Looking ahead

[thylacine60]

On recidivist, I believe the term has a specific usage for a relapsed criminal but it most definitely can be used to describe a relapse of other sorts. It depends on The General's intended purpose. He may have been describing the poster as someone with past negative qualities falling back on them again. Interesting word, interesting topic, interesting debate. Er, go Blues.

And yes, Splendini is TG's mum.

 

[Stubba1]

On recidivist, I believe the term has a specific usage for a relapsed criminal but it most definitely can be used to describe a relapse of other sorts. It depends on The General's intended purpose. He may have been describing the poster as someone with past negative qualities falling back on them again. Interesting word, interesting topic, interesting debate. Er, go Blues.

And yes, Splendini is TG's mum.

Correct. From the word "recidivate"

So who is Gilly then

 

[Salaryman]

It's not French, it's from latin like the majority of legal terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism

Anyone who's done a law degree or even Legal Studies knows the word well. It means habitual relapse into crime, or substance abuse.

As I said before, in reference to Fev himself, it might make some sense. But directed at posters arguing that Fev should not have been traded, it is meaningless.

Who are you anyway? The General's mum?

It does derive immediately from the French but has it's origins in latin....how did I know you would feel the need to bring that up

 

[JuddFevGoal]

It does derive immediately from the French but has it's origins in latin....how did I know you would feel the need to bring that up

It's just fascinating watching everyone scurry to defend a clearly incorrect use of a word in a failed attempt condescend to another poster.

Come on guys, you can do it...

Admit that to call a poster who thinks that a trade was a bad idea a 'recidivist' is just plain, indefensibly incorrect.

You don't have to leap to his defense. He was wrong. He's human. And he was being, dare I say it... pretentious and condescending, hoping it would snuff out the argument.

I'm only correcting him, because I'm the guy he called a recidivist...

What's more, I think you're all just jejune sycophants...

PS. There's a 5 page article on the wikipedia, and I have 3 dictionaries here and none of them mention any form of French derivation.

 

[JuddFevGoal]

You really think Fev could have given us a good forward structure for the next 5 years? No good being reliant on a single 33 year old.
It was a good trade. Henderson has all the makings of a good CHF.

No I don't.

I think he would've been handy for the next 3 years. Michael Voss seems to think so too.

My point (which I'm sure you already know) was that we are now establishing a new forward structure in the wake of losing a high profile and very talented full forward.

It's important that we see development of our forwards (I agree with you on Lachie) and some coaching smarts about the structure of our new forward line, rather than just waiting for 'gifts' in front of goals - a scramble on the ground from Eddie, an easy handpass to Carlos in front of the sticks. We need leading forwards to give our midfield targets.

I'm not seeing that at all in the last two games; those games showed a midfield kicking to a dog's breakfast, and over handling the ball in the midfield so that the opp can get numbers back didn't help matters.

So my reference to the next 5 years was about the future of our approach to scoreboard pressure. Hell, at this point, I'd be happy with an answer to the next 12 months.

 

[Salaryman]

It's just fascinating watching everyone scurry to defend a clearly incorrect use of a word in a failed attempt condescend to another poster.

Come on guys, you can do it...

Admit that to call a poster who thinks that a trade was a bad idea a 'recidivist' is just plain, indefensibly incorrect.

You don't have to leap to his defense. He was wrong. He's human. And he was being, dare I say it... pretentious and condescending, hoping it would snuff out the argument.

I'm only correcting him, because I'm the guy he called a recidivist...

What's more, I think you're all just jejune sycophants...

PS. There's a 5 page article on the wikipedia, and I have 3 dictionaries here and none of them mention any form of French derivation.

Maybe the recidivism referred to being an arrogant **** who always has to be right??

Ego ok?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/récidiviste

 

[JuddFevGoal]

Maybe the recidivism referred to being an arrogant **** who always has to be right??

Ego ok?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/récidiviste

Don't be so hard on yourself. I don't mind that you always have to be right...

I think you'll find the Latin came before the French.

The French do, after all, have to refer to a recidivist somehow...

And I'm still not sure how this makes TG's original use of the word make any more sense.

 

[Salaryman]

Don't be so hard on yourself. I don't mind that you always have to be right...

I think you'll find the Latin came before the French.

The French do, after all, have to refer to a recidivist somehow...

And I'm still not sure how this makes TG's original use of the word make any more sense.

Yes the latin came first, it's the usual order of things Well done.

You would have to ask TG his reasoning.

 

[jono25]

Maybe the recidivism referred to being an arrogant **** who always has to be right??

Ego ok?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/récidiviste

Or maybe he (and others) are sick of people like you and The General having their little club of chums who have to jump in and defend each other all the time (regardless of whether the person is right).

