Ok after rd.22, what will be our record?? [Archive]

Crows.ok

28 Mar 2001, 20:48

There is no reason at all why Crows can't win 13 games this season.

Crows had a poor season last year, yet still won 9 games.

Since then Crows have cut several ordinary players, gained some good prospects, improved their key position players, improved coaching staff, and will re-gain some players from injury.

In the middle stretch of last year, Crows won seven out of nine games, and at other times were very ordinary. Even in the ordinary stretch, there were quite a few narrow losses. Even only a modest improvement on last years form would see Crows with up to 13 wins this season.

In actual fact, Crows would have to have an even worse run than last year to fall back to only 6-8 wins. Crows after all do have 12 games at Footy Park.

Crows would have to slide down to the sort of performance level that Port produced last year to end up with only 6-8 wins.

I just can't see it happening. Crows are too good a team to sink that low. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/smile.gif

29 Mar 2001, 05:10

Our home draw is pretty good this year. The hardest games will be Melbourne round 2, Dogs round 11 and Carlton round 19. Assuming we win one of the games against Port that means 8 winable games at Football Park so I'll mark us down for say 7.

Away, the game against Sydney this week is very important to us. The only other games that you might put us down to win would be Hawthorn (because it's at York Park)round 6, St Kilda round 15 and Freo round 22.

If we can beat Sydney that gives us 11 wins. Probably need 12 to make the eight so if we can jag another away win we should be around the mark.

I definately can't see us among the bottom four.

[This message has been edited by Spogs (edited 28 March 2001).]

ant

29 Mar 2001, 10:46

Yes, I tend to agree with everyone bar that Port loser Scott http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/smile.gif (just kidding). I think somewhere between 10 and 13 wins is very attainable for all the reasons already expressed by my fellow posters.

carb70

29 Mar 2001, 11:34

It depends how many times you play Collingwood. If you play them twice you will be 2-20 but if you play them once you will be 1-21. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

carb70

29 Mar 2001, 11:39

Being serious, how can you guys honestley believe you are going to win 13 games with that team. How many times have you won 13 games in a season?. Maybe twice and they were your Premiership years and this team is nowhere near as good as those teams. I believe Port will be lucky to win 13 games this season and we are a much better team than the Crows. I would say you guys will be lucky to win 8 maybe 9 games.

29 Mar 2001, 16:28

AHHH MY 700TH POST!!!

What a way to celebrate it on the eve of the crows givin the swans a thrashing!!

CARN THE MIGHTY CROWS!!

P.S i wonder why macca hasnt replied yet to this post???? http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
"I came here to win, I am a winner" - Denzel Washington , Remember The Titans ; 2000

Crows.ok

29 Mar 2001, 16:50

Originally posted by carb70:
Being serious, how can you guys honestley believe you are going to win 13 games with that team. How many times have you won 13 games in a season?. Maybe twice and they were your Premiership years and this team is nowhere near as good as those teams. I believe Port will be lucky to win 13 games this season and we are a much better team than the Crows. I would say you guys will be lucky to win 8 maybe 9 games.

carb70, we are perfectly serious. Crows team in 2001 is better than the team which mid-year in 2000 won seven out of nine games.

If we have a reasonable run with injury, something that has eluded us these past four years and which is surely overdue by now, then Crows will win 13 games, perhaps even more.

Seriously.

I think you may be right about Port though, lucky to win 13 games. I'm not aware of any time in Ports history that they have achieved as high a win rate as 13 out of 22 for any reasonable stretch.

Still, there is hope, and just lately Port do seem to be getting the hang of stringing some wins together, so I guess its not out of the question for your guys to do as well as Crows will this year.

See you in the finals then.

Macca19

29 Mar 2001, 18:12

Originally posted by QT:
AHHH MY 700TH POST!!!

What a way to celebrate it on the eve of the crows givin the swans a thrashing!!

CARN THE MIGHTY CROWS!!

P.S i wonder why macca hasnt replied yet to this post???? http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif

Well i wasnt going to reply to this thread, but seeing as im being asked to!!!

I will say that i strongly disagree about the crows getting 13 wins. 13 wins last year would of seen you finish 5th!!!! To think you can win 13 games with your squad is laughable.
I would say your greatest squad was the 1993 side. I think that was a lot better than your two premiership sides. That team only won 12 games for the year. Your two premiership sides won 13 for the year. You think this squad is as strong if not stronger than the 93,97,98 squads?? I personally think not.
I think last years form was a good guide. I believe you have your weakest squad since joining the compettion this year...in terms of the experience lost, and the massive gap between experience and rookies in your squad. There is only really 3 in between players.
Youve lost a ton of competent players in the like of koster connell james caven rehn. All i seem to hear from crows fans is how their recruits are gonna shine. They are Potentially competent players, they are not stars yet. Richardson has been average in the trials, bode will be reasonable, hewitt will be reasonable.
Your younger players will need to stand up for even a stab at the eight. If your 1-2 year 98 onward recruits cant produce much form, then the crows will be in trouble. I will say the crows can make the eight, but it would be an enormous effort with the list you have. Honestly, to say 13 games is pretty funny...i would say 5-10 games. No less than 5 due to the footy park games, no more than 10 as i dont believe you have the list or the depth to get more than 10 wins on the board. If another few players get injured then the start of the season could really be in tatters.

