Review 24 - Ben Stratton (2019)

[Easy Slips Catch]

Posters who ignore the coaches votes

Except when the comparison is between Worp and Jaegar.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Stratton could have finished clear first in the PCM, but that still wouldn't change all the contests he was clearly beaten in, the all too frequent blunders, the poor kicking, the falling over his own feet, etc. Never mind the absolute embarrassment that was the pinching saga. That's what we all saw and that's what he gets judged on.

He may have been Hodge incarnate behind the scenes, but we don't see or hear that. We judge him by his performance on the field, and no matter how hard the club-sanctioned posters try and argue against it - he had his worst season for the club.

We have had some very surprising PCM results before. Lewis finishing 2nd in 2016 was another one.

PS - Merry Christmas

 

[cryptor]

Hypothetically the coaches could have identified that the way to beat a particularly good team was to cut off their ability to transition into forward 50 a particular way. They could have assigned Stratton the role for the match to make sure no matter what he fills some particular space on the field that would deny them the ability to do that. Stratton could then have fulfilled that role perfectly and it could have been the key reason why we beat the opposition. He could have done that without ever wracking up an effective disposal and even the player who seemed to be his direct opponent for most of the game could have snuck 3 goals by some other opportunistic route.

Without knowing that was the role he was given and how important that role was to winning we'd all sit here and think Stratton had an absolute mare. He didn't have an effective disposal, he barely got near it, and his direct opponent got loose and got 3 goals! While Frawley was playing on the linchpin key forward of their team and kept him to just 1 goal. He obviously played better!

In this instance Stratton would likely get full coaches votes for his performance. But everyone else (ie. fans, media, etc.) would probably reckon he needs to be dropped.

I'm not saying Stratton's performances can never be accurately gauged by those outside of the coaching group, just that he plays in a position and often performs jobs that are negating in nature and so it's very difficult to assess how he's performed without knowing exactly what he's been tasked with.

 

[Gralin]

Except when the comparison is between Worp and Jaegar.

Except when the votes support their existing view more like

 

[Mrzohs]

Except when the votes support their existing view more like

Its not rocket science Worpedo had a better season than Jags.
Does this make him a better player? No i wouldn't say so, lets watch 2020 if he has better year than him again i might say he is a more complete player.

 

[flinchfree]

Lol at this seriously lol mate as if these votes matter. By the way not everyone voted however in the PCM those that matter did anyways i have said my piece on this and no one at the club really cares what we all think about player performance or at least evaluation of player performance

Agree, but from the little I've read on here ( ) there has been a pretty strong correlation between poor opinion of a players ability and form, and their subsequent demotion to the magoos or after a time, delisting.
Many of the whipping boys don't turn it around and even the coaches end up losing belief that things will change for them.
TOB one of the few in recent years to upend his trajectory and prove to posters/supporters what the coaches thought could happen for him.

Don't think there are a tonne of fools on here who's eyes work THAT much differently to the coaching staff.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Ffs the pinching episode? Where u been mate he's been doing that for years. Did it two or 3 weeks prior playing on a brisbane gun no one raised an issue it was just brought to the attention because it was the blessed side on friday night that has the backing of a newspaper

 

[Beandip]

Perhaps Stratt's performance should be measured by the success of those around him (i.e. what he leverages) like Frawley and Sicily. If he fulfils his role structurally, perhaps they excel, and the sum of those parts exceeds individual performance...

 

[Bumps"N"Grins]

My thoughts on the Stratton saga are as simple as follows.

His attributes have changed and I would never going forward feel comfortable leaving home to play on the small forwards as he once did with aplomb, those days are past him Stratts Vs Charlie Cameron God help us.

Number three tall and direct traffic all day everyday.

 

[Furn2]

Strats didn't have the best year, he wasn't terrible either but its impossible to say why from where we sit.

Often, its as simple as a player carrying a few niggles, it could be the captaincy or it could be age or a combination, the club will know better than us and he's captain for 2020.

I always go back to Hodgey being written off after 2012 when it was just his knee needed to be fixed. He won a NS 3 years later and played 7 more seasons.

 

[bris tarangau]

Strats didn't have the best year, he wasn't terrible either but its impossible to say why from where we sit.

Often, its as simple as a player carrying a few niggles, it could be the captaincy or it could be age or a combination, the club will know better than us and he's captain for 2020.

I always go back to Hodgey being written off after 2012 when it was just his knee needed to be fixed. He won a NS 3 years later and played 7 more seasons.

Hodgey was 28 in 2012, Stratts was 30 at start of 2019 season.

 

[flashmanvc]

You ruined xmas with this post and your whole family should be ashamed of you.

I have posted on this topic already but I will say it again, Stratton finishing top 10 in the B&f was flat out weird.
Totally agree, he needs to lift big time in 2020 and I am not entirely sure giving him the captaincy again will help him do this.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Did you seriously just compare posters who have a different opinion on a players performance to anti-vaxers???????

I mean...............

You need to make an apology because that is probably the most offensive thing I have ever read on this forum.

Seriously WTF

I sure did, and I gave a pretty detailed explanation as to why this isn’t a case of opinions being equal.

People armed with half the facts thinking they know better than those in the football dept is real nuffie behavior.

So there’s no apology necessary.

I am loving the conspiracy theory of those who dare to suggest that the football dept have a better understanding of how a player has performed his role than a pleb in the stands is a “club sanctioned poster”.

Maybe it’s just called critical thinking.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

I sure did, and I gave a pretty detailed explanation as to why this isn’t a case of opinions being equal.

People armed with half the facts thinking they know better than those in the football dept is real nuffie behavior.

