Neil Craig

[bobshoby]

Still if we want to make the top 4 and have any chance of being a premiership shot this year we can't afford to lose too many games like that. Particularly since we have 7 games against Hawks/Geelong/Saints/Cwood/Bdogs which are at best 50/50 prospects.

Just have to look at Hawthorn last year, even if it all starts to come together mid season you still need a solid base of wins to make a realistic attempt at the finals.

 

[Vantz]

Hard to blame Craigy for this one, his hand was forced by Griff playing like he belongs in the under 10 netball team

Craig is safe. Crowman86 that is a great call. Griffens inability to at least put up a contest in the ruck duel destroyed our whole sides structure. It forced Craig to play Tippett in the ruck and look for other forward options, i.e Bock.

I think what is clearly evident is that we miss Brad Moran more then we could have imagined. He is a competitive second ruck and can play the role Hentschel seems to be attempting to play. Kills two birds with one stone.

 

[Crowmad]

Craig needs to really get some spark happenning in the team.........a lacklustre effort like that on sunday will leave us in limbo land again........not sure what he's up to but he better hurry up and decide or I'll have to change my signature!!

 

[relapse]

I denied its legitmacy because i didnt believe your account.

After you provided the link, it became obvious you're just reaching for anything you can.

The article does not support your premise that Craig stated our chances rest solely upon the older players. In fact it does the opposite. Craig says that he thinks those players are capable of improvement. Sure. Anyone thinking critically would probably begin to ponder which question Craig was orginally asked to draw that response. Something like 'Where is the improvement in your list going to come from given you have all these first 22 players over 30?' perhaps? Since one quote out of context, which you seem to love providing doesnt tell us much, lets look at more of his statements.

He also says....

They are no longer the basis of our midfield structure....

"They need to be better this year. Can Goodwin, McLeod and Edwards play in the midfield for 22 rounds like they used to? No, they can't, and it would be wrong for me to ask them to do that and it would be wrong for the direction of our football club.''

I mean come on, an explicit statement that the best interests of the club are to not be reliant on these players..

And he says that...

They are going to be under pressure from the players beneath them.

"They also quite clearly understand they need to have good seasons because they are getting towards the end of their careers and there is pressure from underneath"

Here Craig forecasts that they may struggle to retain spots if they do not show the improvement he asked for earlier.


These statements are not NOT what you claim. Linking that article as the evidence for your statements is bizzare. Its either a wilfull misrepresentation on your behalf, which makes you dishonest, or you have an inability to comprehend what the article actually says, making you a fool. Take your pick.

You must have had a very frustrating childhood, given your insistence on trying to fit a circle into the square hole. I can only imagine how difficult this makes puzzle games.

Since when did the whole attempt to try and become Crow-mo's doppleganger start The whole process of throwing in some "insults" as a standard retort to someone who doesnt share your opinion is actually rather humerous

I have not been dishonest nor have misreprested what was said. Craig used the comment about pressure on those players from below as a point to reinforce his opening statement. He made the opening statement declaring that he believes our improvement this year will come from those four individuals (no disputing he made that comment), he then reinforces that point by saying that he has seen it on the training track and that he believes that the pressure applied to those four players from underneath will make them into better players in 2010.

but please flame anyway if you wish, but dont forget to throw in some insults as well

 

[amer]

Neil was very good last year with the timing of our run over previous seasons when it seemed to be- Win every game at all costs including PS games and then die in the arse during finals.

Last year was good except for the normal third quarter foudouts that cost us a spot in the GF.

Who cares about round 1 except for teams that desperately want their supporters to think this year will be different.

Yes we have had some bad luck with injury but nothing too serious (except for Otto) so I would not panic too much by starting threads about NC or his coaching assistants.

We will probably have everyone back by Round 3 or 4 and then they need a couple of weeks to get back into the swing of AFL, so all going well by round 5 or 6 the Crows should be hitting some formidable form with a full strength forward line that by the finals have played together more than they did last season.

I still think we are in for a big year and Neil just has to hold his nerve during the early season where there may be some more disappointment.

