Quote ="Wires71"Right I'll speak slower. This is all because, maybe a month ago now, I compared our lack of achievements to our more successful peers such as Leeds, Wigan and St Helens within a given timeframe and you sought to try and say they were comparable in some attempt of a defense of Smith and Agar. This attempt of yours even reached the desperation level of you questioning the lengths of my acronyms as unfair and now the stupendous comparison between Warrington and Swinton.
I then state a separate point about bigger clubs and you think that I have contradicted myself because you purposefully misconstrued "bigger" with more "successful" when the difference is clear to the man on the Clapham omnibus.
Anyway I thought we agreed to disagree? You support Smith and Agar because we made the finals in 2016 and won the hub cap last year (or has your position done a 180?), and I don't because that's all we have done in 4 years and still accounts to very little (or zero in most peoples eyes). My view has remained consistent.
If you are going to go after dismantling my rationale you will have to try harder, maybe even back it up with a fact now and again.'"
What has the speed that you "speak" got to do with anything do you have to talk whilst typing and as for the length of your acronyms I've really no idea?
I think that you may be reading too much into my posts tbh rather than reading what I post. i'm using your rationale from a previous post to see whether it had any impact on what you are saying here. All of the clubs that I mentioned have more and also more recent champion winning teams than ours, that is a fact and it got me thinking, are we as big as we, or the man on the Clapham omnibus think we are? I wouldn't knock Swinton either as they were unlucky with their ground being sold, compete in a city with another club and have been a bit nomadic whereas we have prospered since our move within the borough....there but for the grace of God?
I think that we probably are bigger than most of the clubs listed, but, that is a matter of opinion and based on a number of factors other than the number of championship trophies, for example, turnover, profit, attendances, the ability to attract and retain top talent.
You could have just said something along those lines or whatever you considered was 'big' and we would have reached an informed, happy agreement.
Regarding Smith and Agar my patience ran out and i had posted that on the appropriate thread and at a time in the season that I thought appropriate given last season's performance which is where we differed I've no idea what this has to do with this discussion?
