Oppo Camp Delusional Pearlers III

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
yodellinhank said:
Its a great example, and shows how discussion is what should be encouraged not dismissed.

Missing Cyril still really sticks in my craw, the first time the club ever did wrong by me ;)
Click to expand...

Does not worry me in the least. Yes they made the wrong choice at the time but knowing all the circumstances and the reasoning behind the decision puts it in perspective. I can not see how you can say the club did wrong by you but then i try not to worry too much about things i have no control over. I do not think Cryil would have won us a premiership, who knows David Myers may. I still say we had a win in that draft getting Myers and Hooker and we where unlucky that Pears ended up with a run of injuries that saw him not able to reach what he may have been.
Personally i like to look at the draft as a whole and not the individual picks. I could go on about Parker v Steinburg as i was all for Parker before the draft, i said it was the wrong choice straight after the draft but it is not an exact science.
If i was reading the names for 2007 i would have picked Rhys Palmer at the time.
 
Screen_shot_2016_12_04_at_12_06_29_PM.png


Lest We Forget
 
ant555 said:
Just another example of how the full picture was not known by all. No one said he could not play though, just a risk early in the draft. At that time we had just picked Jetta and Davey so i think we where looking for something else with 6 other than another small forward. Turned out to be a mistake but at the time the reasons made sense. From memory i think i had Cyril around pick 15 because of the questions from the NT coaches and the fact that he was still pretty unfit and not proven anywhere but the forward line. Hawthorn could afford to take the risk as they already had their gun midfielders and KP forwards picked.
Click to expand...
Agree with this and would also add that whether or not a young player fulfills his potential depends on the how the club handles the issues that all players have. History shows that Hawthorn was better placed to mentor and support a young Cyril through the issues that made him a drafting risk. Essendon may well have not provided the structure he needed at the time with the result that the "I told you so brigade" would have questioned the drafting decision.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

yodellinhank said:
Its a great example, and shows how discussion is what should be encouraged not dismissed.

Missing Cyril still really sticks in my craw, the first time the club ever did wrong by me ;)
Click to expand...
Again though, there's a massive difference between discussion once the players have played and the knuckle draggers who try and argue that anyone has 'won' or 'lost' a draft when none of the players have even played a game.
 
yodellinhank said:
Yeah, but without that discussion there isn't a reference point down the track.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why there needs to be one though.

The whole discussion started because of a comment that was obviously not borne of any solid knowledge; it was just your standard herp derp lol Essington crap and you know it.
 
Doss said:
I'm not sure why there needs to be one though.

The whole discussion started because of a comment that was obviously not borne of any solid knowledge; it was just your standard herp derp lol Essington crap and you know it.
Click to expand...
I get your original comment and thought it was pretty funny. I just don't care for the overall quashing of discussion though.

Does there really need to be a discussion on how clubs perform in their list management? I dunno, but you just might expect it on a footy forum.
 
Discussion isn't quashed though, in fact the draft is often not even finished and you have threads popping up all over the place quicker than mushrooms after rain asking who won the draft.

Doesn't mean it's not pointless though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That it clearly pisses him off so much makes me like it now.
 
fodzilla said:
He's spot-on, Essendon's marketing is consistently horrid. Don the Sash should be killed with fire.
Click to expand...
It's super cringey, no doubt. But to me it was more about the club redeeming itself to the supporters and the wider community than it was a statement of "we were hard done by, but now we're back"
 
fodzilla said:
The club doesn't get to decide how its marketing is interpreted.

Also, I know Rudi, he's a professional troll.
Click to expand...
By the same token I don't think it's fair for him to try and dictate what the club's intention is.

Also, some pretty ill informed comments in there.
Typically The Greenfield Post is satire and god damn I hope this one is too.
 
Comeback story? Can't change it so embrace it. Meh.

As for Rudi, quite the comedian. Plenty of laughs on his twitter profile about it too.
 
Essendon is on a hiding to nothing no matter how they market themselves given everything that's happened.

I'd rather this than David Evans' immortal "you're just not passionate enough" spiel about donating to the Flight Plan.
 
What a s**t time to be alive when we're complaining about a football club's membership slogans...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top