What unpopular AFL opinions do you have? (Part 1 - cont in Part 2)

[Hard Ball Get]

Is this even real life? What am I reading here? It literally hurts my head to read this tripe.

Another thread ruined by the ramblings of a jilted arm chair know it all. It's sad that not only do some people believe this stuff, but the hours of time spent arguing it... defies belief really.

Bigfooty legitimately needs another board. There's the bay which houses the trolls, the main board which can house the delusional and trolls that aren't trolls because their lack of understanding of the game means they believe their own rubbish and this new board which can harbour actual legitimate football discussion.

Zero tolerance with some hard ass mod to oversee it all. Who knows, some quality footy might actually get discussed for a change.

 

[Plugger35]

Mate Plugger has bragged that he is trolling on the Dogs frees elsewhere and has roughly 70 thousand posts potting umpires (except when Stk was going ok in which case he defended them).

I'm not sure why you are bothering - flogs are gonna be flogs. There's a reason Plugger was voted Bay 13 Flog of the Year.

The main reason I was voted Bay 13 FOTY was due to salty Bulldogs and Hawthorn supporters nominating and voting for me along with the voting process being about as fair as the umpiring in last year's GF.

I also never said I was trolling about Bulldogs free kicks and truly believe you got favourable treatment from the umpires last year, it's only seems like a troll as you guys keep biting whenever I mention it.

Then why do they crucify St Kilda every week?

Probably because we weren't considered to be in a premiership window like you were, North got pretty favourable treatment from the umpires last year too but they weren't good enough to take advantage of it.

You're probably right. Anyone who creates an alias, very poorly, to defend oneself is a very sad individual (funny my original point was his obsession with the dogs is sad )

I suppose it's like trying to reason with someone who believes vaccines are a government conspiracy.

You really are embarrassing yourself now, as Skeptic has already pointed out he is not an alias of mine. I don't have any aliases here and I wouldn't create one just to defend myself, believe it or not he is just another poster who happens to agree with me and disagree with you.

Is this even real life? What am I reading here? It literally hurts my head to read this tripe.

Another thread ruined by the ramblings of a jilted arm chair know it all. It's sad that not only do some people believe this stuff, but the hours of time spent arguing it... defies belief really.

Bigfooty legitimately needs another board. There's the bay which houses the trolls, the main board which can house the delusional and trolls that aren't trolls because their lack of understanding of the game means they believe their own rubbish and this new board which can harbour actual legitimate football discussion.

Zero tolerance with some hard ass mod to oversee it all. Who knows, some quality footy might actually get discussed for a change.

There is another board where you only read positive opinions about the Bulldogs and how great your premiership win was, it's called the Bulldogs board.

This is the main board where occasionally you will get opinions about your team from opposition supporters that you don't like and don't agree with.

This is also a thread for unpopular AFL opinions so you shouldn't come into this thread expecting opinions that everyone is going to like.

 

[DemonTim]

The main reason I was voted Bay 13 FOTY was due to salty Bulldogs and Hawthorn supporters nominating and voting for me along with the voting process being about as fair as the umpiring in last year's GF.

I also never said I was trolling about Bulldogs free kicks and truly believe you got favourable treatment from the umpires last year, it's only seems like a troll as you guys keep biting whenever I mention it.



Probably because we weren't considered to be in a premiership window like you were, North got pretty good treatment from the umpires last year too but they weren't good enough to take advantage of it.



You really are embarrassing yourself now, as Skeptic has already pointed out he is not an alias of mine. I don't have any aliases here and I wouldn't create one just to defend myself, believe it or not he is just another poster who happens to agree with me and disagree with you.



There is another board where you only read positive opinions about the Bulldogs and how great your premiership win was, it's called the Bulldogs board.

This is the main board where occasionally you will get opinions about your team from opposition supporters that you don't like and don't agree with.

This is also a thread for unpopular AFL opinions so you shouldn't come into this thread expecting opinions that everyone is going to like.

