Roast Matt Rosa

[Coast Guard]

Thanks for that champ. Any other advice you want to impart on me?

Sure. Got any more exaggerations or oversights - champ?

 

[bunsen burner]

You implied that he couldn't be sore because he didn't make body contact, so the guy pointed out that you didn't need body contact to be sore.

Do you have to make an enemy out of everyone?

I was making a joke and dick features decided to take it seriously. And now you come in with your super hero cape trying to be a hero.

Well done. Keep up the good work.

 

[bunsen burner]

When Rosa spurned your advances that night, did it make you cry?

He only spurned me because he doesn't like body contact.

 

[bunsen burner]

Sure. Got any more exaggerations or oversights - champ?

You obviously missed the joke. Probably too busy licking windows. Let me guess, you're in the cheer squad, right?

 

[Coast Guard]

You obviously missed the joke. Probably too busy licking windows. Let me guess, you're in the cheer squad, right?

aaaa personal attacks.. a sign of someone with no more ammo left. you got called out and you hide behind a 'joke'.

ive got a joke. your posts.

 

[bunsen burner]

aaaa personal attacks.. a sign of someone with no more ammo left. you got called out and you hide behind a 'joke'.

ive got a joke. your posts.

Ammo? For what? Clearly this "owning" you are handing me over whether players get sore or not from not making contact is important for you.

Congratulations on that massive smack down you just gave me. Please resume licking your monitor.

 

[lewigie]

He only spurned me because he doesn't like body contact.

lol'd.

 

[Coast Guard]

Ammo? For what? Clearly this "owning" you are handing me over whether players get sore or not from not making contact is important for you.

Congratulations on that massive smack down you just gave me. Please resume licking your monitor.

When did 'owning' come into it? You have made it very clear what you think of Rosa and his efforts so far this year. I challenged your thinking on pulling up sore which resulted in you getting defensive - probably because you know you where wrong. Of course it's easier to lie than it is to admit your wrong. I don't expect you to - its actually funnier if you don't. You were wrong, you got called out, you don't want to admit your wrong, so lie by saying it was a joke, use a sarcastic tone and try to be condescending with words like 'champ' and then resort to name calling - hence you obviously have nothing intelligent left to say and are just clutching at straws.

Others have spoke of their differing opinions too and have received similar responses from you - albeit without being referred to as being disabled for having an opinion different to yours.

Oh and no, its not really that important an issue to me. Its just fun to point out obvious mistakes when posters are making gross exaggerations and then getting defensive about it all. Thank you for being so eager to oblige.

 

[bluengold89]

When did 'owning' come into it? You have made it very clear what you think of Rosa and his efforts so far this year. I challenged your thinking on pulling up sore which resulted in you getting defensive - probably because you know you where wrong. Of course it's easier to lie than it is to admit your wrong. I don't expect you to - its actually funnier if you don't. You were wrong, you got called out, you don't want to admit your wrong, so lie by saying it was a joke, use a sarcastic tone and try to be condescending with words like 'champ' and then resort to name calling - hence you obviously have nothing intelligent left to say and are just clutching at straws.

Others have spoke of their differing opinions too and have received similar responses from you - albeit without being referred to as being disabled for having an opinion different to yours.

Oh and no, its not really that important an issue to me. Its just fun to point out obvious mistakes when posters are making gross exaggerations and then getting defensive about it all. Thank you for being so eager to oblige.

Bunsen obviously made a joke about Rosa not playing a physical game on the weekend and then you decided to over analyse his comment. Everyone is aware that physical contact is not necessary to pull up sore. If you don't think Rosa is soft then just say so, people have different opinions, but you picking apart what was obviously just a throw away comment wasn't required.

 

[Coast Guard]

Bunsen obviously made a joke about Rosa not playing a physical game on the weekend and then you decided to over analyse his comment. Everyone is aware that physical contact is not necessary to pull up sore. If you don't think Rosa is soft then just say so, people have different opinions, but you picking apart what was obviously just a throw away comment wasn't required.

I actually agree that its a weakness in Rosa's game - and I agree that he had a very poor game, but he wasn't alone. However I dont agree with the calls to drop him.

Aside from that Bunsen has repeatably used his posts to point out out that he doesn't think Rosa goes hard enough - and fair enough too. Then makes a comment re:rosa interview about him pulling up sore. His point was made a number of times throughout the thread; its not just a throw away comment - he was using it to strengthen his stand point. I just corrected him a little (it was hardly over analysing) and it could have stopped there. But it didnt due to his sarcastic and defensive response.

