Roast The media....*Shakes Head* Part 6

[Steve Dore]

There's that word clique again.

The BigFooty clique has become a cliche.

 

[Janus]

Who gives a fu** what some w***ers on a forum think of your opinions. Keep posting, who cares who agrees and who disagrees. If it pisses off the clique, good. Keep it up. There's probably more people reading that agree to some degree then those who agree with the s**t thrown at you on here.

It’s got nothing to do with whether people agree or disagree.

There’s a reason why a lot of people have to leave places like this for their mental health. The world in general is becoming a very dark place, and anonymity affords people the ability to say things that they would normally keep to themselves.

I don’t want to piss off anyone. I’d like to unite people if I can. If believing that those in charge have the best interests of PAFC at heart - from the president to the CEO to the head coach - makes me wrong, then I’ll gladly admit to being so.

But I’m not going to join in a cacophony of hate and vitriol, or try to fight against it. I’ve realised that makes me just as bad, because it’s also hatred and vitriol but in a different suit.

This place kills what we used to enjoy about football. Because we watch it not for the contest itself, but so we can be proven right on whatever agenda we are trying to push.

The team wins - it’s because of X, Y and Z that I told you about! It was nothing to do with Hinkley!

The team loses - it’s because we didn’t do X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

The team wins without doing X, Y and Z - we would have looked better/won easier if we had done X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

The team loses while doing X, Y and Z - it’s because we haven’t done enough X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

That’s the merry-go-round of opinion without the power to enact change. Once you get off the ride, you can see it for what it is. There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s just not for me.

 

[TheFVK]

It’s got nothing to do with whether people agree or disagree.

There’s a reason why a lot of people have to leave places like this for their mental health. The world in general is becoming a very dark place, and anonymity affords people the ability to say things that they would normally keep to themselves.

I don’t want to p**s off anyone. I’d like to unite people if I can. If believing that those in charge have the best interests of PAFC at heart - from the president to the CEO to the head coach - makes me wrong, then I’ll gladly admit to being so.

But I’m not going to join in a cacophony of hate and vitriol, or try to fight against it. I’ve realised that makes me just as bad, because it’s also hatred and vitriol but in a different suit.

This place kills what we used to enjoy about football. Because we watch it not for the contest itself, but so we can be proven right on whatever agenda we are trying to push.

The team wins - it’s because of X, Y and Z that I told you about! It was nothing to do with Hinkley!

The team loses - it’s because we didn’t do X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

The team wins without doing X, Y and Z - we would have looked better/won easier if we had done X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

The team loses while doing X, Y and Z - it’s because we haven’t done enough X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

That’s the merry-go-round of opinion without the power to enact change. Once you get off the ride, you can see it for what it is. There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s just not for me.

I agree to an extent, but I would say that for the most part this board and the majority of posters here have been pretty forgiving of Ken Hinkley and optimistic for the future; in fact it's taken 5 years of abject disappointment to get to this point where the push for change is in the majority. So I think it's unfair to paint this place as a black hole of negativity when it's typically been the opposite.

 

[Steve Dore]

Did lol

Back to the ironing

 

[Schulzenfest]

I don’t want to p**s off anyone. I’d like to unite people if I can. If believing that those in charge have the best interests of PAFC at heart - from the president to the CEO to the head coach - makes me wrong, then I’ll gladly admit to being so.

This is a common defence of the coaches by those few who still defend them, but it doesn't really cut it.

I believe Ken Hinkley has the best interests of the PAFC at heart. I don't think he's a bad coach on purpose. But I do think he's a bad coach. And I believe you have the best interests of the PAFC at heart too, but I think you've backed the wrong horse.

 

[Powerstufff]

It’s got nothing to do with whether people agree or disagree.

There’s a reason why a lot of people have to leave places like this for their mental health. The world in general is becoming a very dark place, and anonymity affords people the ability to say things that they would normally keep to themselves.

I don’t want to p**s off anyone. I’d like to unite people if I can. If believing that those in charge have the best interests of PAFC at heart - from the president to the CEO to the head coach - makes me wrong, then I’ll gladly admit to being so.

But I’m not going to join in a cacophony of hate and vitriol, or try to fight against it. I’ve realised that makes me just as bad, because it’s also hatred and vitriol but in a different suit.

