Rucci Replies to Arrowman's Questions

[crowsarethebest]

Is Rucci actually that bad? Sometimes we exagerate and we pick on him too much. He is entitled to his own opinion and there are many many journalists out there looking for a story. The world wouldn't be that interesting without a few people stirring the pot. Thank you to Mr Rucci and Arrowman for the great read.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

I thought the effort by both arrowman and the Rooch were well balanced and open.
As for the continual assertion of the bias against your team, it's nonsense. It's a writer's opinion and it's your own bias that makes it always appear that any criticism is having an unwarranted attack at your team - you guys are far too precious and take yourselves just a tad too serious.

thats a novel way at looking at it.

 

[Pinepower]

Is Rucci actually that bad? Sometimes we exagerate and we pick on him too much. He is entitled to his own opinion and there are many many journalists out there looking for a story. The world wouldn't be that interesting without a few people stirring the pot. Thank you to Mr Rucci and Arrowman for the great read.

Spot on.

IMO I would put Rucci, Cornsey and KG in the same group. I do not take any of them seriously.

 

[RogerRabbit69]

Not the case. He has highlighted our players previously.

My apologies then. I didn't realise Rooch had contacted the Match Review Panel to dob in a Port player. When did that happen?

 

[Southerntakeover]

My apologies then. I didn't realise Rooch had contacted the Match Review Panel to dob in a Port player. When did that happen?

Yeah, an example would be nice.

This threads done nothing to win me over. Infact, Arrowmans responses were very much on point, and Rucci is confirming what we've long suspected about him. Hes not a credible sports writer, so much as an attention seeker.

Still.... Props on the van-Berloism mention.

 

[AdelUniCrowFan]

So, in the end, he's acting as a gutter tabloid journalist rather than a serious sports writer.

Am I wrong?

If he is he certainly isn't out of place at the Tiser. Just read some of the crap that makes the front page, i.e. the government MPs on a bus with seatbelts. Hell even mini-buses like that used by SouthLink around Hallett Cove have seatbelts. Wow what a surprise.

Rucci writes some crap sometime (who doesn't), but he also writes some decent articles. The only thing I was disappointed in today was that he didn't mention where the Cult of Van Berloism started.
The most annoying article I found this year in the footy section wasn't by Rucci. The article about the Edwards-McLeod relationship (I think by Capel) was old news and just laughable.

2 points for Michelangelo
Will you bring back your Top 50 players, I noticed you didn't do that at the start of the year. I like comparing yours to other members of BF and other journalists. Of course they are going to get torn apart but it is good for discussion.
AND
Hopefully you post an AA side before the year is out, as I like forward to discussing that as well. Malthouse's side has already born torn apart, I look forward to yours.

 

[Crow-mo]

Michaelangelo,

top job. fantastic to see you take a step back from the banter, and offer a reasoned and honest explanation of matters.

what's truly bizarre about the internet, is that everyone wants the eradication of the lunatic fringe, and each and every individual draws it in a different place and absolutely believes themselves to be correct.

I'd be in favour of a no troll, once a month chat, where any rubbish is simply deleted so we can have a higher quality level of interraction and understanding. it can be done, but it takes cooperation, and commitment.

what do you say?

 

[JohnK]

This thread's done nothing to win me over.

It doesn't have to.
You are entitled to stay where you are, if that's what you want to do.
If you want another 1000 anti-rooch posts, go for it!

 

[JohnK]

Sorry, no hopping on the Love and Forgiveness Train for me, John. I'd rather walk.

That's fine. We are all moving in the same direction.
You'll catch up with us eventually.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

My apologies then. I didn't realise Rooch had contacted the Match Review Panel to dob in a Port player. When did that happen?

If you're saying that Rucci personally calls Peter Schwab to report an Adelaide player every time he sees a reportable offence, then no, I can't say he's done that to us.

But he has on several occasions in the past highlighted Port player transgressions in his Monday columns.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Hell Arrowman why did you even bother mate. Seems a waste of time to me. He doesn't deserve your time. Anyone that thinks Rucci has any form of credibility, professionalism or impartiality is living in a dream world. Do what I do, stop buying the rubbish. There are plenty of alternatives.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

It was an interesting read, but arrowman did forget to ask the one question that I'm sure you all want to know the answer to ...

"Are you passamore?"

 

[RogerRabbit69]

That's fine. We are all moving in the same direction.
You'll catch up with us eventually.