I think he's had more than enough rope in this thread in regards to stamping on other peoples posts and opinions so I dont feel the need to hesitate on doing the same to his.

 

[tesseract]

Coast Guard, such a comment on the quote wasn't an attempt to strengthen Bunsen's argument, as the quote was deliberately taken out of context for the sake of what was an obvious joke. The quote in itself said very little; certainly nothing that could be used to strengthen an argument given the obvious distorting of its actual context. What Bunsen said previous to the joke about Rosa is irrelevant to the joke because that's opinion.

After reading the thread again, it seems that you made a serious argument in rebuttal to a joke. Therefore, you haven't corrected anything, as Bunsen, just like the rest of us, know full well that a person doesn't need to be hit in order to pull up sore. It goes without saying, but you proceeded to post to him the blatantly obvious anyway under the reasoning that it wasn't a joke. The only one who didn't realize it was a joke was you. Your subsequent serious postings have turned that joke upon you, for reason that you took the joke too seriously, and then want on an on about it in a serious fashion. When people do that, the joke ends up being on them.

Your ability to discern what's a joke and what's not is questionable.

 

[QS]

^^^^
This is bordering on a troll thread...

 

[Coast Guard]

Coast Guard, such a comment on the quote wasn't an attempt to strengthen Bunsen's argument, as the quote was deliberately taken out of context for the sake of what was an obvious joke. The quote in itself said very little; certainly nothing that could be used to strengthen an argument given the obvious distorting of its actual context. What Bunsen said previous to the joke about Rosa is irrelevant to the joke because that's opinion.

After reading the thread again, it seems that you made a serious argument in rebuttal to a joke. Therefore, you haven't corrected anything, as Bunsen, just like the rest of us, know full well that a person doesn't need to be hit in order to pull up sore. It goes without saying, but you proceeded to post to him the blatantly obvious anyway under the reasoning that it wasn't a joke. The only one who didn't realize it was a joke was you. Your subsequent serious postings have turned that joke upon you, for reason that you took the joke too seriously, and then want on an on about it in a serious fashion. When people do that, the joke ends up being on them.

Your ability to discern what's a joke and what's not is questionable.

That's one way to look at it. The way I saw it was you have a poster repeatedly questioning a players effort or lack thereof - and there for indirectly questioning his commitment to the team and his integrity. Thats a fairly serious accusation. The fact that he went on to make a joke doesn't excuse the poster from scrutiny if its in direct relation to a common point. This is all about effort and trying - Bunsen thinks Rosa didn't try at all - fair enough thats his opinion and one that he is entitled to hold and share, but one that is completely subjective and unquantifiable. That he makes a joke about body contact doesn't take away from the fact that he's still trying to make a statement. People try to use humour to strengthen their points all the time - it doesn't mean they can't be pulled up on it - you can't make a joke and then hide behind the fact that its a joke if its shown to be off the mark. If it was his first post and an off the cuff joke - i wouldn't have said any thing - but it wasn't. He was questioning Rosa's character. If you can't see that then i would say your ability to discern when someones trying to make a statement is questionable.

A player doesn't have to be have to be hard at the body to be 'trying' in a game - they can still run hard and be useful. Rosa has been vanilla all his career, but he can still be effective if he is at his run and carry best. In fact, his position and the fact that he is an outside player suggests that this is what he should be doing. Yes he had a poor game - but if your going to question a players efforts and commitment, you'd better have something better than a subjective feeling or view to make it.

 

[Brave Sir Robin]

I was making a joke and dick features decided to take it seriously. And now you come in with your super hero cape trying to be a hero.

Well done. Keep up the good work.

OK, so you've answered my question then.

Cheers.

 

[tesseract]

^^^^
This is bordering on a troll thread...

Bunsen's entitled to his opinion whether you, me or anyone else likes it or not. Disagreeing with an opinion doesn't make for a troll.