Agreed, agreed, agreed! Odds on we'll be up and running late in the year again. For the last time, this year is about two things:

1) Level of improvement in Walker and Dangerfield, the two absolutely elite talents on our list.

2) Whether 2009's devastating exit will galvanise the group.

 

[*PAF]

I didn't see that much of the game, only most of the last quarter and a few bits here and there before that so I cannot comment on the game as a whole, but from the bits I did see you lot weren't outcoached but outskilled and outrun. You looked slow and lacked skills.

Then again, take some of the more skilled players out from any other team and they too will look and play badly.

 

[Allbetsroff]

Craig is safe. Crowman86 that is a great call. Griffens inability to at least put up a contest in the ruck duel destroyed our whole sides structure. It forced Craig to play Tippett in the ruck and look for other forward options, i.e Bock.

No, while Griffin was crap, it was our inability to win the ball and use it effectively in the middle that was the problem. The Forwardline was the least of our concerns.

 

[Vantz]

No, while Griffin was crap, it was our inability to win the ball and use it effectively in the middle that was the problem. The Forwardline was the least of our concerns.

Yes, that stems from Griffen. If he was more competitive at the bounce Sandy would not have been able to spoon feed the Fremantle midfield and would have given our midfielders a chance to get a first look at the football.

 

[razorsedge]

I would like to ask NC why he is so slow n stubborn to play man on man when he has the opportunity and find out who really is or is not accountable. The defensive side of several name players is to be questioned and when the zone is ineffectual why not try something different.
The last of contested ball winning and the decision and execution of disposal in the backline was deplorable.Why not have the confidence to go forward n backing your teammate one on one, it surely could nopot have been any worse a result. we tried to invent something that wasn't there and look what happened.
When going forward you have a clever player in Walker who can lose his player in traffic and Tippett who is so strong in the air and competitive but the decisions of players entering the forward area we tend to overlook one or the other and most times it is not the best player in the position that we kick to.
We hear structure structure zone zone contested ball frontal pressure set plays ! Why not natural ability with some freedom to display natural talents and with a game plan that does not make the talented kids coming thru into crowbots and enjoying your footy doing what comes naturally helps the team win ! Look at FREMANTLE on the weekend.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

I think you may have a slight Crow-Mo obsession, if you feel whinging about him is currently relevant.

Maybe just ask him for his phone number, and get back to the point?

BTW, as far as it goes... Crow-Mo is a far smarter individual than you. A comparison to him is hardly insulting.



So you've chosen the 'inability to comprehend' option.

Youve almost non stop posted the same routine in practically every thread on this board for the last 6 months.

You make the continual claim that our club has made a mistake, and is too reliant on the 30 plus players. To support this you continually provide an out of context quote.

The article that you are linking states that the players in question have been moved out of the midfield, that the best interests of the club will be served by developing younger players for these roles, and that the older players will have to fight to hold their spot because of pressure from the youngsters.

This is not what youve claimed, or argue. The article you link does not support you, it debunks the routine you've been running for oh so long.

Do you understand this time, or should i start drawing a picture to make it easier?



Pretty weak attempt at dodging the issue.

It is not an out of context quote...your are the one trying to mount an argument for that and IMO not making a good fist of it.

I'm with relapse on this one...Craigy said what he said, take it for what it is and stop trying to make it something it is not.

 

[Southerntakeover]

So, by providing all of the statements made, rather than just one, you argue that im infact trying to take something out of context rather than placing it in its context? Id love to know how you think that works.

Ill explain further... To put it in context, you can either look at the question asked to determine what exactly has drawn that particular response, this isnt provided in the article.

The other option is to look at the rest of the statements made, to attempt to gain an understanding of the point being made. If you do this, youd notice pretty quickly that they actively contradict his argument.

Do you need the picture as well?

 

[relapse]

I think you may have a slight Crow-Mo obsession, if you feel whinging about him is currently relevant.

Maybe just ask him for his phone number, and get back to the point?

BTW, as far as it goes... Crow-Mo is a far smarter individual than you. A comparison to him is hardly insulting.



So you've chosen the 'inability to comprehend' option.