29 Mar 2001, 18:19

http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/frown.gif................................. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
"I came here to win, I am a winner" - Denzel Washington , Remember The Titans ; 2000

Crows.ok

29 Mar 2001, 18:51

Macca typed:
"There is only really 3 in between players.
Youve lost a ton of competent players in the like of koster connell james caven rehn."

I'd say that of these, Rehn (at his best form) is a loss. Crows haven't got a ruckman at the moment in as good form as Rehn at his best. McGregor at CHB this year seems to be holding his own quite well, and may prove as effective as Caven did in 97 & 98. Koster, Connell & James were OK players but have been adequately replaced. Look for midfield form from Eccles, Johnson, Bode, Ladhams, Burton, Stenglein and maybe even Shir. If we get down to Byrne, Gallager, and others then you know our injury list has grown too long and, as I have pointed out above, then we may lose form.

This is no different to previous years though. When our injury list is a bit shorter, Crows (the current players) have decent form. As I note, seven out of nine games, when injury is sustainably low.

So - if Crows "leaders/seniors" are Ricciuto, McLeod, Goodwin, Hart, Robran, Smart, Edwards, Bickley, Jarman & perhaps Vardy - then our next group of Eccles, Johnson, Burton, Welsh & Stevens seems to me to number more than three, even when you exclude Bode & Hewitt.

Oh, Macca, BTW - if Crows form last year is a guide, then why shouldn't it also be a guide for Port? Since you tip Crows are going to go from 9 games down to as low as five on the basis of their form last year, you must be (assuming you are self-consistent) tipping Port to win no more than 2 or 3 games ?

Thats not going to be much fun for you. Even I think you will do better than that.

Crow54

30 Mar 2001, 07:03

Can someone please explain something to me. The Victorian media has panned the Crows, saying we have an "ageing list". Now we have people bagging the Crows because we have too many young players with little experience. So, if you have old players you won't win, but if you have young players, you also won't win. Just what does a team need to be successful? Lots of middle-range players? I think the Crows qualify on this count, with Roo, Hart, Goodwin, Johnson, Vardy, etc. All the team needs to do is believe in themselves, and go for it. The wins will follow.

Macca19

30 Mar 2001, 07:24

Originally posted by Crows.ok:
Macca typed:
"There is only really 3 in between players.
Youve lost a ton of competent players in the like of koster connell james caven rehn."

I'd say that of these, Rehn (at his best form) is a loss. Crows haven't got a ruckman at the moment in as good form as Rehn at his best. McGregor at CHB this year seems to be holding his own quite well, and may prove as effective as Caven did in 97 & 98. Koster, Connell & James were OK players but have been adequately replaced. Look for midfield form from Eccles, Johnson, Bode, Ladhams, Burton, Stenglein and maybe even Shir. If we get down to Byrne, Gallager, and others then you know our injury list has grown too long and, as I have pointed out above, then we may lose form.

This is no different to previous years though. When our injury list is a bit shorter, Crows (the current players) have decent form. As I note, seven out of nine games, when injury is sustainably low.

So - if Crows "leaders/seniors" are Ricciuto, McLeod, Goodwin, Hart, Robran, Smart, Edwards, Bickley, Jarman & perhaps Vardy - then our next group of Eccles, Johnson, Burton, Welsh & Stevens seems to me to number more than three, even when you exclude Bode & Hewitt.

Oh, Macca, BTW - if Crows form last year is a guide, then why shouldn't it also be a guide for Port? Since you tip Crows are going to go from 9 games down to as low as five on the basis of their form last year, you must be (assuming you are self-consistent) tipping Port to win no more than 2 or 3 games ?

Thats not going to be much fun for you. Even I think you will do better than that.

Ok...youve covered the loss of Koster James Connell Thiesson, with playesr that already play there anyway!! But who else..Ladhams has played one good trial, Eccles plays onthe wing anyway, So does johnson and goodwin, Shir...maybe, Stenglien plays on the wing anyway. You havent covered for their loss. Rehn is a HUGE loss. He carried the ruck all year last year, while Marsh and Clarke struggled badly. Biglands did very well for his first season.