 

[tesseract]

That's one way to look at it. The way I saw it was you have a poster repeatedly questioning a players effort or lack thereof - and there for indirectly questioning his commitment to the team and his integrity. Thats a fairly serious accusation. The fact that he went on to make a joke doesn't excuse the poster from scrutiny if its in direct relation to a common point. This is all about effort and trying - Bunsen thinks Rosa didn't try at all - fair enough thats his opinion and one that he is entitled to hold and share, but one that is completely subjective and unquantifiable. That he makes a joke about body contact doesn't take away from the fact that he's still trying to make a statement. People try to use humour to strengthen their points all the time - it doesn't mean they can't be pulled up on it - you can't make a joke and then hide behind the fact that its a joke if its shown to be off the mark. If it was his first post and an off the cuff joke - i wouldn't have said any thing - but it wasn't. He was questioning Rosa's character. If you can't see that then i would say your ability to discern when someones trying to make a statement is questionable.

A player doesn't have to be have to be hard at the body to be 'trying' in a game - they can still run hard and be useful. Rosa has been vanilla all his career, but he can still be effective if he is at his run and carry best. In fact, his position and the fact that he is an outside player suggests that this is what he should be doing. Yes he had a poor game - but if your going to question a players efforts and commitment, you'd better have something better than a subjective feeling or view to make it.

The seriousness of accusations on here is irrelevant, as all posts are open to rebuttal.

Just because the joke conveniently tied into what Bunsen was saying, it's not your place to be telling Bunsen what his motivation for that joke was. He made the comment and said it was a joke, so who're you, I or anyone else to say otherwise?

Even if Bunsen's joke was in direct relation to a common point, the fact that it was a joke means that it should've been taken as such, rather than seriously. By all means, debate his opinions, but take the joke for what it is, and not presume such motivation as "he's still trying to make a statement" simply because you find a correlation between his opinion and his joke.

People trying humour to strengthen their arguments doesn't mean that's the case here. It isn't a case of one size fits all. Only Bunsen can know his motivation. He said it was a joke, so we've no choice but to take his word for it because we've no possible way to know otherwise. You can suspect another motive, but to state as fact something other than what Bunsen stated is baseless.

One can hide behind a joke. A joke doesn't make it one's opinion. Even if it did conveniently coincide, as in this situation, Bunsen stated it was a joke, and through subsequent posts of his shows that it wasn't intended to be making a statement in continuance of his previous opinions.

Whether the joke was Bunsen's first post or whatever number, it's irrelevant. You made a big song and dance over a joke, now you're trying to justify it with some faulty and presumptuous reasoning.

Bunsen is allowed to speak as to Rosa's character. (Within the confines of the law.) It's his opinion. You're free to rebut what he says. But, you can't speak as to someone elses motivation when you don't have the ability to read someone elses thoughts so as to know for certain. Given Bunsen has stated that this supposed statement that you presumed came from the joke he made is nothing more than a joke, that's all that needs to be said to show that you're wrong to label the joke as "trying to make a statement."

 

[QS]

Bunsen's entitled to his opinion whether you, me or anyone else likes it or not. Disagreeing with an opinion doesn't make for a troll.

Roast prefix is pretty harsh though. Context of the thread is almost like bait.
Yep, folks are entitled to their opinion. That's the beauty of forums, as is the beauty of being able to respond.

Nobody wins a forum argument though Closest you get is a locked thread and telling yourself that you did.

Anyway, Rosa is fine. This reminds me of the dropping Kerr to the WAFL thread..

 

[tesseract]

Roast prefix is pretty harsh though. Context of the thread is almost like bait.
Yep, folks are entitled to their opinion. That's the beauty of forums, as is the beauty of being able to respond.

Nobody wins a forum argument though Closest you get is a locked thread and telling yourself that you did.

Anyway, Rosa is fine. This reminds me of the dropping Kerr to the WAFL thread..

Perhaps. It's a subjective call as to whether it's harsh or not, but it's the thread starter's call whether to label the thread such, and debatable by all within as to its validity.

I love controversial topics. It spices things up. Everyone agreeing is boring. Argument and debate means fun to be had, IMO.

 

[QS]

I love controversial topics. It spices things up. Everyone agreeing is boring. Argument and debate means fun to be had, IMO.

Oh for sure, bit of good logical debate is fun. I've been around the internet far too long though and my 'post thread for reaction' spidey senses were tingling.

Shit. Just realised I missed the start of seat resale for Sunday!
Edit: Got a ticket. Hooray for in the wings.

 

[sydney eagle]

One question that occurs to me is If we drop Rosa with whom do we replace him ? Swift hasn't really shown enough form in the WAFL, Dalziell seems to be out of favour, Weedon doesn't seem to have developed the endurance for AFL yet and Embley is injured. Who is left that is showing enough form to replace Rosa ?