Youve almost non stop posted the same routine in practically every thread on this board for the last 6 months.

You make the continual claim that our club has made a mistake, and is too reliant on the 30 plus players. To support this you continually provide an out of context quote.

The article that you are linking states that the players in question have been moved out of the midfield, that the best interests of the club will be served by developing younger players for these roles, and that the older players will have to fight to hold their spot because of pressure from the youngsters.

This is not what youve claimed, or argue. The article you link does not support you, it debunks the routine you've been running for oh so long.

Do you understand this time, or should i start drawing a picture to make it easier?



Pretty weak attempt at dodging the issue.

Crow-mo is also a far smarter individual than you, so whats your point ???

There is also no obsession or any complaint about Crow-Mo, just an observation (I also could be mistaken) that you appear to be trying to emulate him to some degree. I am not sure whether that is because you admire him or that you think by retorting to people with statements such as "you are unable to comprehend", "you are illformed" etc that you think it will create a perception that you are superior intellectually to others on this forum and that this will somehow add more weight to value of your opinions. All in all it is actually rather amusing and somewhat narcisistic trait.

Again I could be wrong

Now as for the rest of the post, those three players have not had a full time role in midfield for at least the last 2-3 years. This is hardly a revelation, they still obviously rotate through there in a pinch hitting role and I would expect this to continue again this season. He was just trying to make the point that while he expects them to improve, he obviously understands that they cant be the players they once were.

Let me put it all together

Craig thinks those 4 players will improve. He believes this because he has seen the improvement already on the training track, he also reinforces his opinion based on his belief that list pressure from beneath them will also be a factor in their improvement. He then concedes that the improvement in these players obviously willl not magically revert them back to the all-conquering players that they were 10 years ago, but their improvement this year will be enough to give us that extra 2 percent in September that could be the difference between winning and losing.

Again this is my interpretation, either accept my interpretation for what it is or you can continue in this circular debate that is going nowhere.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Crow-mo is also a far smarter individual than you, so whats your point ???

Ahh, the 'i know you are you said you are' defense. Nice.

There is also no obsession or any complaint about Crow-Mo, just an observation (I also could be mistaken) that you appear to be trying to emulate him to some degree. I am not sure whether that is because you admire him or that you think by retorting to people with statements such as "you are unable to comprehend", "you are illformed" etc that you think it will create a perception that you are superior intellectually to others on this forum and that this will somehow add more weight to value of your opinions. All in all it is actually rather amusing and somewhat narcisistic trait.

Or, and heres an out there theory...

Maybe people continually tell you you're missing the point, because you frequently miss the point? I cant help it if hes also noticed this trait.

As far as imitating him goes... i dont enjoy crumpets and im a far better speller.

Again I could be wrong

Almost religiously.

Now as for the rest of the post, those three players have not had a full time role in midfield for at least the last 2-3 years. This is hardly a revelation, they still obviously rotate through there in a pinch hitting role and I would expect this to continue again this season. He was just trying to make the point that while he expects them to improve, he obviously understands that they cant be the players they once were.

Ok, so these are statements not consistent with the argument of an over dependence. Did you miss the part about relying on them in the key midfield roles being against the clubs best interests? Thats actually a key point in negating the fears you hold.

Let me put it all together

God id love it if you would.

Craig thinks those 4 players will improve. He believes this because he has seen the improvement already on the training track.

Yes. And this is where i really want to know the question asked. My suspicion is Craig was countering the claim that these older players were a liability rather than an asset.

he also reinforces his opinion based on his belief that list pressure from beneath them will also be a factor in their improvement.

No. The pressure from underneath is a consequence of not improving/maintaining their form. Not a justification of it.

He then concedes that the improvement in these players obviously willl not magically revert back to the all-conquering players that they were 10 years ago,

Again, not consistent with your overall argument.

but their improvement this year will be enough to give us that extra 2 percent in September that could be the difference between winning and losing.

No, this isnt contained in what he says at all, and theres the problem. This really only works for you if you take a shirtload of poetic license in interpreting the statements.

At no point are these players mentioned as the sole improvement in our list.

