What They're Saying - The Bulldogs Media Thread - Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
X_box_X said:
I think it was a question in general, as in "do you watch Open Mike"?
Click to expand...
Damn, got my hopes up. Thoroughly enjoy that show.

I need either Denan Kemp to get more AFL players on The Locker Room or an AFL past or present player needs to create an AFL equivalent. It's really enjoyable.
 
Given Emma's network and predictive history alone, you'd think she'd be very good at determining how clubs will use their selections. That alone will make her a valuable asset at putting all the pieces on the table and preparing a strategy for who to select and when.

It seems common that clubs reach on a player they could have had later. I'll bet that wouldn't happen with her there.

Further to that, evaluating players' capability and future potential is not an intrinsic talent, it is a skill. One which she can learn if she hasn't already (and my guess would be she has). She's a good choice. Already the best draft reporter by a country mile. No guarantee of success in this, but a better indicator than many is her capacity to predict already and understand the intentions of other clubs.
 
gangsta deluxe said:
Given Emma's network and predictive history alone, you'd think she'd be very good at determining how clubs will use their selections. That alone will make her a valuable asset at putting all the pieces on the table and preparing a strategy for who to select and when.

It seems common that clubs reach on a player they could have had later. I'll bet that wouldn't happen with her there.

Further to that, evaluating players' capability and future potential is not an intrinsic talent, it is a skill. One which she can learn if she hasn't already (and my guess would be she has). She's a good choice. Already the best draft reporter by a country mile. No guarantee of success in this, but a better indicator than many is her capacity to predict already and understand the intentions of other clubs.
Click to expand...

Not sure about this. I am assuming her network consists of people involved with other AFL clubs. Those people may have been co-operative when Emma was an "independent" person but as an employee of an opposition AFL club and a direct competitor to their own roles her sources will clam up. She will either have to fall back on her own experiences and judgements in assessing a player or learn very quickly on the job.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Perhaps true about the network, but at the very least she'd have developed a good understanding of what motivates other clubs' decision making and an ability to predict what they will do, if not the ability to identify the best talent herself. Her job has been based on not only predicting the players at given picks but what clubs will do with their picks and why.

A broad perspective, not necessarily a focussed one (and she may well have the latter too, who knows)
 
boydshow said:
It was a perfectly sensible post, being a journalist is a lot different to being a recruiter

Calling the poster sexist for that is mischievous at best
Click to expand...
Well lets break down what he said to see how sensible it is.
She could end up a very good recruiter but what has she actually proven? She has proven shitloads as a journalist and is one of the best. Her ability to look at young talent and rate it, is second to none. Of course she hasnt proved anything as a recruiter because she hasnt actually started the job yet. But she has proven she has an eye that can identify young talent and give insightful comments on that talent.
Sense factor of post in bold: 0/25.
She looks for all the positive in players. What else is she meant to do? She obviously wouldnt have the time as a journalist to watch young players and identify their weaknesses. It is not her job to do that. And how would she know players weaknesses unless she talked to the player or coaches of that player. And as if they would tell her anyway.
Sense factor of post in bold: 0/25.
The jury is still out on whether she can critically evaluate players with clubs futures on the line.
Of course the jury is still out because she hasnt actually started the job yet. And how do you know she cant critically evaluate players. I am sure she had a job interview where they asked specific questions and she gave the right answer. GWS obviously think she can critically evaluate players. That is all that matters.
and it's now a much tougher gig compared to what she was doing which had no real consequences. How do you know what she was doing had no consequences. You know her do you? Being a journalist is no piece of cake.
Sense factor of post in bold: 0/25.


