Well I'm not necessarily disputing that at all, just saying you can't get a threepeat out of an AFL team if you don't have a great relationship with your players as a coach.
Yeah it's a strange mentality with this lot, it's like they're constantly thinking 'we hate what Blighty says! So rather than put him on ignore, or not read his posts, let's go to the thread we know he'll be on and comment on every single post he makes, that'll show him!'
Ahhh the good old GFC propaganda paper, would love someone to post the last article they wrote criticising the club in any way, think you'd have to go back to 2006.
If you want that Bucks stat as some sort of relevance, let us counter that with CS's record against Clarko. Meaningless.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
It's not great and counts for nothing if you consistently fail in finals, I mean what's the point of winning season games when you lose when it counts? Do any Hawthorn supporters care Scott has a better season winning % than Clarko? Or do any Doggies supporters care? Or do any supporters other than Geelong supporters care?
As I said, all these stats are meaningless, but you will dredge out any negative stats against CS, eg Buckley, to support your theories. Against that are plenty of positive supporting stats for CS.
No doubt you can dispute what I say, but at least understand context, I was responding to someone who said Bucks and Ross Lyon were my love child's when I've never said anything about them apart from what I said above. I wasn't trying to denigrate Scott in any way but just re-hashing what I said about the relevant coaches disproving the assertion that I somehow love them and want them at Geelong which just isn't true.
Apologies. One of my (many) bad habits is starting to read threads from the last page backwards.
That isn't self evident. Why can't you? And what is a "great relationship" between player and coach?
A relationship is built on great communication so I thought it was self evident that's what I meant.
It's a complete disgrace and surely has to put to bed this notion that we've been competitive (which quite clearly means to those that say it seriously competing for the flag) in the last 5 years. What we have been plain and simple is a complete failure in finals and 8 other teams have been better than us in finals during that time.
That's a pretty awful record right there.
In other words, weirdly enough, you've got nothing. Am shocked bc.
And I don't remember them doing much then even they there was plenty to say.
You raise head to head - Luke Beveridge is 0 - 5 against Geelong
His w-l record is not his own doing (entirely), but the finals losses are?
For me it's like looking after a pet. I can't just ignore it, that would be cruel.
It's so weird right, the bar changes with every comparison where, strangely, Chris Scott always ends up last.
Sorry, but when you play finals you do have the opportunity of winning the big one. It only comes down to personal opinion if you think the team can or can't win it. Nevertheless, by being in finals an opportunity has been created. For some reason you continue to avoid giving Scott any acknowledgement for what he has tried to achieve in turning around a declining list since 2011. Only three of those clubs you have listed have won a flag. Do we classify the others as mediocre as well, given they have not won one? And to answer the question, given the circumstances of addressing the renewal of a declining list, yes the team has been competitive and will continue to be. Good enough to win a flag? The opportunity will be there.
I can see that you're softening your stance on Scott in a few of your recent posts. I'm really glad to see that you are actually a reasonable person.
