Do we?
Percy should not have used the all inclusive "we". He should have said: "All those with eyes in their heads now know that Richards is a better player and prospect than O’Brien."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Do we?
This is my first post.
I have it on good authority that the Board asked SOS to explain why two Geelong Grammar boys (Dow and O’Brien) were picked at 3 and 10 in the 2017 draft. SOS said that they are really country boys (not capital G Grammar boys) and any suggestion of Grammar boy softness was wrong.
I’m also told that he explained the failure to recruit Ed Richards (who went at 15 or 16 to the Dogs) on the ground that he turned up 45 mins late to his interview. So what! He was 17 or just 18 and had a good reason for being late.
True - should have put the caveat of "Pretending it's true for the moment," before it lolMy first reaction is to laugh it off as a clear troll.
If you had a pick would you pick LOB or Richards?
I think it’s a no brainer.
Pity that we were covered for forwards coz Naughton would also have been a great pick up.
The Bulldogs did well in that draft with Naughton and Richards
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
LOB has way more upside than Richards, who is also a good player
Tell your source, a banana that ripens first, doesn't mean it will be better
!
For what it’s worth, I think O’Brien will be a wonderful player for us.
Why does he have more upside?
It's an opinion - why does it need one?Just wondering on what authority you base that assertion on?
It's an opinion - why does it need one?
Hah! Welcome to the internet - good luck finding a qualified opinion. In any case, that's called an argument to authority and it's a fallacy.You must be right, apparently it doesn’t pay for posters (especially new ones) to start their posts with, “I have it on good authority”.
But unqualified opinions, no worries.![]()
I wouldn't employ someone who turns up 45 mins late for an interview. Kelly would want out of carlton and be back in WA alreadyI doubt that!
Richards might be a flight risk to the filth at some point I'm betting.....LOB plays for us.
Richards for them.
They will probably both be good.
I expect there will be times when they ask why didnt we take LOB instead of Richards.
Pretty much a pointless waste of words all round.
They might have a good legit reason for being late ..I wouldn't employ someone who turns up 45 mins late for an interview. Kelly would want out of carlton and be back in WA already
No, they don't.Percy should not have used the all inclusive "we". He should have said: "All those with eyes in their heads now know that Richards is a better player and prospect than O’Brien."
Psych major?Hah! Welcome to the internet - good luck finding a qualified opinion. In any case, that's called an argument to authority and it's a fallacy.
No, but it's something I want to do later, just for my own interests. That and philosophy.Psych major?
I wouldn't employ someone who turns up 45 mins late for an interview. Kelly would want out of carlton and be back in WA already
Why do you doubt it?I doubt that!
Thank God you aren’t on the Board!First reaction to a rumour like that shouldn't be to defend whether people from a certain school are "hard" enough, but to question why on earth Carlton board members would ask such ******ed questions and therefore question their fitness to make insightful and well-considered decisions that affect the club.
He’s, good question. Why?Why does he have more upside?
Tell you what pal.Thank God you aren’t on the Board!
I meant what I said. I do have it on good authority. I know what good authority in this context is.Hah! Welcome to the internet - good luck finding a qualified opinion. In any case, that's called an argument to authority and it's a fallacy.
See my subsequent post.Tell you what pal.
I have been around a lot less than many but long enough to know that genuine new posters dont talk the way you are.
So as far as I am concerned your just here for amusement to try and yank a few chains.
Good luck convincing the sensible members here otherwise.