So I have given that a sense rating of 0/100.. Absolute sexist crap
 
boydee said:
Well lets break down what he said to see how sensible it is.
She could end up a very good recruiter but what has she actually proven? She has proven shitloads as a journalist and is one of the best. Her ability to look at young talent and rate it, is second to none. Of course she hasnt proved anything as a recruiter because she hasnt actually started the job yet. But she has proven she has an eye that can identify young talent and give insightful comments on that talent.
Sense factor of post in bold: 0/25.
She looks for all the positive in players. What else is she meant to do? She obviously wouldnt have the time as a journalist to watch young players and identify their weaknesses. It is not her job to do that. And how would she know players weaknesses unless she talked to the player or coaches of that player. And as if they would tell her anyway.
Sense factor of post in bold: 0/25.
The jury is still out on whether she can critically evaluate players with clubs futures on the line.
Of course the jury is still out because she hasnt actually started the job yet. And how do you know she cant critically evaluate players. I am sure she had a job interview where they asked specific questions and she gave the right answer. GWS obviously think she can critically evaluate players. That is all that matters.
and it's now a much tougher gig compared to what she was doing which had no real consequences. How do you know what she was doing had no consequences. You know her do you? Being a journalist is no piece of cake.
Sense factor of post in bold: 0/25.


So I have given that a sense rating of 0/100.. Absolute sexist crap
Click to expand...

None of the posts that you have quoted in this thread used her gender as a reason for the stated opinions.
Therefore I give your logic 0/100. Absolute illogical crap.

This thread is about Bulldogs in the media and you are stinking it up with your agenda.
 
Bont2Boyd said:
None of the posts that you have quoted in this thread used her gender as a reason for the stated opinions.
Therefore I give your logic 0/100. Absolute illogical crap.

This thread is about Bulldogs in the media and you are stinking it up with your agenda.
Click to expand...
Ha ha. Whatever.
 
boydee said:
Ha ha. Whatever.
Click to expand...

Look I'm all for calling out sexism, but if you can't articulate why you think it is sexist, and have no good reason to think so, then you simply do not have a good justification to make that claim.

From what I can see, all of the questions people raised were about her history as a journalist and suitability for the role on the basis of this experience, not about her gender. And unequivocally, she is the best AFL draft journalist there is (nobody appeared to question that fact).

Nor do I think anyone was saying that it is an inherently unreasonable appointment, more that the jury is out as to whether she will be highly successful (as a reaction to people saying that she is a major coup already, without evidence of impact). And the jury is out. Plenty of people who seem like they are well placed for a role have sucked at it in this business. I have good reasons to think she'll do well, and so do you it, but lets not jump on anything without cause. There are good reasons for both perspectives on her possible skill in the role in this context, and none of them have anything at all to do with gender.

What is relevant to gender in this context, is that she is the first woman in a role like this one, and that is great and shows the views of people within footy clubs are changing. But that has nothing to do with the skill set she brings to the role.
 
Last edited:
Bont2Boyd said:
None of the posts that you have quoted in this thread used her gender as a reason for the stated opinions.
Therefore I give your logic 0/100. Absolute illogical crap.

This thread is about Bulldogs in the media and you are stinking it up with your agenda.
Click to expand...
Do some reading genius on what sexism means.
gangsta deluxe said:
Look I'm all for calling out sexism, but if you can't articulate why you think it is sexist, and have no good reason to think so, then you simply do not have a good justification to make that claim.

From what I can see, all of the questions people raised were about her history as a journalist and suitability for the role on the basis of this experience, not about her gender. And unequivocally, she is the best AFL draft journalist there is (nobody appeared to question that fact).

Nor do I think anyone was saying that it is an inherently unreasonable appointment, more that the jury is out as to whether she will be highly successful (as a reaction to people saying that she is a major coup already, without evidence of impact). And the jury is out. Plenty of people who seem like they are well placed for a role have sucked at it in this business. I have good reasons to think she'll do well, and so do you it, but lets not jump on anything without cause. There are good reasons for both perspectives on her possible skill in the role in this context, and none of them have anything at all to do with gender.

What is relevant to gender in this context, is that she is the first woman in a role like this one, and that is great and shows the views of people within footy clubs are changing. But that has nothing to do with the skill set she brings to the role.
Click to expand...
It is sexist Gangster because he is saying things like "what has she actually proven. " He has come to a conclusion about someones value without a substantiated fact to back it up. Emma was interviewed for the job. She has proven year after that she has an empathy for young footballers. She has proven year after year she can scout young talent. They are the facts. GWS wouldnt have given her the job if they didnt think that. Of course the jury is still out whether Emma will be successful. Just like for anyone who starts a new job. Emma is no different, so why would even say that for? Once again Gangster, if someone is going to come to a conclusion about someones value, without having facts to back it up, then they need to tread carefully. They may not mean to be malicious at all, but we live in 2017 not 1970. That crap needs to stop. Emma is the first female recruiter in the AFL. She is an easy target for someone to question her value and bring some unproven crap into the argument and make it sound like it has nothing to do with the fact she is female. Ask some women whether they would find the post sexist, instead of the geniuses here who all say the same thing.
 
boydee said:
Do some reading genius on what sexism means.