I am all for defending your mates - but this is a footy forum not a school play ground.

 

[thylacine60]

am not am not...

 

[OldBlueFan]

Don't be so hard on yourself. I don't mind that you always have to be right...

I think you'll find the Latin came before the French.

The French do, after all, have to refer to a recidivist somehow...

And I'm still not sure how this makes TG's original use of the word make any more sense.

Hate to be a stickler, but did you read beyond it's etymology?

"the act of a person repeating an undesirable behavior after they have either experienced negative consequences of that behavior, or have been treated or trained to extinguish that behavior."

"repeating an undesirable behavior" Are posters who continually argue that Fev shouldn't have been traded exhibiting undesirable behaviour? To some folks, yes, to TG, most definitely.

"experienced negative consequences of that behavior" Have they then experienced negative consequences of that behaviour? In terms of exchanges on an internet forum, yes again. They have been berated by all and sundry and told to "get over it" or something similar.

"have been treated to extinguish that behavior" Again, you could argue that they have, by the responses they've received from TG and others.

It seems to me, that apart from its derivation, your link supports TG more than you.

 

[Salaryman]

Or maybe he (and others) are sick of people like you and The General having their little club of chums who have to jump in and defend each other all the time (regardless of whether the person is right).

I am all for defending your mates - but this is a footy forum not a school play ground.

I couldn't agree with you more, took it a bit far for a 'fun' internet forum, my apologies

 

[JuddFevGoal]

Or maybe he (and others) are sick of people like you and The General having their little club of chums who have to jump in and defend each other all the time (regardless of whether the person is right).

I am all for defending your mates - but this is a footy forum not a school play ground.

Spot on J25. Couldn't be bothered with these jokers anymore and they're increasingly desperate and hilarious justifications, but couldn't leave you here on your own...

Let's hope Carlton prove all our criticisms wrong and turn it all around for 2010.

 

[JuddFevGoal]

Hate to be a stickler, but did you read beyond it's etymology?

"the act of a person repeating an undesirable behavior after they have either experienced negative consequences of that behavior, or have been treated or trained to extinguish that behavior."

"repeating an undesirable behavior" Are posters who continually argue that Fev shouldn't have been traded exhibiting undesirable behaviour? To some folks, yes, to TG, most definitely.

"experienced negative consequences of that behavior" Have they then experienced negative consequences of that behaviour? In terms of exchanges on an internet forum, yes again. They have been berated by all and sundry and told to "get over it" or something similar.

"have been treated to extinguish that behavior" Again, you could argue that they have, by the responses they've received from TG and others.

It seems to me, that apart from its derivation, your link supports TG more than you.

Oh my God. Let it go. And learn how to use English.

A recidivist is a person who habitually re-commits a crime. I have a degree in Law from Melbourne University. I know what the bloody word means.

In order to argue your point above, you would have to convince a reasonable person (sadly lacking on this forum) that a poster who argues a certain line (ie questions the decision to trade Fevola) is committing a crime or somehow objectively exhibiting 'undesirable behaviour'. This would not only suggest a huge amount of bigotry and policing of opinions on this site, but would also be the most bizarre use of the word recidivist I've ever encountered.

What seems to be more the case here, is that the questioning of the trade is so threatening to certain posters here that they will clutch at any straws to prop up each others flagging arguments.

Don't worry about it. It's just an opinion. Time may prove it right or wrong. No need to police it arrogantly and defensively. All you'll do is kill any reasonable discussion, which is what this forum is supposed to be all about in the first place.

To be clear, my original response in this thread was actually about dissatisfaction with our current forward structure in the wake of the Brisbane and Bombers game, the lack of effective leading forwards and the overuse of the ball by our midfield.

I also suggested that Lachie and Waite could do the job if effectively coached and positioned.

That was all I said that seems to have flown in the cavalry screaming 'recidivist'!!!

I'm perfectly happy to hear other opinions, in fact, dare I say it, I'm even interested in them. But throwing around pretentious, nonsensical abuse to try and belittle others deserves a shot right back. I think deep down, anyone here would agree.

So everybody - as Frankie says - 'RELAX'!

 

[jono25]

We all love Cartlon - let's just all remember that.

Boy I hope the boys get up this weekend!

"Group hug" - (in a non-gay way....not that there's anything wrong with that)

 

[thylacine60]

Oh my God. Let it go. And learn how to use English.

A recidivist is a person who habitually re-commits a crime. I have a degree in Law from Melbourne University. I know what the bloody word means.

In order to argue your point above, you would have to convince a reasonable person (sadly lacking on this forum) that a poster who argues a certain line (ie questions the decision to trade Fevola) is committing a crime or somehow objectively exhibiting 'undesirable behaviour'. This would not only suggest a huge amount of bigotry and policing of opinions on this site, but would also be the most bizarre use of the word recidivist I've ever encountered.