Again this is my interpretation, either accept my interpretation for what it is or you can continue in this circular debate that is going nowhere.

Look, you're really not in a position to accuse others of circular reasoning.

If you're really tired of the debate, id have to question why you continue to post the same thing in practically every thread.

It usually ends the same too... you claiming its just opinion and you'll wait to see the results, before apparently tiring of waiting, and returning the next day in a different thread reposting it.

 

[relapse]

Ahh, the 'i know you are you said you are' defense. Nice.

Ah the old 'I have no comeback' defense nice.

almost religiously

I guess almost as religiously as you believe you are right

Or, and heres an out there theory...

Maybe people continually tell you you're missing the point, because you frequently miss the point? I cant help it if hes also noticed this trait.

Oh I am not sure on that, someone has already said that they agree with my point of view much to your disdain. Have you resorted to throwing them insults yet ?? Come on pull that old chestnut out again

Actually I have no issue with Crow-Mo and honestly is there actually anyone on this forum that hasn’t had a Crow-Mo barb thrown their way over the years, it's all part of the Adelaide board initiation process.

As far as imitating him goes... i dont enjoy crumpets and im a far better speller.

Oh so you have taken your emulation that far, here I was thinking that you were just trying to emulate the posting style, oh well I stand corrected.

Ok, so these are statements not consistent with the argument of an over dependence. Did you miss the part about relying on them in the key midfield roles being against the clubs best interests? Thats actually a key point in negating the fears you hold.

No, you are simply trying to mix two entirely different posts (one from months ago) into the one context. I already posted that they have not held key midfield roles for the best part of two years. Their roles this season will not differ greatly from 2009 in that they will provide a pinch hitting role in our midfield rotations, but will not have a full time role in our midfield..

Whether they are in the midfield or not doesn't appear to change Craig's belief that those players are the key for us in 2010. You constantly choose to argue the point each time yet despite all of them being retained, being given leadership roles and Craig saying that they are the key in 2010 you still are trying to claim that I have no basis for my belief that Craig appears to be over relying too much on those players to bring success

God id love it if you would.

Well one of us has to

Yes. And this is where i really want to know the question asked. My suspicion is Craig was countering the claim that these older players were a liability rather than an asset.

So now you are resorting to trying to base your argument on a suspicion of the question that was asked could you grasp those straws any tighter ?

The question could have easily have been "You have stated that you believe the club is potentially in a position to win the premiership this year, where do you think the improvement will come from"

No. The pressure from underneath is a consequence of not improving/maintaining their form. Not a justification of it.

That's your opinion, I don’t think there is any real consequence for those players unless their form drops dramatically. As for maintaining their form that's not the issue, Craig has made the point that he believes the players will improve and claims to have already seen signs of that improvement and that improvement will be the difference between this year and last year.

Again, not consistent with your overall argument.

What my post from months ago so every post I make is based on posts made in previous threads

No, this isnt contained in what he says at all, and theres the problem. This really only works for you if you take a shirtload of poetic license in interpreting the statements.

This is exactly what you are doing and even resorting to relying on hypotheticals in relation to what questions Craig was asked to try and alter the context of what was said in an attempt to try and substantiate your opinion.

At no point are these players mentioned as the sole improvement in our list.

No but he has clearly said that he believes the main basis of our improvement this year will come from those four. Hence this discussion.

Look, you're really not in a position to accuse others of circular reasoning.

neither are you

If you're really tired of the debate, id have to question why you continue to post the same thing in practically every thread.

Okay, selective post reading maybe ??? Can you tell me where in the aftermath of the Freo game have I brought up the performances of Goodwin and Edwards and made a comment that they should not have been retained ?? I have actually remained very positive and believe that we will bounce back against Sydney. All that I brought up in this thread was in the long term that Craig's list management could eventually be his undoing especially if we have a bad year this year, but also said that he is 100 percent safe this year.

It usually ends the same too... you claiming its just opinion and you'll wait to see the results, before apparently tiring of waiting, and returning the next day in a different thread reposting it.

