Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Mark Robinson

  • Thread starter Thread starter pieman85
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

JB1975 said:
You suggested that no one cared about the fact that Collingwood players are taking illicit drugs. That's the straw man I was referring to, in case you missed it. I can see that you have no real argument, that you're trying to win by exhaustion. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

You will not get the last word in. He even quoted my post so he could have a crack at those who 'liked it'. There is no stone left unturned to be the last voice on the issue.
 
FuManchu said:
You don't know if it's a speculative hasty job because nothing has been proven or disproven.
Click to expand...
When asked, Slobbo couldn't confirm the number 11 , he admitted he made that up. He was given a range which was 25% I believe. So he picks the HIGHEST range. He could have, with the same mathematical legitimacy, chosen the lowest number + 1 and still fulfill the 3rd highest and other in the same range rumour. He didn't bother to do further research. Was under pressure to get the news out before Easter Break
If a journalist makes a claim,it is up to the journalist to prove it. Simple as that. I can also make outlandish claims , then demand people to prove me wrong.
Like Lemmy once said; So far I have proven I am immortal.
 
JB1975 said:
You suggested that no one cared about the fact that Collingwood players are taking illicit drugs. That's the straw man I was referring to, in case you missed it. I can see that you have no real argument, that you're trying to win by exhaustion. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

JB my bridge on this topic will finally be built after we beat the Tigers on Friday night.

I understand & agree with FuManchu and his frustration on this issue at OUR Club.

My question to you in particular because I think you are quite intelligent, is how many more Thomas & Keefe's do we want at OUR Club before we think it is an issue for us?
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

CFC2010 said:
JB my bridge on this topic will finally be built after we beat the Tigers on Friday night.

I understand & agree with FuManchu and his frustration on this issue at OUR Club.

My question to you in particular because I think you are quite intelligent, is how many more Thomas & Keefe's do we want at OUR Club before we think it is an issue for us?
Click to expand...

So you want Players Named so they can get the Wake Up Call?
 
Magpie Girl said:
You're missing the point!
It's not in dispute that players tested positive.
The problem is that Collinwood was the ONLY club named, when every club had players testing positive
And more importantly it was a breach of confidence guaranteed to the players

That's what Eddie and every supporter is mad about!
Click to expand...

Spot on! And the fact that all the discussion has been focused on the one club that was named and all the others (and those with worse results) get off without any repercussions at all. That in itself is enough to show that naming 1 club only was going to certainly focus the drug issue one the players of that club. THAT IS WHY THIS WAS COMPLETELY WEAK JOURNALISM AND WHY MANY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT!
 
Robbo said he didn't name other teams coz he couldn't confirm. Guess he'll be naming hawks soon if the fat prick has any integrity
 
FuManchu said:
Just for the record, the unconfirmed list is as follows.

Hawthorn 21
Brisbane 16
Collingwood 11
Geelong 10
Adelaide 10
Freo 9
Carlton 9
St Kilda 9
Sydney 9
West Coast 8
Port 7
GWS 7
Melb 6
Richmond 5
Bulldogs 5
Gold Coast 4
Essendon 4
Nth 3

Which does tie in with 2 other bits of information previously published. Firstly that an interstate club was in top 3 and the bottom ranked club had 3 positives.
Click to expand...
The problem with that list is that we already know it to be erroneous and so I'm not sure why it still does the rounds. The Collingwood figure has been categorically denied by Bucks on AFL360 so the sooner people start recognising that this is just some idiot's troll the better.
 
FuManchu said:
Just for the record, the unconfirmed list is as follows.

Hawthorn 21
Brisbane 16
Collingwood 11
Geelong 10
Adelaide 10
Freo 9
Carlton 9
St Kilda 9
Sydney 9
West Coast 8
Port 7
GWS 7
Melb 6
Richmond 5
Bulldogs 5
Gold Coast 4
Essendon 4
Nth 3

Which does tie in with 2 other bits of information previously published. Firstly that an interstate club was in top 3 and the bottom ranked club had 3 positives.
Click to expand...
I'd love it if this list was accurate. It would shut all the misguided "we have to sack all the drug takers for the good of the club and its culture" simpletons. If 21 Hawthorn players are tuning out in the off season with some social drug taking then it's clearly not the problem that so many are making it out to be! The whole issue is so completely overblown by the misguided concept that ingesting, inhaling, or injecting a substance automatically turns you into a drug addict who's putting their health at extraordinary risk. It's akin to saying that someone who drinks a beer is an alcoholic. Yes, you can get unlucky and end up with a toxic substance in your system yet, with a drug problem apparently so rampant in the AFL, not a single player has ended up in hospital or o.d'ed or become psychotic. Anyone would think these guys are sitting in a drug den with copious supplies of chemicals the entire off season completely off their face and avoiding sunlight like cotchin avoids september leather. Taking a pill or a line of speed or coke and dancing to sh!t music? Who gives a damn?
As for Robinson, what a cowardly dishonest twat. Tries to make out that it's not a Collingwood story, it's an AFL story, a society problem. If he was truly concerned about drug use in the AFL he wouldn't have even considered naming Collingwood or any other club - doing that has taken the focus completely off the drug issue and onto the betrayal of trust issue. The flog should stick to FOOTBALL stories, not stories about footballers in society. Leave that to people who know how to do it. I mean can you see Robbo fronting up on 4corners? Gigantic puss-infected twat.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

