decent is synonymous with honest. Doesnt mean that's what Gemmell meant. Nah, he didnt, and yes you are. Lol at using the scoreboard. We trailed for 50 minutes against a terrible Eels side and only won in the last 20 by two tries. You clearly have nfi when words like "good" and "convincing" are apt.
And how often do you hear players or coaches say "it was an honest performance"....in an aftermatch speech, for example. If someone said "it was a good performance" it would mean the same thing as "it was a decent performance" Yes he did and no I'm really not. The scoreboard says 18-6. Reads "good" performance..."convincing" win.
lol, nah it doesnt. Decent means satisfactory. Not good. lol, the scoreboard isnt always representative. You'd know that if u knew anything about RL.
Decent doesn't exclusively mean satisfactory. You consider yourself a wordsmith. Broaden your definition. In the context we're using it see below from first dictionary I looked at... decent adj decent [ˈdiːsnt] 1 fairly good; of fairly good quality It's all that matters in the end. Read it in the newspaper tomorrow
Also Gillett has to get are starting spot, his inside support play with hodges straightens their attack up
lol, use Oxford you cheap cunt. lol, the true test of how a team played - Scoreboards and newspapers. Typical horseshit from a cunt who knows nothing. And even if you think they are, how the fuck is an 18-6 score line against a dud Eels side "good"?
It didn't cost me anything but OK http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/decent "good: there’s a few decent players in the team" Hmmm...maybe they're even talking about a rugby league team? <!-- End of DIV senseInnerWrapper--> How can we tell they're a dud side after 1 round? And yep, that's ultimately the true test....scoreboards and newspapers show "results". Familiar with that word? Speaking of words...you know anyone synonyms for "cunt". You're overusing it which makes you appear less intelligent than you would like me to believe.
That's hilarious. I see what you did there. A joke about my age. Highly original and side-splittingly funny. In fact, I play rugby and cricket and the odd game of golf. Never been on a bowling green tbh. Might try it in 30 or 40 years. Looks like a good time tbh
Look up the definition of "good" and see if the word "decent" is used anywhere in the definitions. <!-- End of DIV senseInnerWrapper--> Results are not always indicative of how a side played. In the same way that your post count is not indicative of how much of a moron you are.
2 pretty meaningless contests producing 2 dour games. Bring back Broncs Vs Cows and Roosters Vs Souffs on Friday night. Best way to start off a new season.
Parra were shitcunts. We were pretty dominant until we got in the opposition's 30 then we lost all our shape. Our guys on the fringe need more room to move. We were so flat and they were in our faces very quickly. Thaiday was disappointing considering he was on for pretty much the whole game, still don't think it is his bag. Hannant and McGuire were good, will be nice to have Petero back next week. As for the halves, McCullough's service is still pretty bad, Wallace stepped up when they game needed to be reigned in so I was pleased with that. I thought Hunt went ok. Norman had some good touches to show he has promise, I think his running game looks good though. Parra are fucked big time, and I think they will be worse when Hayne returns. Having 2 backyard footy players in a side can never be a good thing. Tonight though, I liked the look of Mannah and Blair, Hindmarsh busted his arse for them yet again and other than some early errors, Allgood was involved in plenty. In the end I was simply happy they didn't score anything other than that fortuitous turd in the opening minutes. Will need to shake some more cobwebs off before next week. We can only improve from here.
There's no way Parra will be worse off for the return of Hayne. That's up there with the dumbest shit I've ever read on this forum If anything Sandow's and Parra's biggest problem tonight was that he didn't play with any flair. Going to be pissing money down the drain if SK doesn't let him play what he see's. McCullough is a weird one he seems to engage the markers just for the sake of it, not at the right times and even when he does get it right he usually takes the wrong option, also put Wallace under a lot of pressure on his kicks early in the game. Hunt was much better just for the quick service even though he doesn't have anywhere near the running game and kicking game of McCullough.
