Opinion Is it time for Daniel Kerr to go back to the WAFL

[HoneyBadger35]

Woosha didn't generate nearly as much run off half back as he did in his day, well past it, over the hill, WAFL.

 

[Mancey]

Good thread...would read again

 

[tesseract]

The fact that teams tag Kerr based on his past performance is relevant, but his past performance is not relevant?

You've gone past the point of playing devil's advocate, now you're just being ridiculous.

Unlike the tag or run with on Kerr which is in effect in 2012, Kerr's past stats and past feats have nothing to do with 2012. The tag or run-with on Kerr remains relevant because it's current. The reason for such a tag or run-with is irrelevant. It becomes irrelevant when Kerr no longer gets a run-with or tag in a season unspecified by the OP. No player can escape from their past deeds, but in judging a player, we use current info where the OP shows that's what's intended.

Ridiculousness is those pointing out 1 good game as vindication, but overlooking 2 previous poor games and an average game this season.

 

[tesseract]

Are you still being serious or just posting with a sly grin and while holding a fishing rod?

I mean seriously.

Your basic position now is that everything that occurred outside the first 3 games as specifically commented on by the OP is "inadmissible" and "not relevant" except when it's outside what the OP said but it's related to said 3 games. But when his lack of pre-season is mentioned, which directly affects those games you scream "irrelevant". When his injuries in game 1 and game 3 are mentioned, you ignore them.

Kerr is an awesome player with a stellar past record. That CANNOT be ignored when assessing his "poor games leeway", even moreso when one of the games wasn't poor!!

Your "26 possession should be par for the course for Kerr" also belies your own inability to apply your own ridiculous and illogical parameters. I mean why should "26 possession be par for the course for KERR"?

If 20 year old Joe Schmoe played an ordinary game in Round 1 on debut before being subbed off injured, then had 26 disposals as a starting mid in Round 2, we'd be hailing the arrival of a new gun....

Of course Kerr was simply "par for the course for Kerr" - that statement being based entirely on his reputation, which is of course based on his 10 year playing career. If you want to judge Kerr against his own standards "par for the course for KERR" then those standards are "admissible" in judging the question.

You just need to learn to give up when you are making a bit of a dick of yourself ...

Somewhat. I agree and disagree with some opinions from both sides.

Kerr's injuries were minor; so minor that it didn't stop him from playing the next week in both cases, and in the case of the 3rd game, coming back on the ground. Given that he played for fair chunks of ground time in both of the games where he recieved his injuries, his stats show that they're not up to scratch for a starting midfielder.

Kerr is at times an awesome player, as displayed last night. I don't think he's that consistently enough.
The OP is judging from Kerr's feats this season, hence Kerr's past being irrelevant. The OP is not judging Kerr's career to date, just this season thus far.

26 possessions per game should be par for the course for a midfielder. It's a goodly amount, but not in the realms of awesome. The OP didn't just take into account Kerr's possession count in his reasoning.

Joe Schmoe isn't being discussed here. 26 possessions isn't out of the ordinary for any midfielder, let alone an awesome midfielder. 26 is good and acceptable, but the other parts of Kerr's game were not.

26 being "par for the course" is based on him being a midfielder, not about him being an awesome player or, the introducing of his past feats.

Give up when someone challenges opinions? Not my style.

 

[tesseract]

Clutching at straws to defend your position tesseract.

"Clutching at straws" must = sticking to the parameters set by the OP.

It's a position. I never said it was mine.

 

[Eagle87]

Somewhat. I agree and disagree with some opinions from both sides.

Kerr's injuries were minor; so minor that it didn't stop him from playing the next week in both cases, and in the case of the 3rd game, coming back on the ground. Given that he played for fair chunks of ground time in both of the games where he recieved his injuries, his stats show that they're not up to scratch for a starting midfielder.

Kerr is at times an awesome player, as displayed last night. I don't think he's that consistently enough.
The OP is judging from Kerr's feats this season, hence Kerr's past being irrelevant. The OP is not judging Kerr's career to date, just this season thus far.

26 possessions per game should be par for the course for a midfielder. It's a goodly amount, but not in the realms of awesome. The OP didn't just take into account Kerr's possession count in his reasoning.

Joe Schmoe isn't being discussed here. 26 possessions isn't out of the ordinary for any midfielder, let alone an awesome midfielder. 26 is good and acceptable, but the other parts of Kerr's game were not.

26 being "par for the course" is based on him being a midfielder, not about him being an awesome player or, the introducing of his past feats.

Give up when someone challenges opinions? Not my style.

Arguing a point that is contest able and that you are making is one thing. Arguing idiocy is, well, idiotic ...

 

[swannies]

Winning argument above = end thread.