lol. What amuses me about some of the conversations here is that some people seem to be saying it's not about Robbo and journalistic standards or broken confidentiality it's only about player behaviour. Others seem to be saying that it's not about player behaviour or broken confidentiality it's about journalistic standards etc etc. The fact it is that all of these things are issues worthy of discussion. It IS alarming to see that there are still players who are happy to ignore the risks associated with illicit drugs in spite of the Thomas/Keeffe saga. It IS true that Robbo's journalistic standards have a very low threshhold and it is true that the AFL's integrity has taken a beating from the mere fact that this information came into the public domain. We can argue which of these issues we see as our own personal bugbear but the suggestion that one or other of these things is not an issue worthy of discussion IMO is just plain wrong.
 
PieNSauce said:
lol. What amuses me about some of the conversations here is that some people seem to be saying it's not about Robbo and journalistic standards or broken confidentiality it's only about player behaviour. Others seem to be saying that it's not about player behaviour or broken confidentiality it's about journalistic standards etc etc. The fact it is that all of these things are issues worthy of discussion. It IS alarming to see that there are still players who are happy to ignore the risks associated with illicit drugs in spite of the Thomas/Keeffe saga. It IS true that Robbo's journalistic standards have a very low threshhold and it is true that the AFL's integrity has taken a beating from the mere fact that this information came into the public domain. We can argue which of these issues we see as our own personal bugbear but the suggestion that one or other of these things is not an issue worthy of discussion IMO is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...
Some people just need to rage against anything that criticises the club. They can't see beyond what they perceive to be an attack. It's like watching Americans try and outdo each other being patriotic.
 
FuManchu said:
Some people just need to rage against anything that criticises the club. They can't see beyond what they perceive to be an attack. It's like watching Americans try and outdo each other being patriotic.
Click to expand...
To be honest Fu, I actually think you might be being a little unfair here. Without reading every post, I get the feeling that you have a problem with passionate supporters who happen to be standing up for the club. Sure there is no irrefutable evidence about what the motivation for the article written by Robbo was but I have no problem with people taking issue with it. Certainly I believe that someone had an agenda although I have no real idea who that is and I think it's fair to say that it could as easily have been Robbo as anyone else. Let's face it, footy supporters are fairly tribal and it would not surprise too much that journos are no different. Anyway, this is not an attack on you personally because I do respect most of your posts. I just happen to be a believe that footy supporters have every right to defend their club passionately. This place would be pretty boring if we didn't have that level of passion.
 
PieNSauce said:
To be honest Fu, I actually think you might be being a little unfair here. Without reading every post, I get the feeling that you have a problem with passionate supporters who happen to be standing up for the club. Sure there is no irrefutable evidence about what the motivation for the article written by Robbo was but I have no problem with people taking issue with it. Certainly I believe that someone had an agenda although I have no real idea who that is and I think it's fair to say that it could as easily have been Robbo as anyone else. Let's face it, footy supporters are fairly tribal and it would not surprise too much that journos are no different. Anyway, this is not an attack on you personally because I do respect most of your posts. I just happen to be a believe that footy supporters have every right to defend their club passionately. This place would be pretty boring if we didn't have that level of passion.
Click to expand...
The motivation for the article is clear, someone very high up wanted to bring Collingwood down a notch or two. Be it because McGuire is trying to undermine Fitzpatrick or that Pert's stance on illicit drugs is making the AFL illicit drug policy look a shambles.

So they leaked the figures specific to Collingwood and Collingwood only. It doesn't make the story any less relevant and it doesn't mean it shouldn't be published by a journo that is not beholding to the confidentiality provisions.

Everyone is so intent on trying to spread the story to other club's. Only a fool would think this was a Collingwood only problem. We get that. But when you have a club CEO railing against the illicit drug code for 3 years very publicly and you have 2 players serving suspensions for admitting to taking illicit drugs laced with PEDs and then you have positive hair samples, 3 circumstances, 2 of which are unique to Collingwood only, then yes, you have a valid story that should be written about a club in that position.

Don't you think it strange that only Collingwoods numbers were leaked? That wasn't Robbo's doing. That was someone who wanted to get back at the club. And that someone has very privileged information.
 
FuManchu said:
The motivation for the article is clear, someone very high up wanted to bring Collingwood down a notch or two. Be it because McGuire is trying to undermine Fitzpatrick or that Pert's stance on illicit drugs is making the AFL illicit drug policy look a shambles.