I somehow doubt that I'm heading in the same direction as you, John.

 

[RogerRabbit69]

If you're saying that Rucci personally calls Peter Schwab to report an Adelaide player every time he sees a reportable offence, then no, I can't say he's done that to us.

No worries, FF. One of my gripes has been that Rucci has actually approached the MRP himself regarding certain incidents involving Adelaide players. The Goodwin "stomping" incident involving Spida Everitt was the most recent example. Personally, I think that's over the top.

 

[arrowman]

No worries, FF. One of my gripes has been that Rucci has actually approached the MRP himself regarding certain incidents involving Adelaide players. The Goodwin "stomping" incident involving Spida Everitt was the most recent example. Personally, I think that's over the top.

Evidence, please? Mentioning something in an article or on air is not "approaching the MRP".

 

[RogerRabbit69]

Just ask anyone at the AFC. And it's not the first time.

 

[Fergus]

Evidence, please? Mentioning something in an article or on air is not "approaching the MRP".

I'm not sure it was the MRP, but he definitely made the AFL aware of the error in the penalty handed down to Birdman earlier in the year. They forgot his previous record when determining his initial penalty, MR has admitted on radio that he contacted the AFL to query this.

 

[arrowman]

Just ask anyone at the AFC. And it's not the first time.

The fact that the AFC doesn't like some of the stuff that RUcci writes, and in particular what he writes about match incidents that might be referred to the MRP, is not evidence that he directly refers incidents to the MRP.

 

[Mad Dog]

The fact that the AFC doesn't like some of the stuff that RUcci writes, and in particular what he writes about match incidents that might be referred to the MRP, is not evidence that he directly refers incidents to the MRP.

But lets call it as it is - he has taken it upon himself to ring the AFL to highlight an instance of possible interest - and query the accuracy of a penalty.

 

[Southerntakeover]

It doesn't have to.
You are entitled to stay where you are, if that's what you want to do.
If you want another 1000 anti-rooch posts, go for it!

You seem to take this issue highly personally, mind telling me why?

This thread confirmed some of my beliefs about one Rucci, and the fact that he wrote a few little sentences in answer to arrowman doesnt smooth over any ill feeling towards him. Im not someone who changes my opinion simply because i think that the man might be reading this, like appears to be the case with others in the thread.

As for another 1000 anti rucci posts, id be happy to never see him mentioned again.

 

[RogerRabbit69]

The fact that the AFC doesn't like some of the stuff that RUcci writes, and in particular what he writes about match incidents that might be referred to the MRP, is not evidence that he directly refers incidents to the MRP.

When I said ask them, I meant it literally. Go and ask someone in the know down at AFC who alerted the AFL to the Burton suspension and the Goodwin tripping incident. You'll get the same answer to both questions.

Rooch himself was defending it on 5AA a few weeks ago.

 

[marvin]

When I said ask them, I meant it literally. Go and ask someone in the know down at AFC who alerted the AFL to the Burton suspension and the Goodwin tripping incident. You'll get the same answer to both questions.

Rooch himself was defending it on 5AA a few weeks ago.

The Burton one is immaterial - it was a clear mistake by the MRP, and if Rucci hadn't called them, someone would have.

The Goodwin one, Rucci clearly did us a favour. Remember, he was the only person in Australia who saw the secret Zapruder film of Goodwin stomping Spider Everitt aired on "After the Game" - the rest of us who watched the program didn't see the footage at all. Between Rucci seeing the footage, and the MRP convening, the video disappeared.

Someone erased the tape, and I think it must have been the only man who ever saw the vision.

 

[Mad Dog]

The Burton one is immaterial - it was a clear mistake by the MRP, and if Rucci hadn't called them, someone would have.

Agreed

but you still need to wonder what drives someone to make the call .....

.....particulary when you add the context that in all the word association games played at Alberton Quiz nights.......when Burton's name flashes up on the overhead projector.....all the Billy Goats write down "Dibber Dobber" on their Butchers Paper......

Sort of comprimises the preciousness of the stance one would have thought....

 

[jmorg1]

I'm a little confused.

Rucci two days ago = incompetent
Rucci yesterday = emailed arrowman admitting he only disparages the Adelaide board
Somehow Rucci today = competent

Please explain how that works.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Agreed

but you still need to wonder what drives someone to make the call.....

Exactly. Someone may have realised their error, they may not have. I still wonder why Rucci believed it fell to him to ring up and have a dob.