What seems to be more the case here, is that the questioning of the trade is so threatening to certain posters here that they will clutch at any straws to prop up each others flagging arguments.

Don't worry about it. It's just an opinion. Time may prove it right or wrong. No need to police it arrogantly and defensively. All you'll do is kill any reasonable discussion, which is what this forum is supposed to be all about in the first place.

To be clear, my original response in this thread was actually about dissatisfaction with our current forward structure in the wake of the Brisbane and Bombers game, the lack of effective leading forwards and the overuse of the ball by our midfield.

I also suggested that Lachie and Waite could do the job if effectively coached and positioned.

That was all I said that seems to have flown in the cavalry screaming 'recidivist'!!!

I'm perfectly happy to hear other opinions, in fact, dare I say it, I'm even interested in them. But throwing around pretentious, nonsensical abuse to try and belittle others deserves a shot right back. I think deep down, anyone here would agree.

So everybody - as Frankie says - 'RELAX'!

Sure, but listening to you I'm expected to believe that's all it means. It doesn't. No-one's belittling anyone - you certainly seem to be doing a lot of protesting for someone so sure of yourself. And btw, skiting you're a lawyer holds ****-all import anywhere. I'd keep it to myself.

 

[Salaryman]

typical bullish behaviour though.....and explains the deep narcissistic wound inflicted over being caught out on the meaning and etymology of a word

 

[JuddFevGoal]

Sure, but listening to you I'm expected to believe that's all it means. It doesn't. No-one's belittling anyone - you certainly seem to be doing a lot of protesting for someone so sure of yourself. And btw, skiting you're a lawyer holds ****-all import anywhere. I'd keep it to myself.

And I'd keep your opinion to yourself before you embarrass yourself further.

I addressed your supposed 'meaning' of the word recidivist above - one that makes no sense in the context of a person posting an opinion on a footy forum. Read it properly. Then... no don't touch the keyboard... think about it.

Are you seriously saying that someone with an opinion that you disagree with is exhibiting 'undesirable behaviour' or 'committing a crime'?

If so, you really do strange moral compass.

Perhaps, just let go and admit that the term didn't really reflect my perfectly innocent behaviour of posting an opinion which in no way was targeted at any other poster on this site.

 

[OldBlueFan]

Oh my God. Let it go. And learn how to use English.

A recidivist is a person who habitually re-commits a crime. I have a degree in Law from Melbourne University. I know what the bloody word means.

In order to argue your point above, you would have to convince a reasonable person (sadly lacking on this forum) that a poster who argues a certain line (ie questions the decision to trade Fevola) is committing a crime or somehow objectively exhibiting 'undesirable behaviour'. This would not only suggest a huge amount of bigotry and policing of opinions on this site, but would also be the most bizarre use of the word recidivist I've ever encountered.

What seems to be more the case here, is that the questioning of the trade is so threatening to certain posters here that they will clutch at any straws to prop up each others flagging arguments.

Don't worry about it. It's just an opinion. Time may prove it right or wrong. No need to police it arrogantly and defensively. All you'll do is kill any reasonable discussion, which is what this forum is supposed to be all about in the first place.

To be clear, my original response in this thread was actually about dissatisfaction with our current forward structure in the wake of the Brisbane and Bombers game, the lack of effective leading forwards and the overuse of the ball by our midfield.

I also suggested that Lachie and Waite could do the job if effectively coached and positioned.

That was all I said that seems to have flown in the cavalry screaming 'recidivist'!!!

I'm perfectly happy to hear other opinions, in fact, dare I say it, I'm even interested in them. But throwing around pretentious, nonsensical abuse to try and belittle others deserves a shot right back. I think deep down, anyone here would agree.

So everybody - as Frankie says - 'RELAX'!

I think you're the one who needs to relax dude.

I'm not one of the folks who run around supporting TG's arguments and I'm not in his "clique". I was merely pointing out that the meaning of words is in their contextual use, not in their traditional use. That's why English is known to be one of the more evolutionary languages on the planet. There is no hard and fast, right and wrong. Look at the meaning of the word in your own link, does it mention anywhere the committing of a crime? I repeat, that as far as TG is concerned, people who come here and argue that the trading of Fevola was a bad idea are indeed exhibiting "undesirable behaviour". Whether I, or you, agree with that is irrelevant.

Perhaps in this particular case you would have been better served by a degree in linguistics rather than law.

If you wanna take exception to the term as it applies to you, fine. But do so on the basis that it's general meaning doesn't apply to you, not on the basis that the person who used it chose the wrong word to use. You just come off as pompous and conceited (especially when you throw in your law degree).

This is the sort of thing that gets my hackles up, and I suspect those of others as well.

For what it's worth, I was one of the people who thought it was a mistake to trade Fevola, but now I'm on the fence.

 

[XXX KINGS]

No I don't.

I think he would've been handy for the next 3 years. Michael Voss seems to think so too.

Michael Voss and Brisbane are the only party to benefit in the short term from Fev being a **** stick. It's not a matter of whether you wanted him to be a part of the team or not, if you can't acknowledge that the club's hand was tied and that any on-going relationship with Fevola was untenable then you need a reality check.

Don't be a w***er arguing semantics over the use of a word in a post on a football site. No one gives a shit about your academic background either.

 

[JuddFevGoal]

typical bullish behaviour though.....and explains the deep narcissistic wound inflicted over being caught out on the meaning and etymology of a word

The etymology of a word is it's history and derivation. The derivation of the word is Latin. You chimed in early to big note yourself by announcing the derivation is French. You were caught out dude. How's your ego?

As for meaning, that relates to recommitting a crime or behaviour that is undesirable to society. It has never, in the history of humankind been used to describe a habitually offensive poster on a forum because a few posters think that expressing an innocent opinion or holding it over a period of time is 'undesirable behaviour'. Particularly when it's an opinion that others may agree with. Perhaps that's what is threatening you so much...

You are clearly all policing for each other and none of this is ever going to relate to sense or a posters right to put down their point of view without being abused. Yawn. Better things to do. Enjoy.

 

[Salaryman]

The etymology of a word is it's history and derivation. The derivation of the word is Latin. You chimed in early to big note yourself by announcing the derivation is French. You were caught out dude. How's your ego?

Fine

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

I know what etymology means you flowering galoot. I also know that it originally derived from Latin. I chose to cite the more recent french derivation assuming that recidiviste' was more similar to the English recidivist...a fair assumption. Being a smart lawyer you will appreciate that many english words have derived from both latin and french....I took a punt for the sake of brevity. I may be right, I may be wrong.

You may be a lawyer, but you are also an arrogant toss

Your little Matt Damon Good Will Hunting display is failing dismally

 

[JuddFevGoal]

I think you're the one who needs to relax dude.

I'm not one of the folks who run around supporting TG's arguments and I'm not in his "clique". I was merely pointing out that the meaning of words is in their contextual use, not in their traditional use. That's why English is known to be one of the more evolutionary languages on the planet. There is no hard and fast, right and wrong. Look at the meaning of the word in your own link, does it mention anywhere the committing of a crime? I repeat, that as far as TG is concerned, people who come here and argue that the trading of Fevola was a bad idea are indeed exhibiting "undesirable behaviour". Whether I, or you, agree with that is irrelevant.

Perhaps in this particular case you would have been better served by a degree in linguistics rather than law.

If you wanna take exception to the term as it applies to you, fine. But do so on the basis that it's general meaning doesn't apply to you, not on the basis that the person who used it chose the wrong word to use. You just come off as pompous and conceited (especially when you throw in your law degree).

This is the sort of thing that gets my hackles up, and I suspect those of others as well.

For what it's worth, I was one of the people who thought it was a mistake to trade Fevola, but now I'm on the fence.

Most sensible post in at least 3 pages.

I don't intend to come across as conceited. I'm not a fan of that behaviour either.

I simply found myself surrounded by people coming to The General's support for having a crack at me for expressing an opinion.

That term implies criminal behaviour - it is used primarily in society in reference to re-offending criminals. I don't like a poster's opinion, mine or anyone else to be described in these terms to bully another poster into withdrawing a valid opinion.

Ironically, my post was actually about our current forward line and it's problems, I merely mentioned Fev's name along the way and out came the knives.

The wound he has left is deep obviously and I can understand that.

I'm about addressing our current personnel issues and structures and not re-hashing the past. There is a reality though that the trade has hurt our club in some ways and that is a valid situation to discuss. I, like others here, would like nothing more than for the trade to strengthen us in the long run.

 

[JuddFevGoal]

Fine

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

I know what etymology means you flowering galoot. I also know that it originally derived from Latin. I chose to cite the more recent french derivation assuming that recidiviste' was more similar to the English recidivist...a fair assumption. Being a smart lawyer you will appreciate that many english words have derived from both latin and french....I took a punt for the sake of brevity. I may be right, I may be wrong.

You may be a lawyer, but you are also an arrogant toss

Your little Matt Damon Good Will Hunting display is failing dismally

Most lawyers are arrogant tossers. But there's plenty of others out there too!

And by the way, you really did hit me where it hurts there. I hate MATT DAMON ('Team America' pronunciation). I'm not kidding. Couldn't be a worse thing to be compared to..

 

[blue gunslinger]

I think you guys should stop reading your Reader's Digest Expand your vocabulary section!