Crows form last year was up and down, you beat mostly bottom 8 sides last year. I tip port to win from 7 to 12 games this year. Maybe 13, but that would be a lucky win. I believe Port have more reason to be optimistic...on trial form, on end of season form. Crows last half of the season was deplorable. You must agree. You were not in front at 1/4 time for the last 9 games or somethign ridiculous as that. And out of that 9, about 4 of them were by over 5 goals! Something seriously was not right. Port seemed to get their act together after mid year, where we became competitive. Crows wer every up and down and ended the season just how they started. Crows struggled at the end of the year, even with a good chance of making the finals. Port have recruited well, and have shown in the pre season and last year that they can play damaging footy.
Crows have struggled this pre season, and end of last year...that is why i believe Port will do better this year. Not to mention Port has more depth.

ant

30 Mar 2001, 12:32

Crows.ok,

I agree, people now are looking for reasons to bag us, too old, too young, none of those theories really hold any weight for me. I thought Melbourne were going to be bad last year, I looked at their squad and couldn't see how they could possibly make the eight. I tipped them 15th. But players like Robertson stood up, Bruce, Green, Nicholson and Farmer kicked 76 goals. Now everybody is saying how great a young squad they have, how much depth. It may be optimistic but if things go right, and certain players others don't regard very highly perform close to the maximum of their ability, we too can surprise some people.

As for losing Ellen, Koster, James etc. I think they are far from big losses, they were getting older, slower, and in the past two years hadn't really performed as in the premiership years. Getting some younger players to replace them was the way to go. I don't think we lose anything at all with those players leaving the club. The fact is those middle rung players had been letting the club down, in 97,98 they were what made us so good, we performed evenly as a team. As their performance dipped (due to injuries, lack of opportunities maybe, whatever) so too did the Crows. Now I see a freshness about the club and plenty of unfulfilled potential which I hope will be realised this year.

carb70

31 Mar 2001, 10:30

Originally posted by Crows.ok:
carb70, we are perfectly serious. Crows team in 2001 is better than the team which mid-year in 2000 won seven out of nine games.

If we have a reasonable run with injury, something that has eluded us these past four years and which is surely overdue by now, then Crows will win 13 games, perhaps even more.

Seriously.

I think you may be right about Port though, lucky to win 13 games. I'm not aware of any time in Ports history that they have achieved as high a win rate as 13 out of 22 for any reasonable stretch.

Still, there is hope, and just lately Port do seem to be getting the hang of stringing some wins together, so I guess its not out of the question for your guys to do as well as Crows will this year.

See you in the finals then.

Crows.ok, you might think the Crows are ok but are you ok?. Have had any knocks to the head lately?.

You rate the team now better than the one mid 2000, well overall your team sucked for all of year 2000. Port will easily win more games than the Crows. You stated that you were not aware of Port winning 13 games out of 22 but yet we have won 11 out of our last 15 games which is a higher winning percentage than 13 out of 22. Also our last 10 games last year we won 6 from ten and if we can preform at that rate this year we will win 12-13 games.

The Crows biggest problem has been their drafting. They have drafted too many duds from the SANFL such as Atkinson, Bienke, Herbert, Burton and this year Richardson. These players have added nothing to the club. If they had gone for youth in those drafts like Port did the Crows would now being seeing the rewards instead the are going to struggle to not finish in the bottom 3.

31 Mar 2001, 13:13

Originally posted by carb70:
going to struggle to not finish in the bottom 3.

HAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHA YOU WISH MATE, YOU WISH!! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
"I came here to win, I am a winner" - Denzel Washington , Remember The Titans ; 2000

Crow54

1 Apr 2001, 05:42

I agree with you Carb, about the drafting, especially during Malcolm's years. He drafted for the here and now, with no thought for the future, hence the dismal performances during 1999 and 2000.

One positive thing about Robert Shaw's years was the good drafting. This could have helped us win those premierships. Only time will tell how our current crop of draftees will go, but I seriously doubt if Laurence Angwin will ever be as good as Kane Cornes. I have a feeling Laurence could be another Tom Gilligan.

[This message has been edited by Crow54 (edited 31 March 2001).]

ant

1 Apr 2001, 20:33

Funny you should say that Crow54 cause both Kane Cornes and Angwin were in Glenelg's best today, though Cornes was probably BOG. Give Angwin a bit of time and he will be a significant improvement on the Tom Gilligan's of this world.

[This message has been edited by ant (edited 01 April 2001).]

carb70

1 Apr 2001, 22:18

Originally posted by Crow54:
I agree with you Carb, about the drafting, especially during Malcolm's years. He drafted for the here and now, with no thought for the future, hence the dismal performances during 1999 and 2000.

One positive thing about Robert Shaw's years was the good drafting. This could have helped us win those premierships. Only time will tell how our current crop of draftees will go, but I seriously doubt if Laurence Angwin will ever be as good as Kane Cornes. I have a feeling Laurence could be another Tom Gilligan.

[This message has been edited by Crow54 (edited 31 March 2001).]

