It's in the minds of a few people already, including Sterlo and Joey on the Sunday footy show, but no Hindmarsh and no Cayless, experienced forwards!!! I don't think anybody considering a possible 2009 is thinking about anything but Hayne.Or is the current team no different to 2014 and only the Hayne factor matters??

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • no
  • It wasnt only hayne who contributed to that 2009 run the rest of the side played extremely well.The players around hayne in 2009 were so much better than what we have today. Forget 2009 making the 8 will be considered a huge win for the eels this year.

  • no, would be good tho.

  • I'm warming to the idea but lets see how we go against the Dogs and Beagles before I completely jump on that band wagon.

  • even if Parra wins ALL remaining games, Parra needs at least 1 of the Warriors, Cowboys and Bulldogs (except Parra game) to lose at least 1 game more than Parra does on the road home

    Improbable but not impossible situation looming - Parra really cannot afford to lose any games until EITHER Warriors, Cowboys lose at least TWICE and/or Bulldogs lose next week (before playing Parra)

    Yikes !!!!

    • Tele1 if we win every game from here that's 34pts. I cant see them missing the 8 from there.

  • We will miss the 8 by one spot. For and against will kill us off for 2014. I hope I'm wrong but we lack the killer instinct to play grinding finals football.
  • No way, still not certain of making the eight, but if we can beat Bulldogs and Eagles then it will be 2009 again. However, I don't think we can win those matches unless our side is at full strength, excluding Peats.
    • Even if we beat Dogs and Eagles - we still need either Dogs, Warriors and Cowboys to lose at least 1 game more than Parra - so if Parra loses 1 - any of the 3 mentioned need to lose twice, if Parra lose twice - any of the 3 mentioned need to lose 3 times

      Best case scenario - Parra goes undefeated (unlikely) and even beating Dogs still need either Dogs, Warriors and Cowboys to lose at least 1 game

      We're done - really slight chance but really - we're done

  • still need either Dogs, Warriors and Cowboys to lose at least 1 game, even in that scenario

    see here http://www.1eyedeel.com/xn/detail/500401:Comment:1915631

    There is no arguement , that going undefeated in the next 5 weeks is the best scenario - but that's also the hardest way home - if they do go undefeated - then they will deserve a finals place - but even that still requires other sides losing - and neither Dogs, warriors and Cowboys play each other - and if all 3 go undefeated (unlikely) and so do we - we still miss out

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

JC commented on JC’s status
"No that wasn't it, how do I stop getting these emails?"
47 minutes ago
Michael W. replied to Pato's discussion Xerri
"Blore is average. We are top heavy for forwards, very light on in the backs, now you want to get rid of two backs for an average forward. I'm glad Mon is part of the recruitment team, and not you."
51 minutes ago
DYNASTY.LOADING replied to Pato's discussion Xerri
"What makes you say that, and is that a good thing or a bad thing"
2 hours ago
Yehez replied to EelsAgeMe's discussion Ryles/Moses comments on Pezet
"He was bad in defence and was not fully focused in attack sometimes. But he will get a lot of confidence from what worked for him. "
2 hours ago
More…