Remove this Banner Ad

Bluemour Discussion Thread XVI - Facts Not Welcome

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shot gun effect ?
In the words of a famous redhead....please explain

:) Look, we all hear things from all different sources but in the end we find that only a select source/s prove to be right over and again.

Keep bringing the good oil to the table and you won't need me to apologise. Keep it up GS.
 
:) Look, we all hear things from all different sources but in the end we find that only a select source/s prove to be right over and again.

Keep bringing the good oil to the table and you won't need me to apologise. Keep it up GS.
Don’t think I’ll be around much longer I’m a couple of points off a permanent ban. No big deal.
 
This thread has gone away from the 'thanks, we will wait and see' philosophy of past years. Mind you, simply stating you don't think something is true isn't a crime either.

Posters can post their information and sit back and wait to be proven right (hopefully with some humility), and those who have a poor track record of making things up will be weeded out eventually.

It's a rumour thread, not a facts thread. Let's not take it too seriously.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Don’t think I’ll be around much longer I’m a couple of points off a permanent ban. No big deal.

Why is that? Because you don't fit into a neat little parcel type?

Reckon we're better than that here and that things are changing....for the better
 
I was speaking with a GM of a club recently and they were talking about their ideal coaches box make up. In their opinion the Head Coach should be responsible for building relationships and fostering the team culture, with tacticians appointed to specialise in game day and across the different lines.

I have heard from senior people regarding this and Caracalla, supposedly they rate him very highly tactically but lacking in the other categories.
 
Trite.

Finding the right decision and doing it regardless of what anyone thinks is what a leader does. Strength is more likely to have you stick by a poor decision out of stubbornness, something that is plentiful in AFL circles anyway. A desire for 'hardness' or to make a harsh call is frequently nothing more than a front for someone wanting
No, I don't. I see it as the right call. There is no such thing as a 'hard' decision; making the right decision can be difficult, but difficulty alone does not make decisions right.

Dropping Murphy earlier in the year could've been the right decision, but the decision not to is certainly being vindicated at the moment. Is it easier to drop a good player underachieving, or
No, I don't. I see it as the right call. There is no such thing as a 'hard' decision; making the right decision can be difficult, but difficulty alone does not make decisions right.

Dropping Murphy earlier in the year could've been the right decision, but the decision not to is certainly being vindicated at the moment. Is it easier to drop a good player underachieving, or to continue to play them and to back them to return to form? Look at the current primary example of 'I maketh the tough calls' in the AFL in Don Pike; has his various hard stances on things like players leaving, culture, training standards, commitment borne much by way of reward? Or has it resulted in players wanting out (Lever, McGovern, Cameron) or more money to stay (Jenkins, Lynch)?

Hawthorn could be on the way to renewing their flag threats, and I do find pronouncements of their demise premature at the moment. However - and this is a pretty big one - the decisions I mentioned - the trading of Mitchell and Lewis - were not hard decisions in any way whatsoever. What they were was necessary; keeping both around results in artificially maintaining their ladder position for a season or so longer but not being any credible threat at the time either. The decisions and the manner in which they were done was intelligent and considerate, and were very much (IMO) the right decision, just as dropping the player who didn't want to be traded - Roughead - because he's not as good as he once was.

There is something of a deification of people making 'tough calls' in sporting circles; I dropped player x, and we won, ergo my decision is vindicated. What this is is effectively ignoring why that decision was the correct call, and whether you're confusing correlation with causality. I genuinely dislike this kind of reasoning, because - like all such myths - it is the result of appearances over facts, the 'quality' of individuals over their intelligence or the canniness of their decisions. We still want to believe in the godlike, the mythological, ignoring the prosaic or the practical.

Doesn't make it any more true in AFL circles than it does in general.
In 1979 William Styron wrote the novel 'Sophies Choice' about a polish woman in a nazi concentration camp that had to decide which of her two children would live and which would be killed. It was met with rave reviews and would later be adapted into a movie where Meryl Steep won an Oscar for best female actresses. Both the novel and the film received 0 stars for staunch upcoming reviewer 'GethelREAD' who claimed "There are no such thing as hard decisions, trash story'
 

Remove this Banner Ad

In 1979 William Styron wrote the novel 'Sophies Choice' about a polish woman in a nazi concentration camp that had to decide which of her two children would live and which would be killed. It was met with rave reviews and would later be adapted into a movie where Meryl Steep won an Oscar for best female actresses. Both the novel and the film received 0 stars for staunch upcoming reviewer 'GethelREAD' who claimed "There are no such thing as hard decisions, trash story'
Very droll.
 
Charlie gets his way on returning this year with medicos agreeing conservative approach not required but still has to pass 100% structural test and any issues to the contrary puts sitting out the season back on the table.
Gee have a look at that posted at 3pm yesterday.......

Does it show humility to quote your own posts?

Ok I’ll shut now hope I’ve made my point!
 
1/ Humility is not in my DNA

2/ Simply stating you don’t think something is true is one thing but the personal attacks ( not really personal we’re anonymous but you know what I mean) by the same arrogant snobs ( you know who I’m talking about ...Thy ) are another thing. And it’s on every thread!

PS The defence of the same poster/s (Thy) by mods is so obviously biased.

1/ Nobody gets to do what they want and say what they want and bait posters.

2/ I can't speak as to this as I never saw or actioned any reports to this end regarding your rumour.

PS/ Please highlight this defence. A lot of people think that the continued presence of posters means they are never pulled up. You don't see deleted posts or infractions or thread bans. You may see weeks off, although that seems to slip by some as well.

We do err on the side of support as a supporter forum. Some posters have a way of challenging others without stepping over the mark, some just tell others to **** off and get infracted for it. You know what I mean there.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Gee have a look at that posted at 3pm yesterday.......

Does it show humility to quote your own posts?

Ok I’ll shut now hope I’ve made my point!
Believe that is the first sign of BF madness ...
 
No. I admired the old, practical and pragmatic TODN, that didn't aspire to an ideology but dealt with situations on merit.

This is not a rumour. Good to have you back.

My stance on this thread has never changed Harks. Are you seeing what you want to see?

My only ideology for this forum is that we err on the side of support, don't let persistent negative agendas build up, post at a higher standard to the club's facebook page, don't get personal or abusive, and avoid attacking anyone at Carlton with words like 'spud', 'dud', 'r*****' etc.

Always has been thus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top