Certified Legendary Thread Delusional Pearlers IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Oh my oh my. Aren’t the * fans up and about. Wins over a couple of lowly, out-of -form teams and they are back to their cocky ‘best’.

Go to any forum on the main board and they are there; deriding other teams drafting, recruiting, history etc.

Go pies..

A reminder why we detest them..
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, Carlton beat a woeful Bulldogs and their feral scumbags are up and about in an even worse fashion. Only last week they were crying for Bolton to be sacked and begging for a priority pick.

Reality is just around the corner with a swift kick to bring them back down with a thud.
 
The Donners said:
Essendon supporters booed their own players when walking off the ground after losing to St Kilda in round 2 this year.
Click to expand...

Bloody well deserved too.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The Donners said:
Essendon supporters booed their own players when walking off the ground after losing to St Kilda in round 2 this year.
Click to expand...
I believe, as a supporter group, we have the right to boo our side if they under perform due to a lack of effort or not performing to a set standard. All players are susceptible to a bad game, but, with what they dished up early in the season, as a team, it was not to a standard we as supporters expect from them.

We fork out money for memberships, merchandise, away game entry and invest a lot emotionally into our team.

If they want us to cheer when playing well, then they need to accept the flip side of that as well.

I personally would not boo a player because he a good/great player. I enjoy watching the best run around performing at their peak, no matter who they play for.
 
un_eggs said:
Once it was widely discussed that the booing of Goodes could have racist overtones was it still OK for people to continue booing him knowing that it would be interpreted as racist crowd-bullying?
Click to expand...

It's a fair point, but then you could also ask should Goodes have stopped acting like a snide as often as he did, which usually resulted in any other player getting booed, given his rather unique situation?

I recall him in a game vs North where he flopped in a contest, then kicked out at an opposition player. It looked very ordinary on his part. He was booed afterwards, yet Robbo naturally went with the more sinister angle, with zero benefit of the doubt given to those fans.
 
Stopher said:
It's a fair point, but then you could also ask should Goodes have stopped acting like a snide as often as he did, which usually resulted in any other player getting booed, given his rather unique situation?

I recall him in a game vs North where he flopped in a contest, then kicked out at an opposition player. It looked very ordinary on his part. He was booed afterwards, yet Robbo naturally went with the more sinister angle, with zero benefit of the doubt given to those fans.
Click to expand...
Robbo is a headline grabber.
 
Half of Essendons BF posters are delusional.

Have a bit of patience with players instead of wanting half the team dropped after they have one bad performance.
 
Fridge16 said:
Half of Essendons BF posters are delusional.

Have a bit of patience with players instead of wanting half the team dropped after they have one bad performance.
Click to expand...
Only half?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The delusion here is off the scale.

Hawthorne Delusion said:
Hawthorn didn't put Burton up for trade, that was a Media/Port myth. Burton, the media and Hawthorn were all played (by design or luck) by Port.

Hawthorn could have waited a year for Wingard in 2020, however it is likely Port could have matched and forced a trade anyway. At the time trade week opened, Mitchell and O'Meara were uninjured, Hawks had just finished top-4 in H&A, were deep in discussion with Lynch and would have considered themselves a legitimate Premiership contender. Wingard was likely seen as the 'cream' that could lift the team over the top.

Lynch initially listed a set of terms that only Hawthorn could meet, almost as if concocted for that very purpose. Richmond couldn't meet his original demands. (Graham Wright's reaction to the signing said it all, I genuinely believe he thought they had this deal done).

Shiel didn't really limit which club, just that GWS was fairly compensated. He was even happy to stay if a fair trade couldn't be found. EFC had a better 1st round pick than Hawthorn, and eventually offered 2 x 1sts. Hawthorn couldn't beat that and withdrew. (Carlton celebrated when they heard the news thinking they had their man, but soon after Shiel nominated Essendon). Essendon then backtracked on the 2x1sts (hence the quick Scully and almost Patton deals to get GWS under the cap if they kept Shiel) before being 'encouraged' to honour their original offer.

Wingard wanted out, and Clarkson has always wanted Wingard. Once Port gave him the cold shoulder he became Hawks #1 priority given above. Similar to O'Meara, once the player made the commitment to Hawthorn, Hawthorn pay "what it takes" to get him over - even if it means "losing" on the trade.

#15 and #35 was a fair price for Wingard (especially as soon to be FA). Unders (given Wingard age and finish to 2018), but fair.
Port enquired about Burton, Hawthorn (following standard procedure) said they would need to talk to the player first. (Burton was in USA on Holidays). There was a thought at this point that if Burton wanted to go, Hawthorn could keep #15 and possibly make a play for another player.

Port contacted Burton (through the Family connection) in the early hours of the morning (USA time), telling him Hawthorn put him on the table.
Port told the media that Hawthorn put him on the table. Hawthorn refused to comment (standard procedure). Burton read the media reports, spoke with family and his manager, prior to Hawthorn making contact. Hawthorn contacted Burton in the morning (USA) to see if he would be interested in a trade back to SA. They denied offering Burton, but Burton believed the media/family/manager talk and was "shocked" - requesting to be traded. I don't know about other clubs, but this has been Hawthorn's method ever since the shady Franklin/Pickering/Sydney dealings.

Hawthorn's let Burton go to the club of his choice, accepting (IMO substantial) unders (basically a future 3rd round!)

After the trade was completed, the Port list manager actually admitted on radio it (Hawthorn offering Burton) was an outright lie, that Port had asked about Burton, and that Hawthorn had not said NO, instead saying they would talk to the player to see if he was interested in a move.

Port essentially "won" one of Burton or an extra pick (15 or 35, you choose) by exploiting Hawthorn's standard protocols (refuse to comment on active trade deals publicly, give players opportunity to make their own decision for any proposed offer), their willingness to support their players who wish to move on, and most importantly in this case, the family connection that let them set the "story" in Burton's mind.

Hawthorn have been exceptionally 'easy' to trade with over the best part of a decade. They are organised, open and honest to a fault - they give their players significant autonomy in decision making, and are prepared to accept "losses" to get the players they want in, and their existing players where they want to be (if they want out - Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Hill, Duryea and same offer made to many others that chose to stay). This has worked extraordinarily well in establishing strong club support from the players, and trade rapport with most clubs. It has likely earned similar responses, with Carlton/GWS and Sydney deals going through quickly and easily - but has seen them taken advantage of by clubs that don't follow the same "kumbaya" approach to trading (Essendon, Port, GC under Cochrane).

For a club that doesn't have an inherent advantage over the competition (Hawthorn 2012), the assets they do have (picks, Salary cap) need to be stretched further than ever before, and this may see them unable to continue in this fashion - and either change strategy (being more difficult to deal with, but garnishing better value from completed trades) or struggle to remain near the top of the ladder.
Click to expand...
 
Holy s**t, that poster drank all the koolaid, pissed it out, then drank it again.
 
DapperDon said:
Holy s**t, that poster drank all the koolaid, pissed it out, then drank it again.
Click to expand...

The scary bit is I can tell who posted that without even looking it up.
 
The Mongrel Punt posted an article about GAJ and how will Essendon contain him. Mentioned Saad but suggested our best hope may be send Bags back with his only intention to quell GAJ. They also threw out a left-field option in Dev if he is fit. If either Bags or Dev lined up on arguably the GOAT I'd be very, very worried. Link to article below.

https://themongrelpunt.com/afl/2019/05/01/questions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top