Crow54 are you serious?. I can't believe you would agree with me. Your'e not playing mind games with me again, are you?.

kirkyno1

2 Apr 2001, 06:38

Carb70, whilst I agree with your thoughts generally (the Power will probably finish slightly abovethe Crows, both sides will finish between 6-12),the Crows seem to lack something. Can't quite put my finger on it but I have to take you to task about Burton being a dud. This kid is no dud and what he does on the field excites people, how can one not be impressed by his high marking. He,Andrew McLeod and Darren Jarman, are one of the reasons I love to go to Crows games.

carb70

2 Apr 2001, 10:06

Sorry Kirkyno1, while I agree that McLeod and Jarman are special players who can do magical things on the field. I still think Burton is a dud. Apart from his rookie season where he finished second in the rising star award he has done nothing in AFL football. Infact he hardly has been spotted on a football field since his rookie season. Its one thing to be a promising player its another to take the next step and be a consistantly good player week in week out and I believe Burton has come nowhere near taking that next step.

kirkyno1

2 Apr 2001, 15:32

Originally posted by carb70:
Sorry Kirkyno1, while I agree that McLeod and Jarman are special players who can do magical things on the field. I still think Burton is a dud. Apart from his rookie season where he finished second in the rising star award he has done nothing in AFL football. Infact he hardly has been spotted on a football field since his rookie season. Its one thing to be a promising player its another to take the next step and be a consistantly good player week in week out and I believe Burton has come nowhere near taking that next step.

Carb70, he only played 9 games last year due to injury and hasn't been able to get onto the field this year. Hardly a reason to call him a dud and when he does eventually play I think he will give the Crows a spark across the wings (he returned to the side last year in the same period when they won 7 out of 9 games then he got injured) A coincidence I think not. Believe me, given todays effort they need him badly!

Macca19

2 Apr 2001, 16:28

Originally posted by QT:

HAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHA YOU WISH MATE, YOU WISH!! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

After todays performance...i dont think youll be winning more than 7 games this year

carb70

2 Apr 2001, 17:49

Originally posted by QT:

HAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHA YOU WISH MATE, YOU WISH!! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

HA HA QT, your'e already 3rd to last and its only the 1st round. If the Crows keep up their current form they are ever chance to add a woodern spoon to that trophy cabinet. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[This message has been edited by carb70 (edited 01 April 2001).]

carb70

2 Apr 2001, 17:56

Originally posted by kirkyno1:

Carb70, he only played 9 games last year due to injury and hasn't been able to get onto the field this year. Hardly a reason to call him a dud and when he does eventually play I think he will give the Crows a spark across the wings (he returned to the side last year in the same period when they won 7 out of 9 games then he got injured) A coincidence I think not. Believe me, given todays effort they need him badly!

I respect your opinion on Burton, but until he proves me wrong I will still consider him a dud.

Crow54

2 Apr 2001, 18:34

Originally posted by carb70:
I respect your opinion on Burton, but until he proves me wrong I will still consider him a dud.

The only time you can use the word "dud" in connection with Burton is when he was "dudded" in the Norwich Rising Star award, and the "Mark of the Year" award. Clear winner in both categories, but eastern state bias robbed him.

Macca19

2 Apr 2001, 18:54

Originally posted by Crow54:
The only time you can use the word "dud" in connection with Burton is when he was "dudded" in the Norwich Rising Star award, and the "Mark of the Year" award. Clear winner in both categories, but eastern state bias robbed him.

Please tell me how Burton deserved the Rising Star more than Adam Goodes?? Burton...oh wow woopy doo, he can take a big grab...pity his disposal is complete utter shit, pity he is injury prone, pity he cant kick. But hey he can leap...if that means he should win the rising star in front of someone who carried the ruck for sydney in their first year, then bugger me

carb70

2 Apr 2001, 18:55

Crows54, I will agree that he was dudded with mark of the year. Maybe it was Burton's fault he missed out on that anyway because he had too many nominations for that award and you Crows supporters all probably voted for different ones. Now if he had only one nomination then you would of all voted for the same mark.

As far as missing out on the rising star award, are you trying to tell us that Adam Goodes wasn't a deserving winning of that award. He did carry the Sydney ruck position on his back for that entire season.

3 Apr 2001, 14:04

If brett burton played for the power, would you have the same response carb and macca???

------------------
"I came here to win, I am a winner" - Denzel Washington , Remember The Titans ; 2000

Macca19

3 Apr 2001, 14:51

Originally posted by QT:
If brett burton played for the power, would you have the same response carb and macca???

I wouldnt want burton to play for the Power. He wouldnt get a game ahead of francis, dew, francou, nick stevens

3 Apr 2001, 15:59

Brett Burton has unfortunately been labelled as a high flying showpony. Forget last year when he only played 8 or 9 games and never settled back into the side.

In his first year, not only did he take numerous sensational grabs, but he also regularly collected 20 plus posessions and dominated games. People can say what they like about the crows performances over the past couple of years and it's probably justified, but to call Brett Burton a dud is either just stiring, ignorant or just plain stupid.

Macca19

3 Apr 2001, 16:29

Originally posted by Spogs:
Brett Burton has unfortunately been labelled as a high flying showpony. Forget last year when he only played 8 or 9 games and never settled back into the side.