The alias who posts the same stuff as you and has been around for 14 years decided to just become active again to defend you, just said he's not an alias. Solid evidence/10. Would read again.

I think I'll take the advice. Anyone who admits to trolling and is well known and voted as a flog by entire Internet forums is probably not someone worth anyone's time. Enjoy your trolling kiddo

 

[Plugger35]

The alias who posts the same stuff as you and has been around for 14 years decided to just become active again to defend you, just said he's not an alias. Solid evidence/10. Would read again.

I think I'll take the advice. Anyone who admits to trolling and is well known and voted as a flog by entire Internet forums is probably not someone worth anyone's time. Enjoy your trolling kiddo

Ask the mods here if you don't believe me, they will be able to confirm that he's not an alias of mine.

It's a pity you don't post on Bay 13 as you would have been a good chance of beating me for the FOTY award.

 

[Kram]

It's a pity you don't post on Bay 13 as you would have been a good chance of beating me for the FOTY award.

Dunno you would have to be pretty dopey to get outwitted by the tyreguy!

 

[Richo83]

Ask the mods here if you don't believe me, they will be able to confirm that he's not an alias of mine.

It's a pity you don't post on Bay 13 as you would have been a good chance of beating me for the FOTY award.

Casually admitting winning the FOTY award means you're the king of shitposting eh?

 

[Plugger35]

Casually admitting winning the FOTY award means you're the king of shitposting eh?

Not really, some of the better posters have won FOTY awards and I didn't win it on my own anyway, there was a 3 way tie like the 2003 Brownlow Medal.

 

[BRWB]

Casually admitting winning the FOTY award means you're the king of shitposting eh?

Disputed winning it as well. Still arguing with the mods about it. Tin foil hat is superglued to old mate Plugger's head (or it's the most boring and unfunny schtick on BF).

 

[Richo83]

Not really, some of the better posters have won FOTY awards and I didn't win it on my own anyway, there was a 3 way tie like the 2003 Brownlow Medal.

And yet you pot other posters and suggest they would have won it. Unless of course, you think the award is something to be treasured, and you think DemonTim is a genius, but I doubt it.

 

[Skeptic]

The alias who posts the same stuff as you and has been around for 14 years decided to just become active again to defend you, just said he's not an alias. Solid evidence/10. Would read again.

I think I'll take the advice. Anyone who admits to trolling and is well known and voted as a flog by entire Internet forums is probably not someone worth anyone's time. Enjoy your trolling kiddo

Oh dear.
So I'm alias set up to defend someone whose work I've never commented on before despite the fact that I predate the man by 5+ years... and I'll point out that post a few times a year and have done so for a while.

generally prefer different forums to this one due to the nuff nuffs here... like for example, a demon's supporter criticising someone for shoddy logic in one thread and then in the same page, illogically pieces together an idiotic hypothesis on limited info.

oh irony. few people ever realise it about themselves.

no i'm afraid I just needled into to this post because your particular logic on what we were talking about was particularly idiotic and grabbed my attention. Am not particularly invested in the Bulldogs thing. I do reckon things are fishier than most think but I know I can't prove it amd won't bother trying.

anyway, enough from me here (signalling my intentions and you've made clear you need things pointed out to you every time), I'm going to go before I get condescending (that means talk down to people).

enjoy giving plugger grief about an alias he doesn't have and not realising you're wrong

 

[DelRe]

So a Western Bulldogs premierships was just another achievement the AFL wanted to tick off before Fitzpatrick called it quits, yeah not biased at all.

Here's what was said in the article: "I was pleased with the outcome," he said of the 2016 grand final. "I would have been very happy had the Swans won, but we've worked so hard on equalisation. Without that effort it would have been impossible for the Saints or the Dogs to win a premiership. And it was a great game."

 

[DelRe]

Having an opinion that the Bulldogs were favoured by the umpires last year when the free kick stats back that up is nothing like having an opinion that the moon landing was faked with no real evidence to back it up.

