The phrase "financially everything is rosy" was never used at the meeting.

Anyway since the meeting we have had the biggest finacial crisis since the last depression, and while I suppose it's possible, I don't think either McNamara nor Hood could either be blamed for it, nor could they have been expected to predict it. It's bound to hit all clubs hard.

I never said it had been used.

Yes you did.

No I didn't say that exact phrase had been said. I used it cover a few points that had been said to convey that message that indeeded everything was rosy.

Which one? Where we lost by a point?


Not at all. It wasn't our greatest day, but like when Saints handed our arrses to us at VP, you have to give a lot of credit to the opposition on the day.


Eh? So you wouldn't mind me putting my POV, if I did it slower?


When did I claim to be better than you, or anyone? And i don't necessarily "want" to "stick with what we've got", I would be delighted if we could afford to twist, call, or even raise, but only if there is a reasonable expectation of winning. People who want to call blind, regardless of who's bet what or how many chips they have in their stack, are the ones I don't agree with.


See, you agree with me!! Let a natural evolution process take its course, and you get progress. Don't shoot the chimps, eventually they'll get it!!!

I'd call the biggest collapse in super league history a pretty poor 2nd half.

It could back the arguement that Mcnarama hasn't won a "big" game yet.

After leading by a very large margin

Still speculation

Nobody is disputing the facts, including that Wigan got on a fantastic roll that we couldn't (quite) stop, and eneded up losing a match we should never have lost.

What is just weird though is to compare it with the abomination at the JJB. In the play-off game we played some absolutely fantastic stuff and looked like, and for a time were, playing Wigan off the park. So how can that possibly be validly compared with a performance like last weekend's? It deserves a mention in the book, of course, but not in the chapter of performances devoid of merit. The only connection is that Wigan won both, and there the similarity ends.

Ah. So you're not denying that you said they said everything is financially rosy, you are saying that you didn't mean to say that they said that, but meant that they conveyed the message that everything is financially rosy.

You might not have meant it, but why deny you said it?

I'm sure there is some important difference between them actually saying that everything is financially rosy and them conveying the message that everything is financially rosy, but it just escapes me for the moment. Would you mind refreshing my memory and explain the point of the distinction?