In his first year, not only did he take numerous sensational grabs, but he also regularly collected 20 plus posessions and dominated games. People can say what they like about the crows performances over the past couple of years and it's probably justified, but to call Brett Burton a dud is either just stiring, ignorant or just plain stupid.

you tell me some games where he "dominated" and i will gladly go buy the videos to watch them. In his first year he couldnt bloody kick...i remember about 20 times when he kicked the footy on the full. He did it three times in one showdown! He played well in some games..but to say he dominated is either overrating him or just being ignorant

4 Apr 2001, 06:36

A few stats for Brett Burton in 1999:

Played 21 games out of 22 (he was injured in round 21)

In the 12 rounds from round 9 to round 20 (He didn't complete round 21) he was named in the best three for the Crows 8 times. That's right 8 out of 12.

For those 12 games he averaged 17 disposals and 4.5 marks per game. Bear in mind that the Crows lost 8 of those 12 games.

Round 12 V Collingwood 17 kicks, 4 handballs, 9 marks

Round 16 V Dogs 23 kicks, 3 handballs, 3 marks

Round 18 V Hawthorn (i think) 11 kicks, 9 handballs, 11 marks.

This was from a first year player. I've just spent half an hour getting this info. I'm now going to spend a bit more time trying to find the definition of a dud.

Macca19

4 Apr 2001, 07:33

Originally posted by Spogs:
A few stats for Brett Burton in 1999:

Played 21 games out of 22 (he was injured in round 21)

In the 12 rounds from round 9 to round 20 (He didn't complete round 21) he was named in the best three for the Crows 8 times. That's right 8 out of 12.

For those 12 games he averaged 17 disposals and 4.5 marks per game. Bear in mind that the Crows lost 8 of those 12 games.

Round 12 V Collingwood 17 kicks, 4 handballs, 9 marks

Round 16 V Dogs 23 kicks, 3 handballs, 3 marks

Round 18 V Hawthorn (i think) 11 kicks, 9 handballs, 11 marks.

This was from a first year player. I've just spent half an hour getting this info. I'm now going to spend a bit more time trying to find the definition of a dud.

20 possesions is hardly dominating is it! 5 touches a quarter by amidfilder is quite average. So what...because he is a first year player he is not allowed to be matured as a footballer, or he isnt aloowed to play well?? Is that what your saying. Big deal if it is from a first year player or 4th year player. He did alright but i would hardly say he dominated. He didnt change the course of any games.

He averaged 13 touches a game...that is hardly dominating.

Compare this to say Nick Stevens:
First game against Freo he got 15 touches and 2 goals
next game against Carlton he destroyed Koutoufides influence on the game and picked up 29 touches himself...next game 25 touches, next game 26 touches.

Now THATS a debut...after that opposition decided to tag him with 2 players, so he only averaged 15 for the rest of the year

carb70

4 Apr 2001, 10:46

Originally posted by QT:
If brett burton played for the power, would you have the same response carb and macca???

QT, thats a good queston. I have been thinking which Port player I rate highly but is yet to preform consistently at AFL level and the player I came up with was Bowen Lockwood. I think he is a very talented player but because of injury he has yet to preform regularly at AFL level. I think most of us Port supporters know that if Bowen doesn't preform this season he will probably be traded off at the end of the season. We all know he has the potential to be a great player but if he is never on the ground then he isn't worth a lot to the club.

Finally I agree with Macca I wouldn't want Burton in our team. Who would he get picked in front of at Port anyway?.

carb70

4 Apr 2001, 10:51

Visro

4 Apr 2001, 11:04

Just popping in http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif Take note that what I am about to say is only my opinion.

Adelaide and WC are two very similiar football clubs at the moment. We are both suffering from the same problems. Any supporters from the two clubs that think their team will make the finals this year are kidding themselves. We might not finish last because we are interstate teams and for a Vic team to come over and beat us at home is quite difficult, but believe me we are really going to struggle. This is very evident from our round 1 clashes http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/frown.gif

Both teams have very young lists with plenty of potential. The other day I calculated that 64% of the WC list are 23 and under. I suspect that Adelaide are pretty similar. Until some of the younger players mature we will have difficulties. Both clubs have 3 or 4 old stars, 5 odd good middle tier players and then the rest are pretty much young rookies.

The problem with how are teams are being beaten though is to do with the coaches. Gary Ayres and Ken Judge would have to be two of the most negative coaches in the league. We need to replace both these coaches if we are to rise again and be powerhouses.

Both clubs need to accept that their reign as powerhouse clubs is over and that rebuilding must begin. Both clubs are lucky in that they have a lot of rookies to choose from to begin this rebuilding clubs. Other clubs such as NM do not http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif. None of us want our club to finish in the bottom eight but to rise again we need to do some hard work to get back up there. That way, in a few years we will be back thrashing those vics in all our games http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

Cheers Vis

PS. Bring on the Adelaide Vs. West Coast Grand Final!!!

