Roast Rants, off-topic banter, who ignores who & what Greg Williams' relatives know

Remove this Banner Ad

Masquerade said:
You've made five posts on the topic. All sarcastic comments that've contributed nothing. Rors was the one that started it hours after it ended.

But no, I'm derailing it.

i haven't resorted to one personal insult. You, Joffa and Rors combined? Yeah a few insults there. But no, I'm the child and the petty one.
Click to expand...
So the 2 of you personally attack Joffa because Joffa shared his thoughts on here about what some random dude on FB said????

Sorry guys or girls, but it's actually you that are in the wrong this time
 
VDS66 said:
Lighten up sweetie. :)

This place will do your head in, otherwise.

I just take the piss. Life's too short to worry about Joffa.

And if you want to get technical, it's a trade thread. There is nothing serious to contribute to your discussion because it is off topic. Did you honestly expect a serious debate?
Click to expand...
I dont even worry about Joffa mate.

So lets trade Paddy and pick one for Fyfe
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Rors said:
So the 2 of you personally attack Joffa because Joffa shared his thoughts on here about what some random dude on FB said????

Sorry guys or girls, but it's actually you that are in the wrong this time
Click to expand...
And to think I was out at the Nova watching T2 while being savaged on Bigfooty.

So disappointing to have missed it.
 
PrinceofSeaford said:
He didn't say you named anyone. Just pointed out that when you read it on Facebook, you could have commented in the replies section and said what you think but instead chose to come on here and s**t can them anonymously where they can't see it let alone defend themselves
Click to expand...
Boo Fking Hoo, if you don't like what he posts, put him on ignore. I'm going to s**t can you anonymously, pull your head in troll.

Now we've got that out of the way, is there any real news here or are you all just bored?
 
zGHQb4O.gif
 
BrianSpeaking said:
Boo Fking Hoo, if you don't like what he posts, put him on ignore. I'm going to s**t can you anonymously, pull your head in troll.

Now we've got that out of the way, is there any real news here or are you all just bored?
Click to expand...

I'm not going to put him on ignore just because I don't like a few of his posts in every 100. If you don't like me telling him what I think then maybe put me on ignore? It goes both ways. I'm not saying this because I think what he did was mean or unfair I'm saying it because I think he's a pussy
 
PrinceofSeaford said:
I'm not going to put him on ignore just because I don't like a few of his posts in every 100. If you don't like me telling him what I think then maybe put me on ignore? It goes both ways. I'm not saying this because I think what he did was mean or unfair I'm saying it because I think he's a pussy
Click to expand...
I'll only reply to you once as I have never read anything of yours but if I have it was instantly forgettable.

For a start you presumptious fool I did reply to the post on Facebook in the same way, that it was ridiculous, so thre goes you stupid point.

Secondly I will respond when and where I like about trading and wont be bullied by some anonymous nobody like you.

Thirdly to attack me personally shows who the gutless coward is. Maybe if you got your fat arse off the couch you might be able to achieve something.

Loud mouths like you would never have the discipline to run marathons.

So tosser. First and last time I respond to you.
That other poster is 18 so child. You have no excuse apart from being a fool.

See ya jerk
 
Joffaboy said:
I'll only reply to you once as I have never read anything of yours but if I have it was instantly forgettable.

For a start you presumptious fool I did reply to the post on Facebook in the same way, that it was ridiculous, so thre goes you stupid point.

Secondly I will respond when and where I like about trading and wont be bullied by some anonymous nobody like you.

Thirdly to attack me personally shows who the gutless coward is. Maybe if you got your fat arse off the couch you might be able to achieve something.

Loud mouths like you would never have the discipline to run marathons.

So tosser. First and last time I respond to you.
That other poster is 18 so child. You have no excuse apart from being a fool.

See ya jerk
Click to expand...

I bet you didn't comment calling the bloke a dumb campaigner like you did here though did you?

Get a grip I'm not bullying you. Just telling you that your soft because, of all the comments you could choose to discuss on this forum, you chose the guy on Facebook suggesting we trade paddy and pick 1.

