Jack will come back & bite us

[Cap]

Good ******* god, it's semantics. Marquee player was obviously a slightly over exaggerated way of saying QUALITY players. The unfortunate answer to how many QUALITY players we have lost in comparison to our competition in recent times, is bloody heaps.

Dont complain to us when you get your arguement wrong.

 

[cmndstab]

I don't mind the statement that we lost a quality player in Gunston - and everyone who was looking at it sensibly at the time recognised that.

However to say it will "come back and bite us" does imply that somehow we were accepting of the decision, and that we are now unpleasantly surprised to see him doing well. We all knew he was going to do well, we didn't want him to leave. It would be more sensible to state that we will (and now have) end up regretting his decision to leave.

 

[Slippery Pete]

. We are no different to any other team.

There's another new slogan, along with "Sixteen years - it's not that long."

 

[Cap]

It is all swings and roundabouts.

I'm just waiting for the 'we would have won a flag with Hudson' posters.

 

[Slippery Pete]

However to say it will "come back and bite us" does imply that somehow we were accepting of the decision, and that we are now unpleasantly surprised to see him doing well. We all knew he was going to do well, we didn't want him to leave. It would be more sensible to state that we will (and now have) end up regretting his decision to leave.

My premise was the attitude of supporters. "We won't miss him. He's crap."

offended rationalizations.

He was a huge loss.

 

[Allefgib]

Dont complain to us when you get your arguement wrong.

You're just being a dick saying things like that. How about addressing what is clearly the point.
This is exactly my point - its semantics whether he was a marquee player or not.
Instead of just being a dick - whey not try and humbly explore the point to help someone refine their argument?

We lost a quality player in a very unusual situation. Rather than downplaying the loss that called for reflection and a change of 'something' (even if only better monitoring of certain types of players) to ensure we weren't exposed to such a loss again.

 

[Cap]

You're just being a dick saying things like that. How about addressing what is clearly the point.
This is exactly my point - its semantics whether he was a marquee player or not.
Instead of just being a dick - whey not try and humbly explore the point to help someone refine their argument?

We lost a quality player in a very unusual situation. Rather than downplaying the loss that called for reflection and a change of 'something' (even if only better monitoring of certain types of players) to ensure we weren't exposed to such a loss again.

As I said in the Tippet thread. That whole debacle shows we do.

Doesnt the fact that we've held onto the vast majority of our talent and our actual marquee player(s) show that too?

 

[Slippery Pete]

Some supporters even suggested that the nature of his departure indicated that he didn't possibly have it in him to become a good player.

Butt-hurtness which begets irrational insanity is very unbecoming.

 

[cmndstab]

My premise was the attitude of supporters. "We won't miss him. He's crap."

offended rationalizations.

He was a huge loss.

Yeah, I agree with that. Those supporters were just reacting angrily to his departure and not being realistic. I'm fairly sure I said as much earlier in this thread.

I don't have a problem with your statement there, just the initial premise of the thread itself.

 

[Allefgib]

As I said in the Tippet thread. That whole debacle shows we do.

Doesnt the fact that we've held onto the vast majority of our talent and our actual marquee player(s) show that too?

Sorry shows that we do what?

For me the biggest thing I've seen we've done that will hopefully address situation like Jack's is the creation of the reserves side. Obviously alot of any other reaction we wouldn't be privvy to.

What are you saying has been done? Or is already done?
(and if were already 'doing' it needed to be examined given Jack's circumstance)

 

[Cap]

Sorry shows that we do what?

For me the biggest thing I've seen we've done that will hopefully address situation like Jack's is the creation of the reserves side. Obviously alot of any other reaction we wouldn't be privvy to.

What are you saying has been done? Or is already done?
(and if were already 'doing' it needed to be examined given Jack's circumstance)

Im not really concerned about Jack. Sure he was an Ok player and looks good at Hawthorn.

But the club clearly works on keeping it's gun interstate players. Because it has kept them all bar Tippet since Davis left.

 

[headache1]

Dont complain to us when you get your arguement wrong.

I didn't construct the argument. I'm just able to see what the original poster was getting at, instead of arguing over a minor detail for X amount of pages.

 

[Cap]

I didn't construct the argument. I'm just able to see what the original poster was getting at, instead of arguing over a minor detail for X amount of pages.

But there is a difference between marquee and quality.

Tippett and Buddy are Marquee.

Gunston is not.

 

[headache1]

 

[Allefgib]

gotta headache?