No the last time it ended because it would have just degenerated into petty shitfight where we both would have end up getting carded, so I took the view for both of our sakes to just make a at one of your comments instead of continuing and end it there. Obviously you were too busy thinking you had achieved some sort of victory to comprehend this so this time if you want to continue the shit slinging then go ahead. I can give as good as I can get.

As for me claiming that I am stating my opinion, welcome to the world of internet forums. I am sure that you being the Rhodes Scholar you believe yourself to be would understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity. An internet forum is predominantly based around subjective discussion ie it is based around each person's opinions and perceptions.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Ah the old 'I have no comeback' defense nice.

You would have required something to comeback to. You just repeated what i said. You dont get points for that.

I guess almost as religiously as you believe you are right

Its a helpful belief. I am right.

All jokes aside though, what sort of person actively believes they're wrong?

Oh I am not sure on that, someone has already said that they agree with my point of view much to your disdain.

Aww, how cute. You found a friend. Now if only you could find a valid argument.

Have you resorted to throwing them insults yet ?? Come on pull that old chestnut out again

Considering your current tactic, im not sure you can take a high ground approach.

Actually I have no issue with Crow-Mo and honestly is there actually anyone on this forum that hasn’t had a Crow-Mo barb thrown their way over the years, it's all part of the Adelaide board initiation process.

Again... am i supposed to care?

Seriously, just write him a letter or something.

Oh so you have taken your emulation that far, here I was thinking that you were just trying to emulate the posting style, oh well I stand corrected.

Theres those poor comprehension skills again.

I was jokingly suggesting reasons why i couldnt emulate him. Not suprised that went over your head, everything else seems to.

No, you are simply trying to mix two entirely different posts (one from months ago) into the one context. I already posted that they have not held key midfield roles for the best part of two years. Their roles this season will not differ greatly from 2009 in that they will provide a pinch hitting role in our midfield rotations, but will not have a full time role in our midfield..

Whether they are in the midfield or not doesn't appear to change Craig's belief that those players are the key for us in 2010. You constantly choose to argue the point each time yet despite all of them being retained, being given leadership roles and Craig saying that they are the key in 2010 you still are trying to claim that I have no basis for my belief that Craig appears to be over relying too much on those players to bring success

So, you claim im taking you out of context, then regurtitate the same argument.

The probem is, whilst you claim Craig said that they are key, he didnt say that at all. Using a claim that he said something as the evidence that he said something is that old circular arguing we've spoken about.

Well one of us has to

Again with the 'i know you are you said you are' routine.

So now you are resorting to trying to base your argument on a suspicion of the question that was asked could you grasp those straws any tighter?

Yes, im insisting that when analyzing the meaning of an answer it would be appropriate to look at the question. That you reject this so vehemently suggests to me that you're more interested in sweeping 'the sky is falling' statements than an actual understanding of the clubs plans.

The question could have easily have been "You have stated that you believe the club is potentially in a position to win the premiership this year, where do you think the improvement will come from"

It could. We dont know for certain. Thats why the other statements are important to provide context.

You do atleast agree that the meaning of the quote could change depending on the context in which it occured? (i.e. what conversation was taking place before hand?)

That's your opinion, I don’t think there is any real consequence for those players unless their form drops dramatically. As for maintaining their form that's not the issue, Craig has made the point that he believes the players will improve and claims to have already seen signs of that improvement and that improvement will be the difference between this year and last year.

Craig actively mentioned pressure on their spots. Its saying 'improve or else'. That is the consequence.

If they were to improve as he believes they should, then no, there wont be consequence.

And nor should there be.

What my post from months ago so every post I make is based on posts made in previous threads

You have made the argument more than once havent you?

Hey look, if im being unfair to you then my apologies. My memory of this board over the last few months or so compells me to think im not though.

This is exactly what you are doing and even resorting to relying on hypotheticals in relation to what questions Craig was asked to try and alter the context of what was said in an attempt to try and substantiate your opinion.

The hypothetical was a tool to demonstrate a point.

I think youve grasped the point in the second part, in that you seem to atleast be accepting that the context of what was said can alter the meaning.

Fortunately, the rest of the statements in the article provide some scope, and they dont fall in line with your 'big 4 reliance' song and dance.