What were you expecting? A pat on the back and a few likes? Or for people to go and check it out so we can all have a laugh?

I'm not saying you can't post anywhere or anytime because you can but don't get sad when a couple of blokes call you out for being soft as butter and a guy who picks on the easy targets.

As for getting my ass off the couch and trying to achieve something, I'm 19, living out of home, go to uni, play football on weekends and still work 30 hours a week. What were you doing at that age?
 
aussierulesrules said:
I love how if you give a critique of someone from our club that isn't positive and blowing smoke up their ass you have "an agenda" or you're a "hater"! It's freaking hilarious! All these sort of discussions would be going on in match-committee as well and they probably get heated, as I'm sure they also don't all agree with everything each other says, but does that mean if someone in there makes a case for why someone should be dropped, by pointing out their weaknesses/shortcomings, they too are a "hater?

Well I disagree. Not sure if you've been to all our home games, but I have and I've sat on the wing on level 3 and had a great view of so many of Tom's ruck contests and he's been getting regularly mandandled/ragdolled and badly beaten in a hell of a lot of them and this is enabling whoever he's rucking against in these instances to put the ball on a platter for their midfield. Not every single time, but way too much.

This puts us on the back foot immediately at stoppage after stoppage and given that this is exactly what I said in the preseason I was concerned might happen (now that going 3rd-up is banned) I'm not at all surprised that the club have made this move, if they feel Billy is going OK.

It might not be what some want to hear- just as it wasn't what many wanted to hear when I raised the idea of trading McEvoy about half way through his last year with us- but the simple fact is that at 201cm, Tom is now very much on the short side for the ruck and with that being the case, you need to have something else really going for you if you want to be really competitive against the best in that role and unfortunately he is also stick-thin, which means he is going to get regularly manhandled/ragdolled. He has a good leap (which makes him OK at centre bounces), but it's not Nic Nat/Paddy Ryder type good, so all that combined he just doesn't really have much going for him at the boundary throw-ins, or around the ground ball-up's- which of course would be why we went 3rd-up so much last year (about 32% of our hitouts were by those going 3rd-up!).

I've been a big fan of Tom over the journey and loved so much of what he did last year, but that doesn't mean I'm going to close my eyes to what I see going on, or pretend that at 201cm, very thin and without extraordinary ruck craft or leap he is likely to be really competitive with those who are either much taller, stronger, both, or simply better than him in the ruck contests. Last year we could get away with that because we could go 3rd-up and cover for these shortcomings Tom had in the around-the-ground ruck contests and he could make an impact outside of these contests, but the rule change has made everything different and his ruck deficiencies are being regularly exposed and we're paying a price for it.

Sure our midfield aren't great, but they're on the back foot from the get-go if whoever Tom is rucking against is killing him and putting it on a platter for his midfield.

Which is why I said that if he's going to make it if they continue to not allow going 3rd-up I believe he needs to start having the types of games he had against Sydney in the JLT far more often (high disposals or clearances, etc, like a Stef Martin), as I don't see him suddenly growing 7 or 8cm, adding 10kg without losing all his mobility/agility, getting a bigger leap all of a sudden, or improving his ruck craft so much that it overcomes all these other deficiencies.

You may see this as "harsh", but that doesn't mean it's not true, as much as we might not want it to be this way.
Click to expand...
tl;dr.
However you are a hater who has an agenda.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

aussierulesrules said:
Lol. You're a joke. I look forward to more of your melts of others melts while not realising your extraordinary hypocrisy.

You've got nothing but hot air.
Click to expand...
You have a wonderful sense of humour.

Looking forward to your wonderful word salad posts that are so long and boring that nobody in their right mind would bother reading them.

Life is too short.
 
ARR vs Joffaboy is highly entertaining!

I sense the argument is starting to die down which makes me very sad. So:

Personally, I think you're both wrong.

Hickey is easily better than Billy but I don't think it's an agenda by the club either.

Edit: Also I think Joffa is just baiting you ARR and it's pretty funny :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:
 
aussierulesrules said:
I love how if you give a critique of someone from our club that isn't positive and blowing smoke up their ass you have "an agenda" or you're a "hater", according to some! It's bloody hilarious! All these sort of discussions would be going on in match-committee as well and they probably get heated, as I'm sure they also don't all agree with everything each other says, but does that mean if someone in there makes a case for why someone should be dropped- by pointing out their weaknesses/shortcomings- they too are a "hater!? :D

Well I disagree. Not sure if you've been to all our home games, but I have and I've sat on the wing on level 3 and had a great view of so many of Tom's ruck contests and he's been getting regularly mandandled/ragdolled and badly beaten in a hell of a lot of them and this is enabling whoever he's rucking against in these instances to put the ball on a platter for their midfield. Not every single time, but way too much.

This puts us on the back foot immediately at stoppage after stoppage and given that this is exactly what I said in the preseason I was concerned might happen (now that going 3rd-up is banned) I'm not at all surprised that the club have made this move, if they feel Billy is going OK.

It might not be what some want to hear- just as it wasn't what many wanted to hear when I raised the idea of trading McEvoy about half way through his last year with us, because of his deficiencies- but the simple fact is that at 201cm, Tom is now very much on the short side for the ruck and with that being the case, you need to have something else really going for you if you want to be really competitive against the best in that role and unfortunately he is also stick-thin, which means he is going to get regularly manhandled/ragdolled. He has a good leap (which makes him OK at centre bounces), but it's not Nic Nat/Paddy Ryder type good, so all that combined he just doesn't really have much going for him at the boundary throw-ins, or around the ground ball-up's- which of course would be why we went 3rd-up so much last year (about 32% of our hitouts were by those going 3rd-up!).

I've been a big fan of Tom over the journey and loved so much of what he did last year, but that doesn't mean I'm going to close my eyes to what I see going on, or pretend that at 201cm, very thin and without extraordinary ruck craft or leap he is likely to be really competitive with those who are either much taller, stronger, both, or simply better than him in the ruck contests. Last year we could get away with that because we could go 3rd-up and cover for these shortcomings Tom had in the around-the-ground ruck contests and he could make an impact outside of these contests, but the rule change has made everything different and his ruck deficiencies are being regularly exposed and we're paying a price for it.

Sure our midfield aren't great, but they're on the back foot from the get-go if whoever Tom is rucking against is killing him and putting it on a platter for his midfield.

Which is why I said that if he's going to make it if they continue to not allow going 3rd-up I believe he needs to start having the types of games he had against Sydney in the JLT far more often (high disposals or clearances, etc, like a Stef Martin), as I don't see him suddenly growing 7 or 8cm, adding 10kg without losing all his mobility/agility, getting a bigger leap all of a sudden, or improving his ruck craft so much that it overcomes all these other deficiencies.

You may see this as "harsh", but that doesn't mean it's not true, as much as we might not want it to be this way.
Click to expand...
Wait a sec. Im half way through your post.
I'll just get a drink. Then i'll reply :D
 
aussierulesrules said:
I love how if you give a critique of someone from our club that isn't positive and blowing smoke up their ass you have "an agenda" or you're a "hater", according to some! It's bloody hilarious! All these sort of discussions would be going on in match-committee as well and they probably get heated, as I'm sure they also don't all agree with everything each other says, but does that mean if someone in there makes a case for why someone should be dropped- by pointing out their weaknesses/shortcomings- they too are a "hater!? :D

Well I disagree. Not sure if you've been to all our home games, but I have and I've sat on the wing on level 3 and had a great view of so many of Tom's ruck contests and he's been getting regularly mandandled/ragdolled and badly beaten in a hell of a lot of them and this is enabling whoever he's rucking against in these instances to put the ball on a platter for their midfield. Not every single time, but way too much.

This puts us on the back foot immediately at stoppage after stoppage and given that this is exactly what I said in the preseason I was concerned might happen (now that going 3rd-up is banned) I'm not at all surprised that the club have made this move, if they feel Billy is going OK.

