Remove this Banner Ad

Steve Hocking Gone

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Grin said:
Mildly bemused by your pathetic response. Blurting some straw man argument (no decision in the last three years has been done with any motivation other than to spite richmond) and storming away in a huff because you've been out reasoned with basic facts and fairly straightforward observations.
You constantly shift your your position, mislead and make dishonest statements, then sulk like a spoilt brat when your flawed arguments are so easily countered.
Click to expand...

I haven’t been outreasoned with anything. No one at any point has been able to provide a shred of evidence that there is any anti Richmond agenda at AFL house so I’m buggered if I’m going to keep debating it. You guys are the victims

I’ve not shifted my position once:

my position is that there is no anti Richmond conspiracy and until someone shows me that Richmond are operating and training and functioning under different rules to the other17 clubs nothing is going to change that
 
PhatBoy said:
I haven’t been outreasoned with anything. No one at any point has been able to provide a shred of evidence that there is any anti Richmond agenda at AFL house so I’m buggered if I’m going to keep debating it. You guys are the victims
Click to expand...
Now stick your fingers in your ears and yell blah blah blah.
How can I possibly hope to compete with such an intellect.
 
Grin said:
Now stick your fingers in your ears and yell blah blah blah.
How can I possibly hope to compete with such an intellect.
Click to expand...

Literally a few posts ago you had a go at me for thinking Steven hocking had done a good job - something I have not said or alluded to in any way, at any stage. You made a point of arguing something I’d never even hinted at. Don’t bang on to me about intellect.

if you’re that intelligent, prove the conspiracy.
 
PhatBoy said:
Literally a few posts ago you had a go at me for thinking Steven hocking had done a good job - something I have not said or alluded to in any way, at any stage. You made a point of arguing something I’d never even hinted at. Don’t bang on to me about intellect.
Click to expand...
Did I? Care to point that out?
The irony of you accusing another of making a straw man argument is lost on on one but yourself.

PhatBoy said:
if you’re that intelligent, prove the conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Sigh. Yet another straw man argument.
There is no conspiracy. The reason for the introduction of most of the rules is obvious. So obvious you've pointed it out yourself: that the rules were changed to counter the game that Richmond personified.

But don't believe me. Have a look at the rules and ask yourself "what specifically was this rule brought in to change?"
For example why do you think the no prior opportunity ruck rule was introduced?
Why the 666 rule? Why the kick out rule? Why the stand rule?
Again. It's no conspiracy. It's blindingly obvious.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Grin said:
Did I? Care to point that out?
The irony of you accusing another of making a straw man argument is lost on on one but yourself.


Sigh. Yet another straw man argument.
There is no conspiracy. The reason for the introduction of most of the rules is obvious. So obvious you've pointed it out yourself: that the rules were changed to counter the game that Richmond personified.

But don't believe me. Have a look at the rules and ask yourself "what specifically was this rule brought in to change?"
For example why do you think the no prior opportunity ruck rule was introduced?
Why the 666 rule? Why the kick out rule? Why the stand rule?
Again. It's no conspiracy. It's blindingly obvious.
Click to expand...

Ok mate
 
Ron The Bear said:
The AFL has acted against our interests in all sorts of ways, not just the rules. Look at the way they've jerked us around the calendar this year - most 6-day breaks of any club, most long breaks of any club, a single 7-day break, no chance to settle into a rhythm or find form. Pretty ordinary for the supporters, too.
Click to expand...
If you are playing Thursday/Friday nights a lot of the time you are going to get plenty of 6 day breaks. That happens because Richmond are a big club

I'm sure North/Hawthorn/Adelaide/Freo/ Carlton would sacrifice a few 7 days breaks to get some more prime time exposure
 
hawkman said:
If you are playing Thursday/Friday nights a lot of the time you are going to get plenty of 6 day breaks. That happens because Richmond are a big club

I'm sure North/Hawthorn/Adelaide/Freo/ Carlton would sacrifice a few 7 days breaks to get some more prime time exposure
Click to expand...

Does Richmond deserve exposure next Friday night?
 
Ron The Bear said:
Does Richmond deserve exposure next Friday night?
Click to expand...
Brisbane do. A game that has finals implications plus Riewoldt's 300th

One of the MCG games has to be Friday night. Melbourne v Hawthorn and Collingwood v Carlton are even less appealing
 
Ron The Bear said:
Not sure if anyone's actually interested enough to read these links or whether they just want to poo-poo the allegations without considering them.

Which team will be impacted most by 6-6-6 setup?

It's all well and good to laugh at Richmond when they're getting pipped on the line and they cop e.g. Paul Roos' "worst 47 seconds in football", and it also seems we're fair game to be torn down when we do get it right.

The AFL can fu** off.
Click to expand...
I trust the accuracy of Champion Data's stats about as far as I can throw David King but the 6-6-6 rule impacted only the first 20 seconds after a goal had been scored. It made no impact to Richmond in 2019 and 2020 and in terms of losing Prelim sides of 2018 I reckon it probably hurt Melbourne more. Melbourne had a fleet of big slow mids and a hulking ruck and used to rely on winning those clearances and bombing it forward to get field position and we struggled awfully in 2019.

I don't think the rule change was meant to stop any team, it was meant to create more goal scoring chances.

Goals = revenue= the AFL justifying their existence.

Why is that not far more logical than worrying about how many flags Richmond have won? The TV networks pay the bills, not 1 club.
 
Grin said:
So he was an abject failure at the first 2 and had precisely nothing to do with the third. Didn't even take a pay cut (not that anyone at AFL House would let the interests of the game stand between them and the millions they plunder from it)
So why do the mouth pieces of the AFL (whom you so dutifully ape) see him as such a great success?
Click to expand...
Who do you think proposed the 17 game season and shorter quarters? There's no way Hocking wasn't a huge part of last year.

