No Oppo Supporters Non Bulldog Footy Talk - Bulldogs only - Part 3

[Charlie Bucket]

Nose beers is such a lame term.

Not a beer drinker LG ? How bout a glass of Nosé ?

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

Don’t care how good he was, I wish Brian Lake never pulled on out colours.

 

[paulveed]

People can think I make things up but that is indeed my experience and one side of my family has had a long running addiction issue both alcohol and drugs so I can speak to this with some awareness.

But I guess I’m a live and let live kind of guy, you make your own mistakes deal with them. We can try and guide people to the right path and help then when they get there but I don’t think it’s possobe to pretend that we can keep everyone on the straight and narrow by simply testing them.

I stand by my opinion that footy players should be treated ni differently to run of the mill man on the street doing his job.

So perhaps the answer is to test eveyone? I wouldn’t have a problem with that because then eveyone is being treated equally. I can’t stand the “they are role models” line. It’s an excuse to be a voyeur into celebrities lives in my opinion.

Ps I work for myself so I would carry out my own test so I’d be pretty safe I think?

Matt, I was not in any way implying that you made your story up. If you took it that way, you mistook my meaning there.

I agree with your point that everyone should be tested, without exception. This cr4p about exempting people who have, or claim, a mental problem is outrageous. If a player has a mental problem, the club doctors would be in a position to state that any positive test results could be a result of his medications, and the clubs would/should be aware of what medicines the player is taking.
Results of all tests going to the club medicos, gives a chance to sort the situation out, hopefully before it becomes a problem, and before WADA needs to become involved.

 

[Mattdougie]

Matt, I was not in any way implying that you made your story up. If you took it that way, you mistook my meaning there.

I agree with your point that everyone should be tested, without exception. This cr4p about exempting people who have, or claim, a mental problem is outrageous. If a player has a mental problem, the club doctors would be in a position to state that any positive test results could be a result of his medications, and the clubs would/should be aware of what medicines the player is taking.
Results of all tests going to the club medicos, gives a chance to sort the situation out, hopefully before it becomes a problem, and before WADA needs to become involved.

You misunderstand me slightly

I don’t think ANYONE should be tested other than peole who’s work endangers or serves others.

But the rest of us mere minions(including footy players) should have no other judging factor than the law of the land and if you choose to break that or not that is an individual decision.

 

[footscray1973]

Imagine if Lake, Carlisle and Hannebury played at the same club?!

Maybe Saints could recruit Lake as a mature age rookie to cover for Carlisle, unless he ends up in the big house...

 

[Yojimbo]

Carlton: 15-10-100 (360) (24.00)
Essendon: 14-7-91 (350) (25.00)

Carlton: Cunningham 3, Gibbons 3, Cripps 2, McGovern 2, Dow 1, McKay 1, Lobbe 1, J Silvagni 1,
C Curnow 1.
Essendon: Stringer 3, Brown 3, McGrath 2, Tipungwuti 2, Daniher 1, Z Clarke 1, Baguley 1,
Laverde 1.

Contested Possession: Carlton 160 Vs Essendon 141.
Centre Clearances: Carlton 21 Vs Essendon 9.
Marks Inside 50: Carlton 7 Vs Essendon 14.

Cripps had a big night, Essendon still ugly in the midfield. Zach Clarke 37 Hit Outs, 1 goal, 104 Points.

Carlton scored heavily from the stoppage.

 

[mackem]

Carlton: 15-10-100 (360) (24.00)
Essendon: 14-7-91 (350) (25.00)

Carlton: Cunningham 3, Gibbons 3, Cripps 2, McGovern 2, Dow 1, McKay 1, Lobbe 1, J Silvagni 1,
C Curnow 1.
Essendon: Stringer 3, Brown 3, McGrath 2, Tipungwuti 2, Daniher 1, Z Clarke 1, Baguley 1,
Laverde 1.

Contested Possession: Carlton 160 Vs Essendon 141.
Centre Clearances: Carlton 21 Vs Essendon 9.
Marks Inside 50: Carlton 7 Vs Essendon 14.

Cripps had a big night, Essendon still ugly in the midfield. Zach Clarke 37 Hit Outs, 1 goal, 104 Points.

Carlton scored heavily from the stoppage.

Pardon my ignorance but what do the figures in brackets mean?

 

[Mattdougie]

Essendons midfield is rubbish. They are not winning a flag with that set up

 

[The Inbetweener]

Adams not named for Brisbane, assuming it’s an injury?

