Thompson on dangerous driving charge

[hawk-boy]

deregister him

 

[Southerntakeover]

deregister him

I think hes got another two seasons of drugs, crime and celebrity girlfriends before that happens

 

[Drummond]

What the bloody hell are you on about?

Seek help.

This is such a foolish position. Lets try a hypothetical... lets say that a football team fails to score in a match. They are completely dominated from start to finish. Not one player wins his position. You would still hold that being the best player on this losing team is commendable? The context is not important at all to you? This is the epitome of pig headed stubborness on your behalf.

Ok this will be my final post on the matter because to be honest I’ve quite simply had enough of arguing with someone who refuses to listen to logic and who is just intent on driving the other person nuts. Let’s face it, we had an extensive argument quite a while back and it went around in circles then, same thing is happening again.

That hypothetical situation is ridiculous but I’ll answer it anyway with an example that was somewhat close to it. Earlier in the year South got hammered by over 100 points, can’t quite remember who to though. One South player, ONE solitary player was given in the best players. So it’s not like they added in a few players because they were the least worst of a terrible bunch, they felt he was the lone contributor and he was worthy of being in the best players. Of course the context is important, the story is that South were humiliated and only had one player who could say they won their position. My point, which I have said so many times now it’s not funny, is that the team’s best player is just that. They may have played on a team that was absolutely humiliated, went scoreless if you will, but they’ve done all they can. You can't do more than that.

If you don't get it then fine, call me a tool once again, but I’ve put my case forward for the very last time, you might think otherwise but you simply will not accept anything I say.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Seek help.

Ok this will be my final post on the matter because to be honest I’ve quite simply had enough of arguing with someone who refuses to listen to logic and who is just intent on driving the other person nuts. Let’s face it, we had an extensive argument quite a while back and it went around in circles then, same thing is happening again.

That hypothetical situation is ridiculous but I’ll answer it anyway with an example that was somewhat close to it. Earlier in the year South got hammered by over 100 points, can’t quite remember who to though. One South player, ONE solitary player was given in the best players. So it’s not like they added in a few players because they were the least worst of a terrible bunch, they felt he was the lone contributor and he was worthy of being in the best players. Of course the context is important, the story is that South were humiliated and only had one player who could say they won their position. My point, which I have said so many times now it’s not funny, is that the team’s best player is just that. They may have played on a team that was absolutely humiliated, went scoreless if you will, but they’ve done all they can. You can't do more than that.

If you don't get it then fine, call me a tool once again, but I’ve put my case forward for the very last time, you might think otherwise but you simply will not accept anything I say.

So once again you adopt a wrong position, and try to defend it, before blaming it on a 'difference of opinion', and not your inability to sustain a logical arguement. By going in circles i take it you mean you adopt a position, get it explained to you numerous times what is wrong with it, and still continue to try and put forward that position like it hasnt already been discredited?

"My point, which I have said so many times now it’s not funny, is that the team’s best player is just that. They may have played on a team that was absolutely humiliated, went scoreless if you will, but they’ve done all they can. You can't do more than that."

Being your teams best player doesnt prove that at all, this is the point you blockhead. You can be your teams best player, and still play a complete shitter. You could be well below your own standards. Your insistence that you should recieve credit for being the best of a bad lot, regardless of how it compares to your opponent is moronic. These measures are only credible in context with the opponent, not in isolation.

 

[Crow-mo]

ah the offseason...

 

[Farmy]

Drummond can you please remove Adelaide as your listed club, because you are not a crows supporter.

Thanks again.

 

[Jars458]

The Car Scott Thompson was driving has been impounded.

I note that the Club will make no further comment on the issue. I assume this is becasue the matter is before the courts. I would expect Thompson to be dealt with by the Club once the matter has been finalised, or if he pleads guilty.

 

[johnnypanther]

I think that some calling for Drummond to be banned from here are reacting a bit harshly.
Just like Outback Jack, he is expressing his opinions irrational or not, emotionally charged or not, but everyone can either agree or disagree with them and if one does not like the way he (or any other member here) expresses those opinions, then just simply ignore them without entering into a slanging match which nobody ever wins. We all have our prejudices and biases and we all get irrational and emotional in some of our arguments (even me re Shitley's worth for example)

FWIW I think Drummond with some of his evaluations of players contributes positively to the boards regardless of whether others agree (just as Outback Jack did too previously). Much like Rucci - he can and does produce some good analytical work but mixed up with a lot of crap as all of us do. I think everyone on these boards is a passionate supporter of the club, but we all criticize aspects of it, some more than others, and some are more sycophantic than others, but we are all passionate Crows supporters regardless.

I myself was initially pissed off when Pfeiffer was delisted (much more so than Torney), however, as i thought about it more, i can understand why based on the assumption that the club knows more of what happened than i do. Nevertheless, IMO i still think Pfeiffer will be a better player than Vince or Douglas. I just hope that it is with a club other than Port.

There was a discussion going on also about a player from a losing/thrashed side being given BOG 3 2 1 votes. I concur with Drummonds thoughts here - this has long been a bugbear of mine where i constantly here on the media when votes are given out, that the BOG 3 must always go to someone on the winning side. This makes no logical sense to me - i cannot see why, regardless of the result and the margin, the BOG cannot go to the best player on the ground - its irrelevant if he's on the losing side.

 

[Asgardian]

The Car Scott Thompson was driving has been impounded.

I note that the Club will make no further comment on the issue. I assume this is because the matter is before the courts. I would expect Thompson to be dealt with by the Club once the matter has been finalised, or if he pleads guilty.

It wasn't even his own car, it was a Smith's Motor Company car, who had insurance.

Seeing that I was in the insurance game for a damn long time, I even owned my own agency, I can say, with authority, that this insurance claim will not be straightforward. It will depend on the special clauses that would be written into the motor fleet policy they would have had.

Silly boy Scott

 

[Campbell's Chunky]

It wasn't even his own car, it was a Smith's Motor Company car, who had insurance.

Seeing that I was in the insurance game for a damn long time, I even owned my own agency, I can say, with authority, that this insurance claim will not be straightforward. It will depend on the special clauses that would be written into the motor fleet policy they would have had.

Silly boy Scott

Dear Asgardian,

After doing a bit of research, I looked at your most previous 100 posts on the Crows board.

67 were negative, 33 were just normal posts and 0 were positive.

**** off.

Kind Regards,

CC.

 

[hey shorty]

Dear Asgardian,

After doing a bit of research, I looked at your most previous 100 posts on the Crows board.

67 were negative, 33 were just normal posts and 0 were positive.

**** off.

Kind Regards,

CC.

That maybe so, but at least this time he is right. This is exactly the reason I dont like driving other peoples cars or having people drive mine, just in case something happens. I regard myself as a decent driver (as most do think of themselves I suppose) and the chances of me having my own accident are low but when theres guys like that out of the streets anything is possible.

 

[mb2326]

Agree tell the troll to move on.

Thats rediculous, Drummond just speaks his mind. Maybe if some of the Crows assistant coaches did the same thing during the year Kris Massie would not have been burned twice and we would have got further than the 1st round of the finals, but non of them had the balls to and NC's stubborness stuffed us up/.

Don't take your frustrations at NC out on Drummond.

 

[brucetiki]

IMO what Thompson did was just sheer stupidity. In fact, anyone that does burnouts etc on a public road is a goose. Hopefully the fractured skull/eyesocket he gave his passsenger for his stupidity has given him a wake-up call that this behaviour is not acceptable. As bad as those injuries are, it could have been a whole lot more worse.

 

[Gets!]

People who do burnouts and shit are knobs.

But Thommo has massive guns, so I will forgive him.

 

[Asgardian]

Dear Asgardian,

After doing a bit of research, I looked at your most previous 100 posts on the Crows board.

67 were negative, 33 were just normal posts and 0 were positive.

**** off.

Kind Regards,

CC.

To be frank I fail to see a reason to create a post if the comment is only an "I agree" or "that's right" or "you guys are wonderful" or "he's the best thing since sliced bread" or whatever other sycophantic style rubbish.

I post when I see something interesting, something controversial, some thing I consider incorrect, something worthy to be expanded upon, etc.

Hence by definition most of my posts on the Crows board would have to be what you call negative, and you can rest assured, that if I step over the line the mods are watching.

Besides, as 'hey shorty' said, I can't be crucified for saying the truth.

 

[Farmy]

To be frank, go annoy your own clubs supporters.

 

[Asgardian]

Nikkinoo stated in the posting guidelines

"Opposition supporters

* Constructive and friendly debate is more than welcome."

Since I was "corrected" I fail see how I've contravened that rule?

 

[Southerntakeover]

Nikkinoo stated in the posting guidelines

"Opposition supporters

* Constructive and friendly debate is more than welcome."

Since I was "corrected" I fail see how I've contravened that rule?

I dont see anyone suggest you should be banned. More along the lines of 'we dont like you, go away'.

 

[Farmy]

I dont see anyone suggest you should be banned. More along the lines of 'we dont like you, go away'.

What this guy said Asgardian.

 

[Ozzie]

ah the offseason...

Indeed, the kids have come out to play.