 

[Allefgib]

Im not really concerned about Jack. Sure he was an Ok player and looks good at Hawthorn.

But the club clearly works on keeping it's gun interstate players. Because it has kept them all bar Tippet since Davis left.

That's fair enough you're not concerned. But now you've introduced 'gun' as another measure.... let's not get semantical again

I support Pete's view that his loss was downplayed as he was just 'ok' (or worse).

IMO he was a loss we need to look at to ensure it doesn't happen again. He's the type of player that if we lost regularly I woudl be quite concerned about.

Anyway - I'm out. I only wanted to express my amusement re: semantics. Most everyone else is face palming so I'm done

 

[Cap]

That's fair enough you're not concerned. But now you've introduced 'gun' as another measure.... let's not get semantical again

I support Pete's view that his loss was downplayed as he was just 'ok' (or worse).

IMO he was a loss we need to look at to ensure it doesn't happen again. He's the type of player that if we lost regularly I woudl be quite concerned about.

Anyway - I'm out. I only wanted to express my amusement re: semantics. Most everyone else is face palming so I'm done

Damn it, we are still two days from the footy.

Also I used gun to try bait you. Didnt work :/

 

[jenny61_99]

SP - my question to you was why bump the thread? You still haven't really explained why. It's almost two years since someone wrote in this thread.

 

[Allefgib]

Clearly -
"My premise was the attitude of supporters. "We won't miss him. He's crap."

offended rationalizations.

He was a huge loss."

So effectively a bit of 'i told you so' with a hint of 'please review the way you consider how things happen at the club as opposed to rationalising any decision/outcome as 'good'

Personally I think its a waste of time... but as Cap says - we still have 2 days to go....!

 

[moogerfooger]

Trading Gunston netted us Kerridge, Grigg and Jenkins. We made the best out of a bad situation. The time to judge the trade will be once those three have been in the system a few more years but so far I'd argue we're at least breaking even, given the potential they've shown so far. Any of those three could still end up a better player than Gunston.

It certainly isn't the doomsday scenario this thread tries to make it out to be. Is it too much to ask to look at the bigger picture rather than cherry pick just the bad parts of any given situation?

 

[SydCrow]

Jack can bite me

*possible said many times above including by me many pages ago but CBF looking

 

[azza77]

Not sure why this thread was bumped when an severely under strength team who will be competing for the spoon, come out against an almost full strength premiership team, and have 5 goals kicked on them by a very good forward who could have been matched up on one of Justin Clarke, Sam Michael or Daniel McStay....

Jason Laycock could have kicked a bag in those conditions.

 

[Cap]

All I'm saying if it was Gunston for Grigg we are already ahead.

Grigg is going to be a far far better (I know different positions and yes he hasn't won a flag).

I just need Grigg to have a few seasons before I start shooting my mouth off

 

[azza77]

But in all seriousness, I keep pushing the same point... Did anyone ACTUALLY see him becoming this good, and more importantly, did ACTUALLY think he would be so good so soon???

Yes, we lost a promising player in 2011 at the ripe old age of 20. He played 12 games in his 2nd season and put in some very good performances during that time, so it wasnt down to lack of opportunities youd think. But still, and lets be honest here, did anyone actually think at the time he'd get to this level at the age of 22? I certainly didnt I can tell you that, not based purely on the games he played for us. All crows supporters would maybe have been hopeful of this happening, but everyone's making it sound like we traded out Gary Ablett in his prime because we damn well felt like it. We traded out a 20 year old ****head, who walked out on the club after showing some potential in becoming a good player. No one can honestly say they saw him almost winning a Norm Smith 2 years later on can they? Think people need to add a tad more realism to their thoughts.

Obviously it would be a hell of a lot easier to perform in a team like Hawks under the wings of Buddy and Rough, so lets wait and see how he performs this year with no Buddy and more so, how he performs when Hawks begin to taper off a bit. Why are people not also waiting to see what heights Grigg, Kerridge and JJ reach.

What happens if in 2 years from now JJ wins the Coleman or Grigg/Kerridge somehow win the Brownlow or a Norm Smith of their own, then what?

 

[Slippery Pete]

Not sure why this thread was bumped when an severely under strength team who will be competing for the spoon, come out against an almost full strength premiership team, and have 5 goals kicked on them by a very good forward who could have been matched up on one of Justin Clarke, Sam Michael or Daniel McStay....

Jason Laycock could have kicked a bag in those conditions.

It was bumped before yesterday's game, which I haven't even seen. I don't need to repeat my thoughts here on what I think of pre-season games.