 

[tesseract]

Oh for sure, bit of good logical debate is fun. I've been around the internet far too long though and my 'post thread for reaction' spidey senses were tingling.

Shit. Just realised I missed the start of seat resale for Sunday!
Edit: Got a ticket. Hooray for in the wings.

From what I've read from Bunsen over my time on BF, it's not his MO to start troll threads. Yes, he can have controversial opinions at times, but I think he's a straight shooter. I think what he posted regarding Rosa is his fair dinkum opinion, not a phishing expedition.

Good stuff. Enjoy. I'm Influenza Man. I won't likely have reverted in time. DOH!

 

[QS]

From what I've read from Bunsen over my time on BF, it's not his MO to start troll threads. Yes, he can have controversial opinions at times, but I think he's a straight shooter. I think what he posted regarding Rosa is his fair dinkum opinion, not a phishing expedition.

Good stuff. Enjoy. I'm Influenza Man. I won't likely have reverted in time. DOH!

Yeah fair comment mate. I haven't personally read a lot of his stuff, was just a first impression.

Bugger.. fight through it! Few codrals and a beer or two should see you fit

You can see Rosa shine on Sunday *smirk*

 

[tesseract]

One question that occurs to me is If we drop Rosa with whom do we replace him ? Who is left that is showing enough form to replace Rosa ?

Sheppard is the OM who I'd put in his stead. Perhaps Butler could play that role too.

I'm completely against Swift's use on a wing. He's a ball winner, not receiver. Swift would spud it up on a wing.

 

[sydney eagle]

Sheppard is the OM who I'd put in his stead. Perhaps Butler could play that role too.

I'm completely against Swift's use on a wing. He's a ball winner, not receiver. Swift would spud it up on a wing.

Fair enough. Another question is, should Rosa then be dropped out of the team altogether or start on the bench or as the substitute ?

 

[Coast Guard]

The seriousness of accusations on here is irrelevant, as all posts are open to rebuttal.

Just because the joke conveniently tied into what Bunsen was saying, it's not your place to be telling Bunsen what his motivation for that joke was. He made the comment and said it was a joke, so who're you, I or anyone else to say otherwise?

Key word here is "Conveniently".. I believe him when he says its a joke. I disagree that its separately motivated just to get a laugh. If a joke is in direct relation to a common point its still apart of a point. This tactic is used by politicians all the time. One could argue that it was or wasn't but we'd go in circles.

One can hide behind a joke. A joke doesn't make it one's opinion. Even if it did conveniently coincide, as in this situation, Bunsen stated it was a joke, and through subsequent posts of his shows that it wasn't intended to be making a statement in continuance of his previous opinions.

I could quite easily make an argument for why a joke could make part of an opinion. If i made repetitive comments about how I thought Irish people are stupid (i dont btw for our Irish friends ) - and then made an Irish joke - the correlation is too obvious to ignore. If I offend someone with my Irish joke I cant then go - 'it was a joke you window licker' and then expect them to believe me that my opinion is separate from my joke.

Whether the joke was Bunsen's first post or whatever number, it's irrelevant. You made a big song and dance over a joke, now you're trying to justify it with some faulty and presumptuous reasoning.

One post is hardly a big song a dance. If it was a joke and I missed it - wouldn't it just be easier of him to say - "I was joking CG calm down" - rather than get defensive and sarcastic? That type of reaction points towards the fact that it was apart of his point. All through the thread his reactions to people opposed to his opinions have earned such a response.

Bunsen is allowed to speak as to Rosa's character. (Within the confines of the law.) It's his opinion. You're free to rebut what he says.

We're not debating this.

But, you can't speak as to someone elses motivation when you don't have the ability to read someone elses thoughts so as to know for certain.

Again, I call a spade a spade - i think his motivation is quite clearly revealed through his posts, even if it isnt clear to you. If you want to dance around the grey your entitled to. But I think its a little rich to call what im saying presumptuous and faulty when so much of what your saying can be fairly argued against as well.

Given Bunsen has stated that this supposed statement that you presumed came from the joke he made is nothing more than a joke, that's all that needs to be said to show that you're wrong to label the joke as "trying to make a statement."

This is a matter of opinions. Your logic works for you. Mine works for me. I dont see the point in debating this past this point. Its been fun though.

I love controversial topics. It spices things up. Everyone agreeing is boring. Argument and debate means fun to be had, IMO.

I agree Tess. I agree.