It might not be what some want to hear- just as it wasn't what many wanted to hear when I raised the idea of trading McEvoy about half way through his last year with us, because of his deficiencies- but the simple fact is that at 201cm, Tom is now very much on the short side for the ruck and with that being the case, you need to have something else really going for you if you want to be really competitive against the best in that role and unfortunately he is also stick-thin, which means he is going to get regularly manhandled/ragdolled. He has a good leap (which makes him OK at centre bounces), but it's not Nic Nat/Paddy Ryder type good, so all that combined he just doesn't really have much going for him at the boundary throw-ins, or around the ground ball-up's- which of course would be why we went 3rd-up so much last year (about 32% of our hitouts were by those going 3rd-up!).

I've been a big fan of Tom over the journey and loved so much of what he did last year, but that doesn't mean I'm going to close my eyes to what I see going on, or pretend that at 201cm, very thin and without extraordinary ruck craft or leap he is likely to be really competitive with those who are either much taller, stronger, both, or simply better than him in the ruck contests. Last year we could get away with that because we could go 3rd-up and cover for these shortcomings Tom had in the around-the-ground ruck contests and he could make an impact outside of these contests, but the rule change has made everything different and his ruck deficiencies are being regularly exposed and we're paying a price for it.

Sure our midfield aren't great, but they're on the back foot from the get-go if whoever Tom is rucking against is killing him and putting it on a platter for his midfield.

Which is why I said that if he's going to make it if they continue to not allow going 3rd-up I believe he needs to start having the types of games he had against Sydney in the JLT far more often (high disposals or clearances, etc, like a Stef Martin), as I don't see him suddenly growing 7 or 8cm, adding 10kg without losing all his mobility/agility, getting a bigger leap all of a sudden, or improving his ruck craft so much that it overcomes all these other deficiencies.

You may see this as "harsh", but that doesn't mean it's not true, as much as we might not want it to be this way.
Click to expand...
Longer! Hickey! Longer! Hickey! Longer! Hickey! lol

giphy.gif
 
I
aussierulesrules said:
I love how if you give a critique of someone from our club that isn't positive and blowing smoke up their ass you have "an agenda" or you're a "hater", according to some! It's bloody hilarious! All these sort of discussions would be going on in match-committee as well and they probably get heated, as I'm sure they also don't all agree with everything each other says, but does that mean if someone in there makes a case for why someone should be dropped- by pointing out their weaknesses/shortcomings- they too are a "hater!? :D

Well I disagree. Not sure if you've been to all our home games, but I have and I've sat on the wing on level 3 and had a great view of so many of Tom's ruck contests and he's been getting regularly mandandled/ragdolled and badly beaten in a hell of a lot of them and this is enabling whoever he's rucking against in these instances to put the ball on a platter for their midfield. Not every single time, but way too much.

This puts us on the back foot immediately at stoppage after stoppage and given that this is exactly what I said in the preseason I was concerned might happen (now that going 3rd-up is banned) I'm not at all surprised that the club have made this move, if they feel Billy is going OK.

It might not be what some want to hear- just as it wasn't what many wanted to hear when I raised the idea of trading McEvoy about half way through his last year with us, because of his deficiencies- but the simple fact is that at 201cm, Tom is now very much on the short side for the ruck and with that being the case, you need to have something else really going for you if you want to be really competitive against the best in that role and unfortunately he is also stick-thin, which means he is going to get regularly manhandled/ragdolled. He has a good leap (which makes him OK at centre bounces), but it's not Nic Nat/Paddy Ryder type good, so all that combined he just doesn't really have much going for him at the boundary throw-ins, or around the ground ball-up's- which of course would be why we went 3rd-up so much last year (about 32% of our hitouts were by those going 3rd-up!).