I've never said the guy was perfect. It's just a difficult job and a hard one to ever be liked, particularly at a difficult time for the AFL needing to boost scoring.

The only thing he was a abject failure in was stopping Richmond, which according to Q-Arichmon was his mission.
 
master bate said:
I trust the accuracy of Champion Data's stats about as far as I can throw David King but the 6-6-6 rule impacted only the first 20 seconds after a goal had been scored. It made no impact to Richmond in 2019 and 2020 and in terms of losing Prelim sides of 2018 I reckon it probably hurt Melbourne more. Melbourne had a fleet of big slow mids and a hulking ruck and used to rely on winning those clearances and bombing it forward to get field position and we struggled awfully in 2019.

I don't think the rule change was meant to stop any team, it was meant to create more goal scoring chances.

Goals = revenue= the AFL justifying their existence.

Why is that not far more logical than worrying about how many flags Richmond have won? The TV networks pay the bills, not 1 club.
Click to expand...

Obviously it didn't have a huge effect on Richmond given it won the next two flags. But it's the intent that counts.

Even the Champion Data guy appears to have been brough on board.
“What we’re hoping is it brings Richmond back to the pack a little bit.”
Click to expand...

We didn't even win the flag that year!
 
Hands in the back in a marking contest is now muddied again like it was 15 years ago then we got it right but AFL wanted more scoring so now allow players to push in the back again.
And only a little one but teams that have light jumpers should wear white shorts, eg Geelong, but now we have Geelong in blue shorts??? The only club that doesn’t wear a clash jumper, which is ok if they stay in white shorts.
 
Freshwater said:
Hands in the back in a marking contest is now muddied again like it was 15 years ago then we got it right but AFL wanted more scoring so now allow players to push in the back again.
And only a little one but teams that have light jumpers should wear white shorts, eg Geelong, but now we have Geelong in blue shorts??? The only club that doesn’t wear a clash jumper, which is ok if they stay in white shorts.
Click to expand...

Do we need a clash jumper? There is no club that has a jumper anything like ours aside from MAYBE Adelaide. We wore white shorts last Friday I know that
 

Remove this Banner Ad

PhatBoy said:
Do we need a clash jumper? There is no club that has a jumper anything like ours aside from MAYBE Adelaide. We wore white shorts last Friday I know that
Click to expand...
Collingwood and North Melbourne’s jumper is very much like yours. And between you three it can work if like Coll and Nth you have a dark jumper with dark shorts or a light one with white shorts. Cats only have the white based version so should always wear light shorts against the darker teams.
 
Freshwater said:
Collingwood and North Melbourne’s jumper is very much like yours. And between you three it can work if like Coll and Nth you have a dark jumper with dark shorts or a light one with white shorts. Cats only have the white based version so should always wear light shorts against the darker teams.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure what else we should have done last time we played Collingwood - we wore an indigenous jersey and white shorts.

or last time we played North when we also wore white shorts
 
PhatBoy said:
I’m not sure what else we should have done last time we played Collingwood - we wore an indigenous jersey and white shorts.

or last time we played North when we also wore white shorts
Click to expand...
Final last year or year before v Collingwood was a nightmare to see for all fans. Squarely on Hocking.
 
PhatBoy said:
I haven’t been outreasoned with anything. No one at any point has been able to provide a shred of evidence that there is any anti Richmond agenda at AFL house so I’m buggered if I’m going to keep debating it. You guys are the victims

I’ve not shifted my position once:

my position is that there is no anti Richmond conspiracy and until someone shows me that Richmond are operating and training and functioning under different rules to the other17 clubs nothing is going to change that
Click to expand...
I have clearly said it is an allegation, printed in the national papers.

I'm after the shred(s) of evidence to confirm it.

The only faint hope of getting that is for a journalist to actually ask Hocking if the allegations are true, and if so, was he acting on his own volition in poring over Richmond tapes, or was he ordered to do it?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

PhatBoy said:
Based on what I looked at that’s not from the semi final
Click to expand...
It’s from the 2019 Qualifying final. The next day talk back stations were inundated with complaints about it being a visual nightmare. Eddie had a rant as Eddie does that the Cats had broken a gentleman’s agreement with Frank Costa etc. whether that existed or not is beside the point that Colin Carter was sick of cats having to wear white shorts as home team so Hocking allowed them to wear blue. But what was lost on Carter and especially on Hocking was because Geelong didn’t have a alternative strip because they are one of the only clubs with a ‘light’ home guernsey. Which is fine but you can’t not have an alternative and then refuse to wear shorts that make the match up work! It is easy fixed but reason can easily see an outcome but ego gets involved and destroys reason.
 
Steve’s done a great job.
Tonight’s game is testament to his work.

He wanted more goals, more contests and less congestion. And this is what we end up with.

Looking forward to the players tiring in the last quarter as fatigue brings the skilled players to the forefront.
 
Rich01 said:
Steve’s done a great job.
Tonight’s game is testament to his work.

He wanted more goals, more contests and less congestion. And this is what we end up with.

Looking forward to the players tiring in the last quarter as fatigue brings the skilled players to the forefront.
Click to expand...
I think repealing of the idiotic 'Stand' rule mid-season, immediately, should be considered.

Hocking is gone, it was a rushed-in rule which they just didn't think through. Panicked after a COVID year which was never a year you would regard as 'normal' and base rule changes around.

They will be lucky to get 20 goals kicked tonight once again, and that will only be with a rush of goals in the last quarter due to exhaustion.

I'm watching Tour de France, much more entertaining tbh.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Steve Hocking Gone

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top