 

[Bont2Bruce]

Adams not named for Brisbane, assuming it’s an injury?

https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-02...s-set-to-launch-twoheaded-giant-in-forward-50

Western Bulldogs recruit Marcus Adams has had a cleanout of his right knee and will resume running in two weeks.

 

[Fossie 32]

You misunderstand me slightly

I don’t think ANYONE should be tested other than peole who’s work endangers or serves others.

But the rest of us mere minions(including footy players) should have no other judging factor than the law of the land and if you choose to break that or not that is an individual decision.

I think the AwFL and clubs as employers of the players should have a say about whether they want their players taking drugs. And they make their money from the fans so they should have a say too.

 

[Yojimbo]

Pardon my ignorance but what do the figures in brackets mean?

Total Disposals, and Disposals Per Goal, sorry about that analytical tool have been using in the off season
force of habit.

 

[Mattdougie]

I think the AwFL and clubs as employers of the players should have a say about whether they want their players taking drugs. And they make their money from the fans so they should have a say too.

I think the AwFL and clubs as employers of the players should have a say about whether they want their players taking drugs. And they make their money from the fans so they should have a say too.

100000000% disagree we as fans have some right to know what players do In their own time.

Does your employee drug test you? Do they have right to know everything you do coz they pay your salary?

 

[Fossie 32]

100000000% disagree we as fans have some right to know what players do In their own time.

Does your employee drug test you? Do they have right to know everything you do coz they pay your salary?

Self employed If I was employing someone and thought they were taking drugs that might impair their performance I would want to know about it.

 

[Mattdougie]

Self employed If I was employing someone and thought they were taking drugs that might impair their performance I would want to know about it.

Unfortunately I think the recent past has shown that players can use drugs and play to exceptionally high levels


I won’t name names we all know the obvious ones.

I’m also self employed and I have no concern what my employees do on their time off. They come to work and work and act normally it’s none of my business. They are adults making their own deciosn who am I to judge them? I really struggle with the concept of others trying to tell or make people live to their own conceptions of what life should be for everyone.

Obviously nothing I do endangers lives or that would be a different issue

 

[Fossie 32]

Unfortunately I think the recent past has shown that players can use drugs and play to exceptionally high levels


I won’t name names we all know the obvious ones.

I’m also self employed and I have no concern what my employees do on their time off. They come to work and work and act normally it’s none of my business or concern. I really struggle with the concept of others trying to tell or make people live to their own conceptions of what life should be for everyone.

Obviously nothing I do endangers lives or that would be a different issue

Maybe they don't perform optimally even though they act normal. They may end up like Ben Cousins. Just say no.

 

[Mattdougie]

Maybe they don't perform optimally even though they act normal. They may end up like Ben Cousins. Just say no.

They perform to a level I require and meet time constraints I don’t care how they do it. I’m not encouraging them and I believe most don’t do it but I’m sure a couple do and good luck to them. That’s their life if they turn out like Ben Cousobs then that’s their path. They choose it they walked it.

Obviously if I notice something I say something or question them but that’s very rare so it isn’t a problem for me.

I have indeed let people go because of their addictions but the two I have let go where for alcohol and gambling. Both meant they wouldn’t turn up for work when required so I moved them on.

 

[Fossie 32]

They perform to a level I require and meet time constraints I don’t care how they do it. I’m not encouraging them and I believe most don’t do it but I’m sure a couple do and good luck to them. That’s their life if they turn out like Ben Cousobs then that’s their path. They choose it they walked it.

Obviously if I notice something I say something or question them but that’s very rare so it isn’t a problem for me.

I have indeed let people go because of their addictions but the two I have let go where for alcohol and gambling. Both meant they wouldn’t turn up for work when required so I moved them on.

By ‘they’ I meant players

 

[BRWB]

I think the AwFL and clubs as employers of the players should have a say about whether they want their players taking drugs. And they make their money from the fans so they should have a say too.

You could say that about every enterprise. Every organisation makes money from the public/consumers/fans (govt via taxes, private via goods and services) so on that theory the public has a right to know if (hypothetically) my son has smoked some dope on the weekend after his forced drug test at Coles where he operates a checkout comes up positive.

I get that some people have bad experiences with drugs, but that doesn't mean we should require everyone to be tested. Its an out and out invasion of privacy and individual rights. Why not just go to the China model where everyone is under surveillance and get 'good' points and 'bad' points tallied up and rewarded or punished accordingly? Or just microchip everyone so we know where everyone is all the time so criminals can be easily identified? Why not have cameras inside every home? Afterall, most violence and child abuse happens in the home (and if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about...) Where do you stop?

