Remove this Banner Ad

Gibbs.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bentleigh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Jars458 said:
We have to move on.

Our club is professional and it is fraught with danger to pin too much of your future success on one player

I am more in favour of building a squad which has great depth and a bunch of players who will play for the jumpber. Neil Craig is building this. To some extent the more star players you have the harder this is to do.

If we can get guys like Richad Douglas, Chris Knights and Johncock at the numbers in the draft we did, having star players won't be a problem in any case.

Father son rule should be scrapped in my view. Very unfair to give a slect few the choice to go to a team or not when the majority get no choice.
Your right mate, we got a couple of steals there too, especially Douglas who should have been a top 7 or 8 if he didn't have injuries, and stiffy in the 60's shows how fraught with danger picking somebody up in the first round can be, in regards to talent.
 
Bentleigh said:
What are your feelings on not being allowed Gibbs? I am not trying to troll but am intersted by how you feel abount not being able to get the 'superdrafts' best player, and what is rightfully yours for more or less for free.

As it stands you have a fantastic list/coach and look like giving the flag a very serious run bla bla - its all going very well but landing young Byrce and blooding him in the SAnFL must have just been a cherry on top for when the like of Roo and Edwards hang up the boots?

I know it's something that would eat away at me if the same sitaution was to happen at Richmond. :(

Thoughts?

As usual benters, it is a troll.

that said, we're moving on without him.
 
I don't even know why they need to put a time window on when the games are played to complicate the matter. It is not like a guy who played for Glenelg in the 1930's is going to father draft eligible kids in 2006.

You either have a father who has played the prescribed number of games or you haven't. Simple.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Brasher said:
I don't even know why they need to put a time window on when the games are played to complicate the matter. It is not like a guy who played for Glenelg in the 1930's is going to father draft eligible kids in 2006.

You either have a father who has played the prescribed number of games or you haven't. Simple.
Can't say I agree with that. That means we could have a Glenelg player who started his career in the mid 1990s be elligible for us. The cut off has to be somewhere but logically that would be when we had our first 100 game player, which opened a new door of father/son candidates for our club.
 
We can only hope that Collingwood keep picking up duds like the three Clokes and Shaw's under father son
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brasher
I don't even know why they need to put a time window on when the games are played to complicate the matter. It is not like a guy who played for Glenelg in the 1930's is going to father draft eligible kids in 2006.

You either have a father who has played the prescribed number of games or you haven't. Simple.


Can't say I agree with that. That means we could have a Glenelg player who started his career in the mid 1990s be elligible for us. The cut off has to be somewhere but logically that would be when we had our first 100 game player, which opened a new door of father/son candidates for our club

Fair enough! First 100 gamer sounds right. Who and when was that anyway?
 
Vic Crow said:
Last night my Dad came home and said to me, "They were just discussing the Bryce Gibbs issue on SEN. You guys got screwed!"
He was largely referring to the fact that our first 100 game player was in 1995 so we have a four or five year period with no elligible fathers, or as he put it "guys who's SANFL careers count for nothing" (in regards to father/son rule obviously, not their careers in general).

This is the part that burns my arse.

Fair's fair, and this is crooked. Dishonest. Contrived.

It's not even a case of uneven opportunity. For this 5 to 6 year period, it's zero opportunity

If it were ever tested in a court of law, Vlad and his dimwit off-sider would be found to be denying Adelaide natural justice. .
 
GoSarge said:
We should be thanking them for 'opening up' so many eligible fathers to the AFC. Top blokes.

Lets hope Jesse Aish turns out a gun.

You can get set with me that once we offically miss out on Bryce
the rules will change again
 
Crow-mo said:
they understand perfectly well. give their dishonesty more credit than that.

Some of them, yes. Most of them, no.

You over rate their intelligence.
 
birdmanptr said:
You can get set with me that once we offically miss out on Bryce
the rules will change again
Well Adrian "Tariq Aziz" Anderson did allude to the rules being reviewed at the end of the season.
 
rayven said:
Well Adrian "Tariq Aziz" Anderson did allude to the rules being reviewed at the end of the season.

Maybe he is a good bloke after all. :confused:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

rayven said:
Well Adrian "Tariq Aziz" Anderson did allude to the rules being reviewed at the end of the season.