So they leaked the figures specific to Collingwood and Collingwood only. It doesn't make the story any less relevant and it doesn't mean it shouldn't be published by a journo that is not beholding to the confidentiality provisions.

Everyone is so intent on trying to spread the story to other club's. Only a fool would think this was a Collingwood only problem. We get that. But when you have a club CEO railing against the illicit drug code for 3 years very publicly and you have 2 players serving suspensions for admitting to taking illicit drugs laced with PEDs and then you have positive hair samples, 3 circumstances, 2 of which are unique to Collingwood only, then yes, you have a valid story that should be written about a club in that position.

Don't you think it strange that only Collingwoods numbers were leaked? That wasn't Robbo's doing. That was someone who wanted to get back at the club. And that someone has very privileged information.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with journos publishing facts but there are a couple of problems with what Robbo did for a start. Firstly, he doesn't have facts, only airy fairy numbers. OK, I get that this is not a major issue but the fact that he chose to run with a story whose impact would have been fairly obvious rather than wait until more facts are known most definitely indicates a fairly low threshhold as Bucks said on 360. It goes to the character of the man in highlighting a single club with the obvious consequence of derailing that club and the bigger issue rather than seeing the bigger story and waiting until that could come out. Sure there's no confidentiality agreement as far as he's concerned so it his right to publish but it most certainly a reflection on the man at a personal level. I am also suspecting that there has been foul play here by someone at a fairly high level but even that is pure speculation. What is not speculation here is that regardless of how it got out, the AFL has failed the players, the Collingwood Football Club and the game as a whole simply by virtue of the fact that the information somehow found its way into the public domain. For me, one of the biggest issues here is the lack of integrity the AFL is projecting by failing to address the issue and root out the source. That said, I have no idea what is going on behind closed doors but I would have thought it absolutely appropriate for the AFL to make a strong public statement on the issue.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

FuManchu said:
4 clubs had 75% of their players tested.
Click to expand...
Did they get to choose which 75% were tested?

If i could choose the 75% who got tested for Collingwood I'm pretty confident we would have had no more than 1 or 2 test positive.
 
PieNSauce said:
I don't have a problem with journos publishing facts but there are a couple of problems with what Robbo did for a start. Firstly, he doesn't have facts, only airy fairy numbers. OK, I get that this is not a major issue but the fact that he chose to run with a story whose impact would have been fairly obvious rather than wait until more facts are known most definitely indicates a fairly low threshhold as Bucks said on 360. It goes to the character of the man in highlighting a single club with the obvious consequence of derailing that club and the bigger issue rather than seeing the bigger story and waiting until that could come out. Sure there's no confidentiality agreement as far as he's concerned so it his right to publish but it most certainly a reflection on the man at a personal level. I am also suspecting that there has been foul play here by someone at a fairly high level but even that is pure speculation. What is not speculation here is that regardless of how it got out, the AFL has failed the players, the Collingwood Football Club and the game as a whole simply by virtue of the fact that the information somehow found its way into the public domain. For me, one of the biggest issues here is the lack of integrity the AFL is projecting by failing to address the issue and root out the source. That said, I have no idea what is going on behind closed doors but I would have thought it absolutely appropriate for the AFL to make a strong public statement on the issue.
Click to expand...
What if there were no further facts to be had and no other source that would verify it?

If the leak came from a source that is impeccable, and that leaker is telling you up to 11, then you run with it. Now he could have written that story differently. He could have angled it that someone was leaking deliberately against Collingwood, but that still wouldn't change the fact that up to 11 had tested positive.

If you are wanting and expect Journos to wait to be 100% spot on with their reporting, then you're going to have very thin papers with very little investigative reporting going on. If he was within a margin close to 11, the story has validity.

A year ago, if Collingwood had 1 player testing positive, it would have been huge news. Now all of a sudden because he can't verify if it's 9,10 or 11, it becomes a point of contention if he should publish or not!!!

All this talk about other club's is just a deflection of avoiding a real problem that our club faces. If by some chance we start seeing players getting 4 and 12 week suspensions, is anyone really going to take solace in the fact that other club's have the same problems?

The facts are that in spite of claims his numbers are incorrect, not one alternative number has been given to counter his number. If it was significantly less, I would have thought that fact would be made very public.
 
Kirby said:
Did they get to choose which 75% were tested?

If i could choose the 75% who got tested for Collingwood I'm pretty confident we would have had no more than 1 or 2 test positive.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why only 75% were tested. It doesn't make sense to me. I would have thought in for a penny in for a pound. But maybe it was done to create a statistical deviation. But who knows?
 
FuManchu said:
The facts are that in spite of claims his numbers are incorrect, not one alternative number has been given to counter his number. If it was significantly less, I would have thought that fact would be made very public.
Click to expand...
I got it on good authority that our number is the holy number 7. There. Fact. Proof me wrong.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

domus
    • Like
Banning the Use of Knee in Marking Contest
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
cakewalk_1
cakewalk_1

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom