Sheesh, if I got so upset when everyone had declared that Quins had put in a bad performance, I'd have gone through about 10 laptops by now, tapping away with such rage.

No rage here - just stating a simple fact.

Stating that the two teams were poor is hardly attention seeking, rather an opinion, and one that isn't exclusive to me. I think you need a refresher in what constitutes a fact and what constitutes an opinion.

You've got no fans + shouldn't be in SL, how's that?

Cuts deep.

I may have exaggerated slightly when I said that attention-seeking constituted your [ientire[/i output. Just the vast majority of it. Which is as close to a fact as anything based on posts on an internet forum is likely to get.

And so it should, as you know it's the truth.

If it wasn't for the fact the RFL cannot admit defeat with the 30-year London project then you'd be booted out to the National League (your real level) year after next.

And you it would seem, judging by the number of posts you've made on this very thread.

Methinks you protest too much

Another jealous fan of a nothing club with no rivals attempting to get personal, keep trying.
(See how easy that was...)


Yes, that would be them two really good players for Harlequins that are so good they've propelled their team to 13th in the Super League! Indeed. For someone who used the line "true Rugby League supporter" to describe himself, you'd think that you might no something about the sport!



The problem with some fans of the smaller clubs with no real rivals is that they don't really understand the psychological battle on the field when it comes to a truly big game. You talk about the game being a poor game due to a lack of skill (something I disagree with BTW, there was some great skill involved as well as some brainfarts). There were some amazing technical skills, great hits, textbook tackles, etc. in the game. The psychology of the game was interesting to see, and is a huge part of the game. It's these psychological parts of the game that make the difference between a game involving two ordinary teams and two rivals. A true Rugby League fan like yourself should know about this.

Anyway, for someone who is claiming to not be an attention seeker, as well as claim that no-one outside of Hull is interested in this game, I find it amazing how not only was you the first person to comment on this thread, you also watched the entire game, and are dying to comment continuously. If you really wasn't interested, and if others weren't interested, they wouldn't comment (or continue to comment) and would just leave it alone. But because of your need for attention and petty envy of a game that actually means something to people (unlike when anyone plays Harlequins), you've felt the need to attempt to patronise. It's really quite sad. I'm not sure what to suggest for the envy, but may I suggest you find some friends for the attention-seeking problem?

Lister well n truly owned by Wellsy

Deary me, yes consider myself owned, and I will not comment next time that a game doesn't impress me, I live in fear of another lecture from Wellsy13 telling me what I think/believe.

Not bothered if the game doesn't impress you or not. I don't think anybody is. It's your opinion and you're entitled to it. It's when you say things like this:

Quite clearly, this is as you watched the game and have cared enough to post continuously about it. Most people that say they don't care about something when they clearly do are those that are envious of that something or want that something. It's either that, or you just fancy a bit of attention. Or both. Either way, none of it's admirable.

Sometimes it takes someone else to tell you something about yourself before you realise it.

You can thank me later