No but he has clearly said that he believes the main basis of our improvement this year will come from those four. Hence this discussion.

No, thats not what he says at all. See? You're being circular again. You cant use what you claim he says as the support for what you claim he says.

Listing those four as sources of improvement doesnt state they're the only, or even the main.

neither are you

Maybe you could boil your entire response next time down to 'no you are.'

Okay, selective post reading maybe ??? Can you tell me where in the aftermath of the Freo game have I brought up the performances of Goodwin and Edwards and made a comment that they should not have been retained ?? I have actually remained very positive and believe that we will bounce back against Sydney. All that I brought up in this thread was in the long term that Craig's list management could eventually be his undoing especially if we have a bad year this year, but also said that he is 100 percent safe this year.

To some extent all post reading is selective, in that i randomly read threads and comment as it strikes me.

No the last time it ended because it would have just degenerated into petty shitfight where we both would have end up getting carded, so I took the view for both of our sakes to just make a at one of your comments instead of continuing and end it there. Obviously you were too busy thinking you had achieved some sort of victory to comprehend this so this time if you want to continue the shit slinging then go ahead. I can give as good as I can get.

Yeah, sure you did.

And i coulda set that world record for worsts fastest bowler, i just chose not to.

As for me claiming that I am stating my opinion, welcome to the world of internet forums. I am sure that you being the Rhodes Scholar you believe yourself to be would understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity. An internet forum is predominantly based around subjective discussion ie it is based around each person's opinions and perceptions.

Unfortunately, an opinion can still be wrong.

Example, it is my opinion that the world is flat.

 

[CrowCro]

Craigy let s forget about football the way it used to be. Speed of ball movement will only get you so far. Leg Speed means you get caught less, means you can tackle others quicker, means you can apply more pressure and perceived pressure and means you can break the lines alot easier ala Hill. Craigy time to toss away you theory.

We need some fleet footed runners in the side ie Jaensch and Brodie martin types. Football is now a game for runners.

 

[WandallBone]

It is not an out of context quote...your are the one trying to mount an argument for that and IMO not making a good fist of it.

I'm with relapse on this one...Craigy said what he said, take it for what it is and stop trying to make it something it is not.

say what?

I don't see any evidence that Craig is relying on his older guys, and reading the whole article just proves that he's not.

 

[Mismatched]

Yes, that stems from Griffen. If he was more competitive at the bounce Sandy would not have been able to spoon feed the Fremantle midfield and would have given our midfielders a chance to get a first look at the football.

Seriously what does Griffen have to do with our ruck problems, he doesn't even play for us Ryan Griffen is a midfielder for the Bulldogs, Jonathon Griffin is a ruckman for the Crows, check it out

 

[WALL-e]

Griffen would probably be a better ruck too.....

 

[noddy]

Crow-mo is also a far smarter individual than you, so whats your point ???

.

You guys do realize that Crow-mo is probably sitting back in his arm chair sipping a glass of Port & smoking a very expensive Havana saying to himself "ahh dear lord it was all worth it"

 

[noddy]

Griffen would probably be a better ruck too.....

I laughed at that

Even though it's probably true

 

[WAG]

I laughed at that

Even though it's probably true

I laughed too, until I realised that Griffin really is that shit and then I got mad !

 

[Wood_Duck]

Maybe when Ottens is over his ACL he will solve our ruck problems.

 

[icrow32]

It is not an out of context quote...your are the one trying to mount an argument for that and IMO not making a good fist of it.

I'm with relapse on this one...Craigy said what he said, take it for what it is and stop trying to make it something it is not.

I agree with relapse also, it was a bizarre statement to make and makes you wonder what goes through his head sometimes, its almost as if Southerntakeover is taking out his frustrations at NC in making such a stupid statement on relapse.

 

[Southerntakeover]

You guys do realize that Crow-mo is probably sitting back in his arm chair sipping a glass of Port & smoking a very expensive Havana saying to himself "ahh dear lord it was all worth it"

No, i believe hes more sitting there glaring demanding to know what the hell he was red carded for.