I've been a big fan of Tom over the journey and loved so much of what he did last year, but that doesn't mean I'm going to close my eyes to what I see going on, or pretend that at 201cm, very thin and without extraordinary ruck craft or leap he is likely to be really competitive with those who are either much taller, stronger, both, or simply better than him in the ruck contests. Last year we could get away with that because we could go 3rd-up and cover for these shortcomings Tom had in the around-the-ground ruck contests and he could make an impact outside of these contests, but the rule change has made everything different and his ruck deficiencies are being regularly exposed and we're paying a price for it.

Sure our midfield aren't great, but they're on the back foot from the get-go if whoever Tom is rucking against is killing him and putting it on a platter for his midfield.

Which is why I said that if he's going to make it if they continue to not allow going 3rd-up I believe he needs to start having the types of games he had against Sydney in the JLT far more often (high disposals or clearances, etc, like a Stef Martin), as I don't see him suddenly growing 7 or 8cm, adding 10kg without losing all his mobility/agility, getting a bigger leap all of a sudden, or improving his ruck craft so much that it overcomes all these other deficiencies.

You may see this as "harsh", but that doesn't mean it's not true, as much as we might not want it to be this way.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you say except for your paragraph spacing...
 
Masquerade said:
He was pretty aggressive in the game-day threads, I'll give you that. I think the last few posts he's been fooling around though. That being said, I've had a few tiffs with him too so I'm not going to stop you from giving him trouble.

With Hickey, I think it's a case of seeing what you want to see - and I say this in the nicest possible way. Purely from a statistical perspective, he's averaging more hitouts, more clearances, more tackles and more inside 50s than last year, where he was highly lauded. In fact I remember a thread popping up about him breaking our all time hitout record too last year and he's currently on track to beating that! Yes, he is averaging 12 disposals this year compared to 13 last year but honestly, if you guys were fine with 13 in 2016 I can't see how 12 is suddenly such a big problem.

For me, the third-man rule is a nice little way to criticise him but I don't think the argument holds much merit. We all rave about Acres running through the centre square bombing the ball to Roo or Ross doing the same against the Lions (even Dunstan had such moments) but guess who was feeding them the ball on the platter? Longer, on the other hand, was criticised by Eddie McGuire for doing the same thing at every stoppage. "Brings his left hand across his hip at all times" - I'm paraphrasing but if Eddie can see the problem, then I think AFL coaches would've as well. He may have improved since then, but we can't say for sure.

We also say that Bruce in the ruck is an issue, since the teams tends to lose a lot of momentum when he goes to contend stoppages. One, that tells me that Hickey must be having some impact in the ruck. If he was being brushed aside as see as you say, then how does Bruce do so much worse? I mean they shouldn't be that much of a difference if Hickey is struggling so so badly. Two, Longer is younger and also, from pre-season reports, less fit than Tom. This means that Bruce might have more ruck stints. Even if Billy has become the better ruckman, is he good enough to cover the potentially extra time Bruce does in the ruck? Eh, I don't think so. One more thing is that Hickey, in a supposed down year, averages one more clearance than Billy did back in 2015. Is our midfield strong enough to lose that one clearance? Or the extra tackle? Probably, but these are also points in Tom's favour that seem to be forgotten.

You also say the coaches might have seen Billy dominate Hickey at training. Fair enough. The coaches see a lot more than I do, so their opinion is very important. The proof will come tomorrow ultimately. Billy is coming up against a weaker ruck division than Hickey has - certainly theres no Martin, Grundy or Gawn to contend with! If he's really that much of an improvement, we'll find out by 6 PM tomorrow.

IMO, I'm tipping he'll disappoint. I don't want him to. I want him to get 60 hitouts and 15 possies and we win by 10 goals. I'd love to be wrong but I don't see it.
Click to expand...

Bump.

aussierulesrules care to reply?
 
Masquerade said:
Bump.

aussierulesrules care to reply?
Click to expand...
To you, after the way you carried on last night in such a disrespectful and belittling way? Are you on crack?

I'm more than happy to talk to anyone who can have a reasoned conversation and not carry on like an arrogant "twat" when someone says something they don't agree with, but if you think I'm going to be giving you the time of day if you're going to respond like that you must be high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top