So there’s no apology necessary.

I am loving the conspiracy theory of those who dare to suggest that the football dept have a better understanding of how a player has performed his role than a pleb in the stands is a “club sanctioned poster”.

Maybe it’s just called critical thinking.

Right.....

So critical thinking is whenever anyone has a differing opinion to yourself you immediately compare them to anti vaxers? Unusual definition of critical thinking.

At a guess I would suggest the ratio of posters on this board who were surprised at Stratton top 10 finish is rather high so you basically just compared maybe half of these posters (possibly more) to child killing enthusiasts.

Seriously go away and think about it again.

And the comment about not all opinions being equal is absolute gold for a forum which is all about posting opinions is it not?

 

[eldorado]

you basically just compared maybe half of these posters (possibly more) to child killing enthusiasts.

Mate, I have read some overwrought, self-indulgent s**t on this board over the years, but you have just won the prize.

Congrats.

 

[B&GBlood]

Right.....

So critical thinking is whenever anyone has a differing opinion to yourself you immediately compare them to anti vaxers? Unusual definition of critical thinking.

At a guess I would suggest the ratio of posters on this board who were surprised at Stratton top 10 finish is rather high so you basically just compared maybe half of these posters (possibly more) to child killing enthusiasts.

Seriously go away and think about it again.

And the comment about not all opinions being equal is absolute gold for a forum which is all about posting opinions is it not?

Give it up Simon. No one is equating the death of children to footy. The point being made is simply one of possession of the most information/knowledge. The more info you have the better your opinion is likely to be. Re Stratton and his top ten finish. The people with the most info made that assertion I can wonder how they came to that result based on what I observed but I must assume the no parameters they were using were different to mine. Hence they know more than me about this. Ask yourself, why would the club pump up the tyres of an under performing player? That might be critical thinking.

 

[threesixpio]

I’m getting the mumps just reading some of this.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

Mate, I have read some overwrought, self-indulgent s**t on this board over the years, but you have just won the prize.

Congrats.

I'm sorry was I the one who bought anti vaxxers into this debate?

Yet I am the one who is being overwrought?

 

[threesixpio]

Jar Jar Binks is an anti-vaxxer. That’s why he’s always saying

“Measle so glad to meet you”

 

[A Diakos]

Newton was a punk with his gravity as a force concept.

certainly was #flatflatflat

 

[eldorado]

I'm sorry was I the one who bought anti vaxxers into this debate?

Yet I am the one who is being overwrought?

Yes.

My phone is dying so just read B&GS post above.

The reference to antivaxxers is about those who believe their possession if knowledge and expertise is equivalent to that of molecular biologists because they know what they know, and have read some websites. Many antivaxxers also believe they have peer review. But what they don't have is accurate information, knowledge of the variables of significance, detailed measurement of these variables, and the expertise to draw conclusions from it.

This is where the comparison was made. No one was drawing moral equivalence between posters and killers. To suggest otherwise is specious.

Sent from my T702 using Tapatalk

 

[threesixpio]

I'm sorry was I the one who bought anti vaxxers into this debate?

Yet I am the one who is being overwrought?

I think you’re missing the grander point made by Abasi by focusing on the consequence rather than the method one takes to get to the conclusion.

We are in a fascinating cultural moment where any assertion of “expertise” is regarded as elitist and arrogant. The alternate paradigm is a remarkable false equivalence of all views no matter what evidence or expertise is used in reaching the decision.

It’s a weird little period where those in power are taking advantage of a massive dispersal of information on the internet at the same time that academics have embraced difference and multiplicity of perspective

This allows people to assert things like “the yabby medal equals the views of the Hawthorn coaching group” and all of those millions of doctors are wrong because some halfwit said something once about autism

To suggest that Abasi was saying that your views equated to encouraging children to start dying is almost evidence of the point I’m making

 

[threesixpio]

Yes.

My phone is dying so just read B&GS post above.

The reference to antivaxxers is about those who believe their possession if knowledge and expertise is equivalent to that of molecular biologists because they know what they know, and have read some websites. Many antivaxxers also believe they have peer review. But what they don't have is accurate information, knowledge of the variables of significance, detailed measurement of these variables, and the expertise to draw conclusions from it.

This is where the comparison was made. No one was drawing moral equivalence between posters and killers. To suggest otherwise is specious.

Sent from my T702 using Tapatalk

Ah *. You just posted what I just posted. Don’t like you anymore

 

[Gralin]

Ah ****. You just posted what I just posted. Don’t like you anymore

Come on he used specious on big footy, how can you not like him

 

[Simon Crawshay]

Yes.

My phone is dying so just read B&GS post above.

The reference to antivaxxers is about those who believe their possession if knowledge and expertise is equivalent to that of molecular biologists because they know what they know, and have read some websites. Many antivaxxers also believe they have peer review. But what they don't have is accurate information, knowledge of the variables of significance, detailed measurement of these variables, and the expertise to draw conclusions from it.

This is where the comparison was made. No one was drawing moral equivalence between posters and killers. To suggest otherwise is specious.

Sent from my T702 using Tapatalk

Look I know how science works, a long time ago I completed a Science degree and worked as an industrial chemist in a laboratory for 7 years.

To equate a coaching group voting on a B&F with the established scientific method is a long, long, long bow to draw.

Voting in a club B&f is a lot more an art than a science. In fact it's nothing like Science at all that I can see.

Football clubs are a lot more like a political party in Canberra than a research laboratory in CSIRO.

To equate posters querying a result in the PCM with anti vaxxers is well out of order no matter what justification you care to use.