It is sexist Gangster because he is saying things like "what has she actually proven. " He has come to a conclusion about someones value without a substantiated fact to back it up. Emma was interviewed for the job. She has proven year after that she has an empathy for young footballers. She has proven year after year she can scout young talent. They are the facts. GWS wouldnt have given her the job if they didnt think that. Of course the jury is still out whether Emma will be successful. Just like for anyone who starts a new job. Emma is no different, so why would even say that for? Once again Gangster, if someone is going to come to a conclusion about someones value, without having facts to back it up, then they need to tread carefully. They may not mean to be malicious at all, but we live in 2017 not 1970. That crap needs to stop. Emma is the first female recruiter in the AFL. She is an easy target for someone to question her value and bring some unproven crap into the argument and make it sound like it has nothing to do with the fact she is female. Ask some women whether they would find the post sexist, instead of the geniuses here who all say the same thing.
Click to expand...
You're an idiot. Seriously, you are an actual idiot.

If Rohan Connolly was a journalist who wrote in depth on drafts, and was well liked by all the fans, everybody would say the exact same thing. Because it has nothing to do with the fact she's a woman, in fact nobody even brought that up or even though about that until you brought it up. It has everything to do with the fact that she is a journalist going into recruiting, and these are two vastly different things. And especially after I've seen how journalists work and their sources (which are usually within the respective clubs), I think those pathways might all dry up and she might be exposed when she's left without them.

And that is purely because she is a journalist.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

boydee said:
Do some reading genius on what sexism means.

It is sexist Gangster because he is saying things like "what has she actually proven. " He has come to a conclusion about someones value without a substantiated fact to back it up. Emma was interviewed for the job. She has proven year after that she has an empathy for young footballers. She has proven year after year she can scout young talent. They are the facts. GWS wouldnt have given her the job if they didnt think that. Of course the jury is still out whether Emma will be successful. Just like for anyone who starts a new job. Emma is no different, so why would even say that for? Once again Gangster, if someone is going to come to a conclusion about someones value, without having facts to back it up, then they need to tread carefully. They may not mean to be malicious at all, but we live in 2017 not 1970. That crap needs to stop. Emma is the first female recruiter in the AFL. She is an easy target for someone to question her value and bring some unproven crap into the argument and make it sound like it has nothing to do with the fact she is female. Ask some women whether they would find the post sexist, instead of the geniuses here who all say the same thing.
Click to expand...

Challenge accepted!

I have asked Mrs TLU to read the post (and your response). Her response is as follows.

His post was perfectly logical being as he was assessing her abilities regarding recruiting for an actual club, as an insider of an actual club at odds with all others. Which she has never done. As opposed to an outsider who is allowed in to all clubs writing for a newspaper. A news anchor and a war reporter on the ground are in the same industry but NOT the same job, a newspaper writer regarding football recruitment and an actual football recruiter are NOT the same job. The Jury is out as he stated, her sex was only an issue with YOU. I am rather insulted that you made that post out to be sexist and find your clutching at straws and jumping at shadows to be sexist.

AAAAAAND that answers that. My wife perhaps isn't "some woman" since she reads BF (bulldogs only) often enough, knows who Emma is and loves her doggies. but wasn't in the mood to grab some random Lass and drag her into my home to read your crap post.
 
Ha ha.
ThirdLegUp said:
Challenge accepted!

I have asked Mrs TLU to read the post (and your response). Her response is as follows.

His post was perfectly logical being as he was assessing her abilities regarding recruiting for an actual club, as an insider of an actual club at odds with all others. Which she has never done. As opposed to an outsider who is allowed in to all clubs writing for a newspaper. A news anchor and a war reporter on the ground are in the same industry but NOT the same job, a newspaper writer regarding football recruitment and an actual football recruiter are NOT the same job. The Jury is out as he stated, her sex was only an issue with YOU. I am rather insulted that you made that post out to be sexist and find your clutching at straws and jumping at shadows to be sexist.