13 Aug 2001, 20:58

Ok this post is back...ENJOY :D

Crows.ok

13 Aug 2001, 21:09

I especially like this bit from Macca "I will say that i strongly disagree about the crows getting 13 wins. 13 wins last year would of seen you finish 5th!!!! To think you can win 13 games with your squad is laughable."

I will save that one up. Wouldn't it be great if Crows did manage to win the last three games? We can all have a good laugh then.

Except Macca, I guess.

Macca19

13 Aug 2001, 23:30

Originally posted by Crows.ok
I especially like this bit from Macca "I will say that i strongly disagree about the crows getting 13 wins. 13 wins last year would of seen you finish 5th!!!! To think you can win 13 games with your squad is laughable."

I will save that one up. Wouldn't it be great if Crows did manage to win the last three games? We can all have a good laugh then.

Except Macca, I guess.

And so what??? Do you think i care that my PREDICTION was wrong??? Thats the thing...you think your soooo damn f*cking good.

Thats the thing about predictions...sometimes they are wrong...in my case it could well be wrong...then again, you havent won 13 games yet. Whos the over confident one Corws.ok??? You have a go at Shinboners and the north fans for being overconfident but what the hell are you doing!!!! Talk about a hypocrit!!!

Do you think i will lose any sleep over having my crows prediction wrong??? Do you think i will lose any sleep over my freo prediction being wrong??? NO!!!

I will laugh....i will laugh at you and how pathetic you really are?? How old are you?? 13? 14? You act like Easty...all these HAHA IN YOUR FACE type posts.

Am i having a go at your prediction of "port will be lucky to win 13 games this season...in fact im not aware of any time in their history that they have won 13 out of 22 games at any time"
Am i having a go at you for that?? No!! Maybe i should start.

Some of your statements about Port:

"Port though, lucky to win 13 games"
"I'm not aware of any time in Ports history that they have achieved as high a win rate as 13 out of 22 for any reasonable stretch."
"its not out of the question for your guys to do as well as Crows will this year"

I especially love the bit about Port being lucky to win 13 games!!!

Even if the crows do get 13 wins...it doesnt matter anyway - as Port will have more anyway!!

You obviously have a lot to learn about a lot of things...may i suggest growing up and stop acting like a 12 year old as a starting point?

Crows.ok

14 Aug 2001, 22:31

Originally posted by Macca19

Am i having a go at your prediction of "port will be lucky to win 13 games this season...in fact im not aware of any time in their history that they have won 13 out of 22 games at any time"
Am i having a go at you for that?? No!! Maybe i should start.

Some of your statements about Port:

"Port though, lucky to win 13 games"
"I'm not aware of any time in Ports history that they have achieved as high a win rate as 13 out of 22 for any reasonable stretch."
"its not out of the question for your guys to do as well as Crows will this year"

I especially love the bit about Port being lucky to win 13 games!!!

Sorry Macca, you are wrong yet again. Do try a bit harder, one day you may get the hang of this reading caper.

You see, it was actually carb70 who made the prediction about Port being lucky to get 13 games, not I. Here it is:

carb70: "Being serious, how can you guys honestley believe you are going to win 13 games with that team. How many times have you won 13 games in a season?. Maybe twice and they were your Premiership years and this team is nowhere near as good as those teams. I believe Port will be lucky to win 13 games this season and we are a much better team than the Crows. I would say you guys will be lucky to win 8 maybe 9 games."

I was just agreeing with carb70's prediction re Port, that yes Port might be lucky to get 13 wins.

Fortunately for your crowd, carb70 was wrong about "lucky to get 13 wins" for Port.

Fortunately for us, he was just as wrong about Crows.

I don't know what your point is about this quote "its not out of the question for your guys to do as well as Crows will this year" - that was 100% accurate! It proved not to be out of the question at all.

"I'm not aware of any time in Ports history that they have achieved as high a win rate as 13 out of 22 for any reasonable stretch." - also accurate at the time it was made - since the last seven odd games of 2000 did not to my mind constitute a reasonable stretch.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem or something, Macca?

Come back and try again when you can understand this stuff as well as a 12 year old can.

Macca19

15 Aug 2001, 00:27

You know why i took your quote out of context?

You took my "LOWER THAN 13TH" comment completly out of context. Not only did you refrain from adding my words before that which were along the lines of "Worst case scenario - lower than 13th" your whole 'argument' in on those 3 words which you took out of context.

Maybe it is you that needs the help reading

Because you did that - i refused to add the fact that you were only answering Carbs comments.

Two can play at that game

carb70

15 Aug 2001, 15:40

Originally posted by Crows.ok

Sorry Macca, you are wrong yet again. Do try a bit harder, one day you may get the hang of this reading caper.

You see, it was actually carb70 who made the prediction about Port being lucky to get 13 games, not I. Here it is:

carb70: "Being serious, how can you guys honestley believe you are going to win 13 games with that team. How many times have you won 13 games in a season?. Maybe twice and they were your Premiership years and this team is nowhere near as good as those teams. I believe Port will be lucky to win 13 games this season and we are a much better team than the Crows. I would say you guys will be lucky to win 8 maybe 9 games."

