It is quite simple RF. I explained the expectation. I am sorry if it is a bit complex for you. I see you are negative toward the game you only watched on TV from another thread so I suppose I wouldn't get anything positive from you.rodgerfox wrote: Why would there be that expectation? It's a praccy match. Conversely, where Harvey was going at about 70% last night (as he always does pre-season) the Saints' new players and young guys would be going at 110% - they want a spot.
Oh and you can only go at 100% not 110%.
joffaboy wrote: It was expected that Richmond would want to hit the ground running in 2008 after their dreadful 2007 and the Saints would struggle against a more cohesive senior team.
rodgerfox wrote:Who expected it?
The punter and the bookies.
Started well and then spoiled by injury in the season proper. Got beaten in a quagmire in Cairns in the pre seasonrodgerfox wrote:I'd imagine the Saints had a lot more to prove in terms of 2007 than anyone in the comp.
Why is it worth noting? They nearly had a full team in, much more experienced than our team last night.rodgerfox wrote:It's worth noting too, that in fairness to Richmond they aren't overly experienced anyway.
Thanks Sherlock.rodgerfox wrote:It happens every year. February flag favourites pop up, and wooden spoon favourties pop up.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
It amazes me how obtuse you are. Nobody is proclaiming anything except for the mouths on radio who are all predicting St.Kilda for a top fourrodgerfox wrote:It still amazes me that anyone still correlates the NAB Cup with the real stuff.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Oh please tell us when you deem it allowable to discuss a game that you didn't even turn up to.
Would be terrible to be optimistic wouldn't it?