TV AFL 360 - 2021

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,580
21,059
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
Nick Riewoldt reckons whether Toby Greene gets 3 weeks or 6 weeks, the difference is merely "semantics".

What does he think that word means?
 

Ishmael_

EQuiv
Apr 30, 2013
2,681
6,946
Stockholm
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
South Fremantle
Tuned back in for finals and man, 360 hasn’t been great for a few years but it’s nearly unwatchable these days.

JB is a terrible pairing with Whateley, he’s the bad kind of dumb to Robbo’s inspired version. Riewoldt is both over exposed and not very good.

Dunstall is pretty good, probably smarter than Gerard and isn’t as deferential to him which is needed because Whateley in full flight can be pretty nauseating.

But honestly I think Robbo makes the show. It needs his ludicrous energy to work.

Get well King.
 

Sprout

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 6, 2010
12,895
18,755
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
MCFC, The Exers
I simply don’t understand the Jack Riewoldt appointment. Unless the aim was to find an entirely unlikeable twat who sounds like he’s gargling marbles every time he talks. If that was the aim they’ve nailed it.
 

Spearman

Club Legend
Sep 15, 2017
2,631
3,994
expatriated in East Asia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Ohio State Buckeyes
I simply don’t understand the Jack Riewoldt appointment. Unless the aim was to find an entirely unlikeable twat who sounds like he’s gargling marbles every time he talks. If that was the aim they’ve nailed it.
newest initiate into the boys club

here's a pic from Jack's official welcome party
 

SuperMal

Rookie
Jul 28, 2021
31
42
AFL Club
Sydney
Nick Riewoldt reckons whether Toby Greene gets 3 weeks or 6 weeks, the difference is merely "semantics".

What does he think that word means?
He’s a footballer - but at least the word is in his vocabulary.

Jack on the other hand - unless he feel’s personally associated with an issue, he has nothing of weight to say.
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,217
1,998
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
Is it? He's not using it correctly. Does that still count?
The phrase, "It's just semantics", is a colloquialism. Semantics is the study of meaning in linguistics. Colloquially, people say "It's just semantics" to indicate that a point made might involve some small distinction in meaning, but without significant real world consequences. Riewoldt meant that the difference between 3 and 6 weeks was immaterial to the material issue of whether Greene could be involved in the Giants' finals campaign, so Riewoldt was not really far off the mark of the colloquial use of the phrase.
 

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,580
21,059
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
The phrase, "It's just semantics", is a colloquialism. Semantics is the study of meaning in linguistics. Colloquially, people say "It's just semantics" to indicate that a point made might involve some small distinction in meaning, but without significant real world consequences. Riewoldt meant that the difference between 3 and 6 weeks was immaterial to the material issue of whether Greene could be involved in the Giants' finals campaign, so Riewoldt was not really far off the mark of the colloquial use of the phrase.
"The colloquial use of the phrase" i.e. getting it wrong.

A roundabout way of saying he misused the word.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,580
21,059
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
It would be a misuse if no one understands what you mean. Colloquialisms are, by definition, widely understood, and are not a misuse of language.
Rubbish.

Everyone knows "what you mean" if you say irregardless. It's still incorrect.

Stop making excuses for people who don't know what words mean. You sound foolish.

Some of us are literate and don't invent meanings for words because we're too dumb to understand the real ones. That's the standard, not some other clueless bullshit where everyone just guesses.

Why do we have to dumb everything down for folks who don't know?

We have to lower the threshold of what's correct to accommodate the shortcomings of people who can't write/speak properly? No. They can jump in the sea.
 
Last edited:

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,217
1,998
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
Rubbish.

Everyone knows "what you mean" if you say irregardless. It's still incorrect.

Stop making excuses for people who don't know what words mean. You sound foolish.

Some of us are literate and don't invent meanings for words because we're too dumb to understand the real ones. That's the standard, not some other clueless bullshit where everyone just guesses.

Why do we have to dumb everything down for folks who don't know?

We have to lower the threshold of what's correct to accommodate the shortcomings of people who can't write/speak properly? No. They can jump in the sea.
No, you're wrong. Your example of "irregardless" is not analagous, because it's not an example of a colloquialism. When that term is used, the interlocutor intends the same meaning as "irrespective" or "regardless", but simply chooses the wrong (made up) word. When someone used the expression, "It's just semantics", they are not mistakenly using that word instead of another. They are using that expression to describe a situation where a distinction has been made between two alternatives (as between a 3 and 6 week suspension), and where they are claiming that the distinction exists only at the level of meaning (hence 'semantics'), but, implicitly and in contrast, not at the level of significant real world consequences.