Having said that I have no problem with drug testing for people in charge of potentially dangerous equipment or machinery (eg police, forklift drivers, etc) and that includes all drivers because there is a clear safety risk for the community in those cases. But not for footy players, its just none of our business what they do in their private time and we certainly don't have 'the right' to know anything about them beyond what they do for about 3hrs every weekend in footy season....IMO

 

[Yojimbo]

Why not have cameras inside every home?

They can already see inside your home through some of the new televisions and some baby monitors, kind of
like reverse gogglebox not that I watch that crap, but I have seen the ads. You just have to hope the right
people are watching, but who are the right people ?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

They can already see inside your home through some of the new televisions and some baby monitors, kind of
like reverse gogglebox not that I watch that crap, but I have seen the ads. You just have to hope the right
people are watching, but who are the right people ?

Those google thingumies that Eddie Betts talks to are already spying on the household. And they want us all to buy them...

 

[Fossie 32]

You could say that about every enterprise. Every organisation makes money from the public/consumers/fans (govt via taxes, private via goods and services) so on that theory the public has a right to know if (hypothetically) my son has smoked some dope on the weekend after his forced drug test at Coles where he operates a checkout comes up positive.

I get that some people have bad experiences with drugs, but that doesn't mean we should require everyone to be tested. Its an out and out invasion of privacy and individual rights. Why not just go to the China model where everyone is under surveillance and get 'good' points and 'bad' points tallied up and rewarded or punished accordingly? Or just microchip everyone so we know where everyone is all the time so criminals can be easily identified? Why not have cameras inside every home? Afterall, most violence and child abuse happens in the home (and if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about...) Where do you stop?

Having said that I have no problem with drug testing for people in charge of potentially dangerous equipment or machinery (eg police, forklift drivers, etc) and that includes all drivers because there is a clear safety risk for the community in those cases. But not for footy players, its just none of our business what they do in their private time and we certainly don't have 'the right' to know anything about them beyond what they do for about 3hrs every weekend in footy season....IMO

They are paid megabucks and do intensive training, dietary control etc to get the best out of their bodies. So if people who pay them believe that stuffing dangerous substances into themselves may interfere with that, I think they have the right to know about it. And I have tipped in a fair bit too plus am a member so think I have a right to say something about it too. Not that anybody is gonna listen. If they don't like that they can get another job. IMHO

I can see the arguments to the contrary but having seen people * themselves up with drugs, that's just how I feel.

 

[BRWB]

They are paid megabucks and do intensive training, dietary control etc to get the best out of their bodies. So if people who pay them believe that stuffing dangerous substances into themselves may interfere with that, I think they have the right to know about it. And I have tipped in a fair bit too plus am a member so think I have a right to say something about it too. Not that anybody is gonna listen. If they don't like that they can get another job. IMHO

I can see the arguments to the contrary but having seen people **** themselves up with drugs, that's just how I feel.

Yeah we differ...CEO's, some entertainers and barristers get paid megabucks should they all be subject to drug testing? Reckon you'd just about shut the legal system down if barristers were drug tested.

And just because you pay for a product (in this case AFL) or a worker (in this case employer clubs) it doesn't give anyone the right to invade the privacy of the workers or producers of the product. IMO. Its like saying 'I paid a lot of money for my TV and I demand and have the right to have the manufacturers and retailers of my tv drug tested'.

I can see that people have bad experiences with things like drugs but that shouldn't give them any 'rights' to invade the privacy of other people. Just IMO.

 

[Fossie 32]

Yeah we differ...CEO's, some entertainers and barristers get paid megabucks should they all be subject to drug testing? Reckon you'd just about shut the legal system down if barristers were drug tested.

And just because you pay for a product (in this case AFL) or a worker (in this case employer clubs) it doesn't give anyone the right to invade the privacy of the workers or producers of the product. IMO. Its like saying 'I paid a lot of money for my TV and I demand and have the right to have the manufacturers and retailers of my tv drug tested'.

I can see that people have bad experiences with things like drugs but that shouldn't give them any 'rights' to invade the privacy of other people. Just IMO.

If they were taking drugs in the change rooms it would not be ok. But as long as they wait half an hour and go off and do it somewhere else, its ok?

 

[mackem]

Total Disposals, and Disposals Per Goal, sorry about that analytical tool have been using in the off season
force of habit.

Thanks for the explanation. I will know next time I see it.