I was just agreeing with carb70's prediction re Port, that yes Port might be lucky to get 13 wins.

Fortunately for your crowd, carb70 was wrong about "lucky to get 13 wins" for Port.

Fortunately for us, he was just as wrong about Crows.

I don't know what your point is about this quote "its not out of the question for your guys to do as well as Crows will this year" - that was 100% accurate! It proved not to be out of the question at all.

"I'm not aware of any time in Ports history that they have achieved as high a win rate as 13 out of 22 for any reasonable stretch." - also accurate at the time it was made - since the last seven odd games of 2000 did not to my mind constitute a reasonable stretch.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem or something, Macca?

Come back and try again when you can understand this stuff as well as a 12 year old can.

Crows.ok, I don't know how you can say my statements were wrong. I didn't actually say that Port would win 13 games or the Crows win 8-9. I said they would be lucky to win that many games and considering that both teams have reached that figure, my conclusion is they must both be LUCKY.;)

Crows.ok

15 Aug 2001, 21:13

Originally posted by carb70

Crows.ok, I don't know how you can say my statements were wrong. I didn't actually say that Port would win 13 games or the Crows win 8-9. I said they would be lucky to win that many games and considering that both teams have reached that figure, my conclusion is they must both be LUCKY.;)

Apologies, carb70, I should not have said your statements were wrong.

I should perhaps have said that they were lucky guesses?

;)

Crows.ok

15 Aug 2001, 21:16

Originally posted by Macca19
You know why i took your quote out of context?

You took my "LOWER THAN 13TH" comment completly out of context. Not only did you refrain from adding my words before that which were along the lines of "Worst case scenario - lower than 13th" your whole 'argument' in on those 3 words which you took out of context.

Maybe it is you that needs the help reading

Because you did that - i refused to add the fact that you were only answering Carbs comments.

Two can play at that game

Here is your quote, posted 17-03-2001 08:42 AM, on this board, in full context:

Macca19: "Dont tell me what my opinion should be...i think Marsh is a useless piece of ****, i think Jarman will still be at adelaide in 2004, i think you will come below 13th this year. That is MY opinion...just like most of your opinions about port topics are negative. Show me up...good luck."

There were no caveats on "Worst case scenario" in there at all Macca. Not in the entire post. I did no such thing as "refrain from adding my words before that". They weren't there, mate, any that related to "will come below 13th". It stood alone.

This was not your only prediction of doom & gloom for Crows, there were others, all stated just about as beligerently, and all as derisive, none with caveats that I can recall. Less than 7 wins was one such prediction, which was later watered down to 5 - 10 wins.

Meanwhile, you still haven't come up with anywhere where I have made a negative prediction about Port (as you consistently claim I did), and especially not on the Port board.

Macca, I am only doing exactly what you asked me to do here ... showing you up.

Have a nice day.

Macca19

16 Aug 2001, 11:23

Originally posted by Crows.ok

Macca, I am only doing exactly what you asked me to do here ... showing you up.

Have a nice day.

I will say again....do you think i really care that my crows prediction was wrong??? Do you think that you bagging me about it is going to prove anything??? If at all it will prove how idiotic and petty you are. Concentrating on someones prediction (predictions can be wrong often as well remember) is plain petty. Yet somehow you get some sort of joy from it, and i dont understand why. Either way, Port are going to finish above the crows at seasons end - one reason why i should celebrate. Port are a strong chance at a top 4 finish - another reason to celebrate. Port are likely to have the best ever record in a season by a SA club - another reason to celebrate.
I have lots to celebrate about...and really i do not care that my prediction for the crows was wrong. Crows haev performed better than what i predicted.

What else do you want me to say or do?? Would you like me to write a 5 page letter of apology to the Adelaide Football Club for predicting they would only win 7 games for the year?

I do not understand why you are so happy and so intent on harping on this issue. Very sad indeed

Macca19

16 Aug 2001, 18:15

Do i harp on all the times you have been incorrect...like what you have done??

Maybe i should bring up this gem:

I'd contest that the teams are even, I don't think so. Adelaide has some all-australian players on its list, three currently. Adelaide has more trophies in the cabinet. Adelaide performed better than Port last season. Adelaide players have better statistics than Port players lats season. Adelaide scored about 50 more goals than Port last season (but we did let through about 50 more points to opposition sides than Port did). Adelaide players received more Brownlow votes.
On just about every measure that one can resonably think of, Adelaide has the better list. Its only in Ruccis imagination that Port have a better list.
He is just plain dead wrong about it, that is all.

Thats certainly proven to be false hasnt it. With Port in the top 8 for 18 of the 19 rounds this season, Port in the top 4 for 14 weeks this season, and an assured finals spot.

Crows on the other hand have been in the 8 for two weeks this season, with a peak of 7th.