That review is unlikely to include eligibility criteria.

It's going to be examining the price clubs have to pay for their F/S selections, changing from the current 3rd round pick to something which more closely resembles the value of the player being selected.
 
Crow-mo said:
they understand perfectly well. give their dishonesty more credit than that.

You will actually find a large percentage of Victorian club supporters think the Crows have been shafted concerning Bryce Gibbs. The remainder of the supporters are rabble, they are the ones that have a dis-proportionate tooth to tatt ratio. Obviously with a un-informed opinion as yours you fit this mould.

I lived in Adelaide for 3 years and really enjoyed my time there, I found 99% of the locals fantastic, the 1% such as yourself lower your fine cities colours. I'll even go further to say a comment like that is what I would expect from either a Collingwood or a Port supporter.
 
dyertribe said:
On WLF a few weeks ago Matthew "The man... machine!" Campbell was in the chair for Grybas.

An Adelaide fan called in with a long-winded question about the unfairness and imbalance of the F/S rule.

After 30 or 40 seconds (did seem like a decade) Campbell cut him off and said,

"OK, I'll stop you there. I know where you're going with this - Bryce Gibbs. I'll tell you why the Father/Son system is the way it is, merely because the Victorian clubs have been around a lot longer. The interstate clubs like the Crows and West Coast haven't. It's as simple as that."

F**king clueless - and that's from an Adelaide boy who played with the Roosters, Bears and SA Origin sides.

I think that this guy has no f*cking idea about football and he makes himself look really bloody stupid.

Isn't it amazing how AGAIN Melbourne clubs benefit for a rule that was in the VFL and not the AFL as the AFL started in 87. The Vics have it so bloody good it is actually sickening to tell you the truth.:mad:
 
BlueFeaver said:
You will actually find a large percentage of Victorian club supporters think the Crows have been shafted concerning Bryce Gibbs. The remainder of the supporters are rabble, they are the ones that have a dis-proportionate tooth to tatt ratio. Obviously with a un-informed opinion as yours you fit this mould.

I lived in Adelaide for 3 years and really enjoyed my time there, I found 99% of the locals fantastic, the 1% such as yourself lower your fine cities colours. I'll even go further to say a comment like that is what I would expect from either a Collingwood or a Port supporter.

Port Supporters are not that bad mate
 
BlueFeaver said:
You will actually find a large percentage of Victorian club supporters think the Crows have been shafted concerning Bryce Gibbs. The remainder of the supporters are rabble, they are the ones that have a dis-proportionate tooth to tatt ratio.....
:D :D
 
BlueFeaver said:
You will actually find a large percentage of Victorian club supporters think the Crows have been shafted concerning Bryce Gibbs. The remainder of the supporters are rabble, they are the ones that have a dis-proportionate tooth to tatt ratio. Obviously with a un-informed opinion as yours you fit this mould.

I lived in Adelaide for 3 years and really enjoyed my time there, I found 99% of the locals fantastic, the 1% such as yourself lower your fine cities colours. I'll even go further to say a comment like that is what I would expect from either a Collingwood or a Port supporter.

:D :D
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

BlueFeaver said:
The remainder of the supporters are rabble, they are the ones that have a dis-proportionate tooth to tatt ratio. Obviously with a un-informed opinion as yours you fit this mould.

uninformed huh? so please tell us all about the situation oh sage, an obviously articulate statesman such as yourself should have no problem filling me in? ;)
 
BlueFeaver said:
You will actually find a large percentage of Victorian club supporters think the Crows have been shafted concerning Bryce Gibbs.

When this issue came up several Victorian Club administrators basically said we wanted a rule change only to get Gibbs,it was all about Gibbs apparantly.:rolleyes:

Theres plenty of posts on this site from people who thought the same thing.

Now it is emerging in Victoria the true heart of the whole matter not the sensasionilistic(how the ff do you spell that word:D ) aspect only.

But before then we copped some crap hey.
 
Crow-mo said:
uninformed huh? so please tell us all about the situation oh sage, an obviously articulate statesman such as yourself should have no problem filling me in? ;)

always best to just appreciate a comment that drills you instead of trying to come up with a poor retort like this. Very funny BlueFeaver good job. Its all fun and games after all.;)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom