lord.

I wonder what that is in German?

Sums you up.