Port have kicked 54 more goals than Adelaide this season. Are statistics are better too.

You were completly wrong about that one werent you! So you were 'just plain dead wrong'.

Or on the Beinke or Richardson issue where you said i was completly biased towards Bienke because of his Port Magpies background, and you abused anyone that said a bad word against Richo...you also stated:

At three goals a game, assuming he plays this badly all year, he still might return as many as sixty goals for Crows this year. It is a possibility.
There is even the possibility he might even get a bit better with a bit of AFL experience behind him as the year progresses.

60 goals this year?? I dont think he has had 60 minutes on the field let alone 60 goals. He didnt even look like getting 1 goal, let alone 3 goals a game.
Beinke came into the side and made an instant impact, and was unexplainably dropped for no apparent reason. He has been the only tall Crows forward to do have anywhere near a reasonable year this year. Richo was a laugh and a half when he played. Hewitt has been a laugh all season, Robran has made no impact, yet Beinke played some good footy and was dropped.

You were wrong there too.
But does anybody harp on those??? Nope!!

Point is...everyone gets things wrong sometimes in their lives. You predicted Adelaide had a better list than Port...that was proven wrong. You predicted Richo was a better bet at Full Forward than Beinke, that was proven wrong.

I predicted Crows wouldnt win more than 10 games...i could still be right, but am most likely to be wrong, as im sure they will win one of the last three games.

Everyone gets things wrong sometimes...you are the only crows supporter on this board, or on the internet in general that has taken a "ner ner na ner ner, you were wrong, your stupid hahaha" type attitude.
I guess it shows your complet immaturity compared to other, more normal, mature posters like Ant and QT and topjars and Crow54, and even Jars has never done a "ner ner" type post.

You on the other hand thrive off them. I wouldnt if i was you, cos youve been proven wrong just as many times as i have.

kirky

18 Aug 2001, 01:23

Well, it looks like all preseason gloom and doom by all concerned and that includes the media has been proven incorrect. Yes, most thought the Crows would finish between 13th and 16th (some tipsters had them finishing bottom) and God knows why. The Crows have one of the best midfields going and the stat that says it all is the number of times it goes inside 50 (most in the competition). If we only had a consistent CHF, I have no doubt the Crows would be in the top 4.

Now, Macca, I don't want to harp, but it makes no difference if you end up having the highest wins of a SA side unless you take off the ultimate prize. Remember, who finished on top of the ladder in 1996 with 16 wins 5 losses and 1 draw - the Swans. Their ain't no prize than the ultimate and means nothing if you don't pull it off. Essendon in 1999 is another classic example. Only winners are remembered, the rest can please themselves.

Congratulations to Port to date, but now the real business starts.

Crows.ok

18 Aug 2001, 17:28

I was going to remain quiet, but you insist, so here it comes.

I haven't been having a go at you because of you prediction at all. There have been plenty of others who have had a go at Crows, even on this board, and posted doom and gloom predictions. Note that I haven't been harping on at them. Why do you suppose that is?

Since you are sooooo slow to get it, I'll tell you just exactly why I have been having a go at you. Just you, Macca.

First you did post several doom and gloom predictions for Crows, on the Crows baord. Not a great idea, but you weren't the only one. Thats not it, its what you did next, and continue to do.

Next, you posted insults about Crows players, on this board.

Then, you told Crows fans to f**k off, from their own board.

Then, when you were picked up on this, you insisted that they had done the same things as you had, but were unable to say where. False accusations.

Then you accuse others of lying.

Then you swear at them and insult them and their team and call them idiots.

Then you insist that you didn't post such negative predictions, "I NEVER said lower than 13th".

Then when your quote is presented back at you, you claim ... but I said that would be worst case. You didn't.

Then you misquote others, not using their actual words, and deliberately take it out of context.

You claim you were taken out of context. You weren't.

Then you call the other party a hypocrit.

Then you call them sad.

Macca, Macca, Macca, what a sad and sorry tale this all makes.

Hold up a mirror to thyself, and maybe, just maybe, you will be able to see your own behaviour, and maybe you will be able to do something about it.

If you can, then my effort will have not been wasted.

If you insist on being a prick, then f**k off.

Macca19

19 Aug 2001, 12:42

<snip crows.ok rubbish>

Crows.ok.....why would i tell someone to *** off from their own board? saying "you can get f*ked" or "blah blah blah so *** off" is not saying get off your own board. That is stupid....and i thought you would of been smart enough to realise this is not what i meant.

I posted insults to players??? Yes i said i didnt think much of Ben Marsh in more 'harsh' words...i stand by that.

Please Crows.ok also....tell me when the last time i did any of those things was??? About round 4. If you hadnt realised...i stopped doing that...which you havent realised obviously.

You harping on it just shows how pathetic and petty you really are. Anyone else would of left it alone...and everyone else has...except you.

And again....i honestly dont care what you say to me. You can harp on it all you like...i dont really mind.