AAAAAAND that answers that. My wife perhaps isn't "some woman" since she reads BF (bulldogs only) often enough, knows who Emma is and loves her doggies. but wasn't in the mood to grab some random Lass and drag her into my home to read your crap post.
Click to expand...
Yer he assessed her abilities and said she hasnt proven anything. Tell Mrs TLU to read it again, she doesnt get it.
 
timtamWB said:
You're an idiot. Seriously, you are an actual idiot.

If Rohan Connolly was a journalist who wrote in depth on drafts, and was well liked by all the fans, everybody would say the exact same thing. Because it has nothing to do with the fact she's a woman, in fact nobody even brought that up or even though about that until you brought it up. It has everything to do with the fact that she is a journalist going into recruiting, and these are two vastly different things. And especially after I've seen how journalists work and their sources (which are usually within the respective clubs), I think those pathways might all dry up and she might be exposed when she's left without them.

And that is purely because she is a journalist.
Click to expand...
The first woman to be an AFL recruiter and this genius says nobody even thought about the fact she is a woman! haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
 
boydee said:
Ha ha.

Yer he assessed her abilities and said she hasnt proven anything. Tell Mrs TLU to read it again, she doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

But you do! For you see things with such male insight that my wife's female brain could not "get it" without reading it twice?

For someone that digs pretty deep to find sexism in Golden 6's response you should be more careful with your own. She, I, and several others don't agree with you. End OF! And then you suggest in the post above to TimTam that GWS was indeed looking at her sex when they recruited her?

So they are simply virtue signalling, much like you are? you think they had a group think and thought "what can we do to get credits that hasn't been done? Female recruiter!" So she was only recruited because of the marketing points she would provide for them... You might be right, but it is a pretty sexist thing to suggest.



and yes, he did say she hasn't proven anything yet, as has anyone in a new job, and he would be right! So you can accuse Golden 6 of being Captain ******* obvious, but not sexist.

The above is purely to show you that when all you have is a hammer, everything MUST be a nail.


Now lets all get back on topic.

WHAT WILL THE MEDIA CALL US ALL YEAR?

That's right, THE REIGNING ******* PREMIERS BABY!!!!!
 
boydee said:
The first woman to be an AFL recruiter and this genius says nobody even thought about the fact she is a woman! haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Click to expand...
You mate are part of the problem. These typical males wishing to hand things to woman just for the sake of looking like you care about sexism. I've heard it everywhere. Give the woman the job because she is a woman and not because she is the best candidate. It's a slap in the face to sexism itself and is the real problem in our society.
 
Here's the front page of one of the Horsham papers. My nephew is in the photo with Luke and you can see what an amazing person he is by his reaction. The photographer also said this is one of his favourite front pages his had. We have one special coach.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0751.JPG
    IMG_0751.JPG
    226.8 KB · Views: 7
Westerndog11 said:
Here's the front page of one of the Horsham papers. My nephew is in the photo with Luke and you can see what an amazing person he is by his reaction. The photographer also said this is one of his favourite front pages his had. We have one special coach.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing, he's truly a special human being....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ExRoyboy
What They're Saying - The Bulldogs Media Thread - Part 4
279 280 281 282 283
Replies
7K
Views
554K
Unorth
Unorth
X_box_X
Autopsy Free kick against Bulldogs
Replies
18
Views
960
DognBones
DognBones
Testekill
Welcome to the Bulldogs Lachlan Bramble
2 3 4 5
Replies
104
Views
9K
Dogs_R_Us
Dogs_R_Us
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Lachlan Smith
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
House_of_Dahl
House_of_Dahl
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Aiden O’Driscoll
2 3
Replies
69
Views
7K
ossie_21
ossie_21
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Joel Freijah
2 3 4 5
Replies
109
Views
11K
dergert
dergert
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Jordan Croft
2 3
Replies
65
Views
5K
DiamondDogs8
DiamondDogs8

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top