It is you who sound foolish, or like you have Asperger's and can't actually tolerate the living flexibility and malleability of language, and the creativity with which humans use it.
 

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,580
21,059
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
No, you're wrong. Your example of "irregardless" is not analagous, because it's not an example of a colloquialism. When that term is used, the interlocutor intends the same meaning as "irrespective" or "regardless", but simply chooses the wrong (made up) word. When someone used the expression, "It's just semantics", they are not mistakenly using that word instead of another. They are using that expression to describe a situation where a distinction has been made between two alternatives (as between a 3 and 6 week suspension), and where they are claiming that the distinction exists only at the level of meaning (hence 'semantics'), but, implicitly and in contrast, not at the level of significant real world consequences.

It is you who sound foolish, or like you have Asperger's and can't actually tolerate the living flexibility and malleability of language, and the creativity with which humans use it.
Look at this ridiculous, long-winded defence of people misusing language.

Everything has to be dumbed down because people don't know what words mean. The "creativity"! Run along.

And invoking Asperger's in a desperate effort to insult someone online is gross.
 
Last edited:

Spearman

Club Legend
Sep 15, 2017
2,631
3,994
expatriated in East Asia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Ohio State Buckeyes
Look at this ridiculous, long-winded defence of people misusing language.

Everything has to be dumbed down because people don't know what words mean. The "creativity"! Run along.

And invoking Asperger's in a desperate effort to insult someone online is gross.
This. There is a difference between evolution of usage and misuse.

and don't get me started on loose/wraps/ etc :madv1:
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,217
1,998
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
Look at this ridiculous, long-winded defence of people misusing language.

Everything has to be dumbed down because people don't know what words mean. The "creativity"! Run along.

And invoking Asperger's in a desperate effort to insult someone online is gross.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary one of the meanings of "semantics" is "verbal quibbling". The OED defines "quibbling" as (amongst other meanings) "to argue about a triviality" or "evade the point at issue". Riewoldt's point was that focusing on whether Greene got 3 or 6 weeks, when in either case he would miss the Giants' entire finals campaign, was to evade the point at issue, to argue about a triviality, to quibble, that is to engage in semantics.

You should stop mouthing off and insulting people when you really don't know what you are talking about.
 

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,580
21,059
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
According to the Oxford English Dictionary one of the meanings of "semantics" is "verbal quibbling". The OED defines "quibbling" as (amongst other meanings) "to argue about a triviality" or "evade the point at issue". Riewoldt's point was that focusing on whether Greene got 3 or 6 weeks, when in either case he would miss the Giants' entire finals campaign, was to evade the point at issue, to argue about a triviality, to quibble, that is to engage in semantics.

You should stop mouthing off and insulting people when you really don't know what you are talking about.
It is simply the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. It has nothing to do with the length of Toby Greene's suspension. Stop making excuses.
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,217
1,998
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
It is simply the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. It has nothing to do with the length of Toby Greene's suspension. Stop making excuses.
Maintaining one's position in the face of incontrovertible evidence is not the sign of intelligence that you seem to think it is. In fact it's the opposite. I'll go with the Oxford English Dictionary on this one.
 

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
25,580
21,059
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
Maintaining one's position in the face of incontrovertible evidence is not the sign of intelligence that you seem to think it is. In fact it's the opposite. I'll go with the Oxford English Dictionary on this one.
It's simply an acknowledgment of its common misuse.

But sure, you go with "flexible" language if it makes you feel better.
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,217
1,998
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
It's simply an acknowledgment of its common misuse.

But sure, you go with "flexible" language if it makes you feel better.
It's not about making me feel better. Language is flexible. If you don't understand that, you don't understand anything about language. Shakespeare introduced hundreds of words into the English language - it was originally a "misuse" when he made up "multitudinous", but now it's common parlance.

Dictionaries are constantly updated to reflect common usage. Meanings of words change over time. If you prefer to focus on what is "correct", then you should be willing to accept the OED as an arbiter of that. You seem to be implying that dictionaries should either be static, with no words having changed, or expanded, their meaning for the last few hundred years, or that any new words or meanings they include are just an acknowledgment of 'misuses', an idea that no linguist would agree with.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad