Analysis What The Heck Happened vs Dockers

Ok I give up. Arguing with two people on behalf of someone else because sanders can’t read the original post properly, or thinks you shouldn’t post anything unless you’ve got something vital to say. As if he always does.

Goodnight

Look, I'm not particularly trying to have an argument.

I just don't think that there's anything particularly obnoxious or wrong about the position that Sanders took.

There seems to be a lot of huffiness about the right to have an opinion and express it at all times and have it valued regardless of whether it's capable of offering any insight. I accept that people are entitled to hold opinions, I even accept that people are entitled to express them. But if that is the case then it must also be the case that others are entitled to express their views about whether the opinion is of value.

I think if people are getting to the point where they're defending themselves by pantomime in outrage at the suggestion that they should watch games before weighing in, they really should take a deep breath.
 
Last edited:
******* exactly!

I didn’t see the game, I have nothing to offer on his performance, yet I don’t see why that should stop me

Worse than that, I think there was an implicit attack on the credibility of the poster he was responding to- unless people consider that the suggestion that the existence of a difference of opinion is interesting was earnest (and so reject the more obvious reading).
 

CrowBloke

Solum stulti se excusant!
May 14, 2017
11,166
12,355
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide
Bay62 , thanks for trying. You summed up why I defended myself very clearly, but Sanders never responds well to logic or clarity. Cheers.

No, you're really not.
Come on, how is this even controversial? That people should watch games before offering their opinions on what transpired within them? It's bare minimum stuff.
Are you really fighting for your right to offer uninformed opinion? Why?
Not trying to be controversial. Just had a gutful of Sanders' tiresome, negative, patronising niggling.
the one identifiable theme to date has been a sense of grievance at having an opinion discounted for not having seen the game?
You have missed the point. I have not made any comments about aspects of the game I did not see.

You're asking fair questions, reasonably, so --- have you read the whole conversation, all of it?
--- I have not watched all of the last three games, and admitted it, openly. No mystery there. I went fishing every time. Even claimed jokingly that my not watching the game was a major factor in the hat-trick :).
--- I was very careful not to post about anything I had not seen eg except on AFC highlights, News reports, or best goals etc.
If you like, I'll PM you all of my posts after the last 3 games, none of which passed comment on how anyone played for the whole game BECAUSE I did not see the whole game, but I might have watched some video of a blunder or howler eg Hartigan's kick to Freo which gifted them a crucial goal in the last quarter which was shown in the AFC's "highlights" package. Looked like a lowlight to me, with such tight scores.
--- Sanders said I had no right to comment on how CEY had played, not having seen the game. He's just being contrary, and negative, as he loves to do. However, I made NO comment, at all, about how CEY played on Sunday. Someone posted that he thought CEY was poor. I noticed and quoted that the AFL report of the game had CEY as one of our best, then commented that it was funny, and interesting, how people could watch the same game/players and have such opposite views. True also of JJ, Tex, Gibbs, Murphy, Hartigan and Kelly over the last few weeks.
--- Soporific Sanders latched onto the fact I had not watched Sunday's game and pot-shotted me, which was irritating and undeserved. Most of his smart-alec and condescending negativity attacks people for their comments/posts, regardless of the facts, regardless of the truth of the situation (above). He does not engage in footy discussions. He tears down.
When I explained my objections, all I got from him was "Blah blah blah ..." which is the fool's way of countering an argument.
If we tolerate his bullying, condescending negativity in here, we'll get more of it.
 
Last edited:

CrowBloke

Solum stulti se excusant!
May 14, 2017
11,166
12,355
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide
unless people consider that the suggestion that the existence of a difference of opinion is interesting was earnest
Exactly my intention!
Doesn't it amaze you that the same thing can attract such totally opposite interpretations, game after game, week after week? eg "Tex was very effective"/ "No, Tex was garbage".
The other, on which I commented, was "CEY was poor" yet named in the AFL's list of our best players.
Some posters want Tex (of all people) dropped. Most do not.
Some posters want Gibbs/ Murphy/ Hartigan/ Lynch/ Kelly/ Knight dropped; based on the same info, the same observations, about the same number do not.
It's funny and interesting.
 
Jun 23, 2016
14,846
13,552
AFL Club
Adelaide
Bay62 , thanks for trying. You summed up why I defended myself very clearly, but Sanders never responds well to logic or clarity. Cheers.


Not trying to be controversial. Just had a gutful of Sanders' tiresome, negative, patronising niggling.

You have missed the point. I have not made any comments about aspects of the game I did not see.

You're asking fair questions, reasonably, so --- have you read the whole conversation, all of it?
--- I have not watched all of the last three games, and admitted it, openly. No mystery there. I went fishing every time. Even claimed jokingly that my not watching the game was a major factor in the hat-trick :).
--- I was very careful not to post about anything I had not seen eg except on AFC highlights, News reports, or best goals etc.
If you like, I'll PM you all of my posts after the last 3 games, none of which passed comment on how anyone played for the whole game BECAUSE I did not see the whole game, but I might have watched some video of a blunder or howler eg Hartigan's kick to Freo which gifted them a crucial goal in the last quarter which was shown in the AFC's "highlights" package. Looked like a lowlight to me, with such tight scores.
--- Sanders said I had no right to comment on how CEY had played, not having seen the game. He's just being contrary, and negative, as he loves to do. However, I made NO comment, at all, about how CEY played on Sunday. Someone posted that he thought CEY was poor. I noticed and quoted that the AFL report of the game had CEY as one of our best, then commented that it was funny, and interesting, how people could watch the same game/players and have such opposite views. True also of JJ, Tex, Gibbs, Murphy, Hartigan and Kelly over the last few weeks.
--- Soporific Sanders latched onto the fact I had not watched Sunday's game and pot-shotted me, which was irritating and undeserved. Most of his smart-alec and condescending negativity attacks people for their comments/posts, regardless of the facts, regardless of the truth of the situation (above). He does not engage in footy discussions. He tears down.
When I explained my objections, all I got from him was "Blah blah blah ..." which is the fool's way of countering an argument.
If we tolerate his bullying, condescending negativity in here, we'll get more of it.

I would just like to point out that I didn't read this post, but in my opinion it is a bad post and has performed badly this evening.
 

Thegibbsgamble

I beg to meg
Oct 28, 2017
5,601
3,259
AFL Club
Adelaide
You serious about CEY? He was in everything. Pure grunt work stood out which all add to the drama you describe above. Sure, he shanked a few kicks, but his willingness to get to the contest, fight, and win the ball was outstanding
I've seen a number of second efforts not up to scratch
 
Back