This place kills what we used to enjoy about football. Because we watch it not for the contest itself, but so we can be proven right on whatever agenda we are trying to push.

The team wins - it’s because of X, Y and Z that I told you about! It was nothing to do with Hinkley!

The team loses - it’s because we didn’t do X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

The team wins without doing X, Y and Z - we would have looked better/won easier if we had done X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

The team loses while doing X, Y and Z - it’s because we haven’t done enough X, Y and Z! Sack Hinkley!

That’s the merry-go-round of opinion without the power to enact change. Once you get off the ride, you can see it for what it is. There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s just not for me.

I get it.
I too have changed the way I engage with the online world, which for me is only BigFooty and Twitter. I'll step away for weeks* at a time. I've found that the 'ignore' function here dramatically improves my enjoyment of it. And if I want to argue a point I really, really recommend drafting the post and then walking away for 5 min then coming back and looking at it with fresh eyes.
It's tricky to do what you do now which is to transition from one online approach to another while retaining the same identity/avatar. If you say X now when you used to argue Y there's a niggling cost. A few here change identity with their changed approach rather than leave altogether, but I prefer your way of doing things.

* No issue at my age, I had kids in high school before social media got going

 

[Grave Danger]

The BigFooty clique has become a cliche.

 

[Macca19]

You keep being you Janus and keep posting positively

 

[Grave Danger]

As we approach the end of another 400 page epic, who would be a worthy journalist to honour in the thread title of part 7? Now the obvious answer may be no one, because that would be oxymoronic, but I can think of only one man...

 

[Macca19]

I agree to an extent, but I would say that for the most part this board and the majority of posters here have been pretty forgiving of Ken Hinkley and optimistic for the future; in fact it's taken 5 years of abject disappointment to get to this point where the push for change is in the majority. So I think it's unfair to paint this place as a black hole of negativity when it's typically been the opposite.

Id disagree with that. Rumblings started in 2015 and the constant negativity was in full swing by mid 2017.

Not saying its wrong but its been this way for a few years now

 

[Macca19]

Back when i was young I thought clique was just the french way to write cliche and that they were the same thing.

 

[Magus]

Id disagree with that. Rumblings started in 2015 and the constant negativity was in full swing by mid 2017.

Not saying its wrong but its been this way for a few years now

Why is it only anti-Hinkley sentiment that's considered negative? Janus throws just as many barbs as anyone, just at different places. Assistant coaches and junior players have regularly been in his crosshairs but now he's been viewed as someone attacked for their overwhelming positivity? Spare me.

 

[Macca19]

Why is it only anti-Hinkley sentiment that's considered negative? Janus throws just as many barbs as anyone, just at different places. Assistant coaches and junior players have regularly been in his crosshairs but now he's been viewed as someone attacked for their overwhelming positivity? Spare me.

I didnt mention Hinkley. I mentioned negativity. This place has been overwhelmingly negative, outside of the Summer of George for at least 3 years.

 

[Magus]

I didnt mention Hinkley. I mentioned negativity. This place has been overwhelmingly negative, outside of the Summer of George for at least 3 years.

"Sack Hinkley" was used in every example of negativity that Janus gave.

It's not that this place can't be negative, it can, but let's not act like certain people aren't guilty of it themselves because they choose to direct their vitriol at different places than everyone else does.

 

[Janus]

"Sack Hinkley" was used in every example of negativity that Janus gave.

It's not that this place can't be negative, it can, but let's not act like certain people aren't guilty of it themselves because they choose to direct their vitriol at different places than everyone else does.

Did you not read the part where I said I was just as guilty of it? The examples used weren’t personal because I’ve already acknowledged my many faults.

I get it.
I too have changed the way I engage with the online world, which for me is only BigFooty and Twitter. I'll step away for weeks* at a time. I've found that the 'ignore' function here dramatically improves my enjoyment of it. And if I want to argue a point I really, really recommend drafting the post and then walking away for 5 min then coming back and looking at it with fresh eyes.
It's tricky to do what you do now which is to transition from one online approach to another while retaining the same identity/avatar. If you say X now when you used to argue Y there's a niggling cost. A few here change identity with their changed approach rather than leave altogether, but I prefer your way of doing things.

* No issue at my age, I had kids in high school before social media got going

I think the problem is when people don’t agree with something, they instantly want to prove the other person wrong instead of trying to see the situation from their point of view. It’s like we want to see a reflection of ourselves and our beliefs in everyone we talk to, because we aren’t emotionally equipped to deal with different ideas.

And when everyone is on the same page as us, we go looking for something or someone else to make miserable by showing them how they are wrong for wanting something different.

For example: For a long time, I thought I’d be happy when Adelaide fans realised their list wasn’t as great as they believed it to be. But now I realise that most of them are just people like you and me who just want to see their team do well.

What gives me the right to be happy at the misery of others?

I guess I’ve realised how deep down that rabbit hole of feasting on the negative emotions of others I’ve gone down. It’s definitely not who I am as a person, and not why I started posting on this forum.

 

[bomberclifford]

Back when i was young I thought clique was just the french way to write cliche and that they were the same thing.

I thought a clique was a little man in a canoe.

 

[Steve Dore]

Back when i was young I thought clique was just the french way to write cliche and that they were the same thing.

One of the poster who accused people who disagreed with them of being members of the BigFooty clique spelt it "cliche".

 

[Magus]

One of the poster who accused people who disagreed with them of being members of the BigFooty clique spelt it "cliche".

Someone once told me that real men don't eat cliche. I disagree, it's delicious.

 

[70sDinosaur]

Port needs to click, not clique.

 

[70sDinosaur]

As we approach the end of another 400 page epic, who would be a worthy journalist to honour in the thread title of part 7? Now the obvious answer may be no one, because that would be oxymoronic, but I can think of only one man...


View attachment 723128

I presume the suit has been photoshopped onto Mr Rucci in that photo.

 

[Papa G]

Did you not read the part where I said I was just as guilty of it? The examples used weren’t personal because I’ve already acknowledged my many faults.



I think the problem is when people don’t agree with something, they instantly want to prove the other person wrong instead of trying to see the situation from their point of view. It’s like we want to see a reflection of ourselves and our beliefs in everyone we talk to, because we aren’t emotionally equipped to deal with different ideas.

And when everyone is on the same page as us, we go looking for something or someone else to make miserable by showing them how they are wrong for wanting something different.

For example: For a long time, I thought I’d be happy when Adelaide fans realised their list wasn’t as great as they believed it to be. But now I realise that most of them are just people like you and me who just want to see their team do well.

What gives me the right to be happy at the misery of others?

I guess I’ve realised how deep down that rabbit hole of feasting on the negative emotions of others I’ve gone down. It’s definitely not who I am as a person, and not why I started posting on this forum.

Often a persons point of view has nothing to with it. Often things are either right or wrong. Calling out bullshit where you see it is not innately negative.

 

[DaTBird187]

Back when i was young I thought clique was just the french way to write cliche and that they were the same thing.

They kind of are.

 

[Janus]

Often a persons point of view has nothing to with it. Often things are either right or wrong. Calling out bulls**t where you see it is not innately negative.

It’s all just opinion. On a long enough timeline all things become right or wrong.

“Everything is Dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled.”

But if it makes you feel better, do what you need to.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

There's that word clique again.

You are part of the clique m8! Jumbo told me

 

[Lucifuge]

The tarps were also an SANFL innovation, having used them to make extra sponsorship money during prior finals series at Football Park.

Were they a bad look and ill-advised? Absolutely. But at that point the wolves were at the door and the club was already a friendless, toxic brand regardless.

Which is why, even after a lot of the structural defects were sorted, the regime was forced to look outside SA for opportunities anyway — Renault, Four’N’Twenty, OAK, China, GFG — tarps or no tarps.

And even then, where was the second joint-major in 2018?

Port Adelaide has a problem with how it presented itself. It still does.

Too many people make excuses for poor commercial performance by saying we don’t have the advantages of Adelaide. But the flipside of that is, we don’t have the disadvantages of them either.

It all depends on the perspective of the people involved. We give the Crows s**t for their mailing list memberships, but it was those memberships that convinced Optus to come aboard, because in the absence of contrary data it proves that there are more Adelaide supporters than Port.

We should be selling our links to China much better than we are. Right now, when we have a young group coming though and Adelaide looks like falling of a cliff, is when we need to strike.

That’s why 2020 is a huge year.