The analogy holds though. Your opinion, in my opinion, is a crackpot one for the following reasons:

• Your starting point is irrational. You think the umpiring was biased and needs evidence to be proved otherwise.
• You quote twitter trends as a main support for your argument (somewhat ironically in an unpopular opinions thread).
• You state the umpires 'pulled out' frees for the Dogs despite it not having any factual basis (the Dogs frees for being the average amount against the Swans all year and the same as the average against in their past 3 GF appearances).
• The obvious basis on which to support your argument - analyzing the decisions - you "don't have time for" and don't actually need to provide any evidence
• You cite the AFL review as support but when pointed out that it referred only to 3-4 decisions, state that it was a cover-up.
• You seem to think the AFL conspired to favour the Hawks to get them into the finals only to ensure they were sent out in straight sets so the Dogs could win, despite having 7 prior opportunities to get the Dogs into a GF and instead choosing the most difficult of ensuring they won from 7th.

Just my opinion, but all the evidence is there that what you are proposing is nothing more than a silly conspiracy theory.

 

[Jimmy Unchained]

NEW OPINION

For those scrolling through that mess above this comment.

AFL fans have a poorer understanding of their own sport than fans of the majority of other codes.

The reasoning may be less unpopular. I put it down to the lack of accessible statistical analysis and video analysis in the media, the complex nature of footy strategy and the relatively large amount of players compared to other sports.






On XT1635-02 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Plugger35]

Here's what was said in the article: "I was pleased with the outcome," he said of the 2016 grand final. "I would have been very happy had the Swans won, but we've worked so hard on equalisation. Without that effort it would have been impossible for the Saints or the Dogs to win a premiership. And it was a great game."

Well he was wrong about it being a great game, it might have been a great game if it wasn't marred by such poor umpiring.

The analogy holds though. Your opinion, in my opinion, is a crackpot one for the following reasons:

• Your starting point is irrational. You think the umpiring was biased and needs evidence to be proved otherwise.
• You quote twitter trends as a main support for your argument (somewhat ironically in an unpopular opinions thread).
• You state the umpires 'pulled out' frees for the Dogs despite it not having any factual basis (the Dogs frees for being the average amount against the Swans all year and the same as the average against in their past 3 GF appearances).
• The obvious basis on which to support your argument - analyzing the decisions - you "don't have time for" and don't actually need to provide any evidence
• You cite the AFL review as support but when pointed out that it referred only to 3-4 decisions, state that it was a cover-up.
• You seem to think the AFL conspired to favour the Hawks to get them into the finals only to ensure they were sent out in straight sets so the Dogs could win, despite having 7 prior opportunities to get the Dogs into a GF and instead choosing the most difficult of ensuring they won from 7th.

Just my opinion, but all the evidence is there that what you are proposing is nothing more than a silly conspiracy theory.

If you seriously think having an opinion that the Bulldogs were favoured by the umpires in the GF last year is the same as having an opinion that the moon landing was faked then I'm clearly wasting my time arguing with you as you're living on another planet where reality doesn't exist.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Well he was wrong about it being a great game, it might have been a great game if it wasn't marred by such poor umpiring.



If you seriously think having an opinion that the Bulldogs were favoured by the umpires in the GF last year is the same as having an opinion that the moon landing was faked then I'm clearly wasting my time arguing with you as you're living on another planet where reality doesn't exist.

If You don't think that was a great game, you're watching the wrong sport. Footy's just not for you.

 

[Plugger35]

If You don't think that was a great game, you're watching the wrong sport. Footy's just not for you.

It might have been a great game if you were a Bulldogs supporter but I've seen better GFs in the last 10 years like the 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 GFs.

It was a better GF than the 2013, 2014 and 2015 GFs but that's not saying much.

 

[FredLeDeux]

NEW OPINION

For those scrolling through that mess above this comment.

AFL fans have a poorer understanding of their own sport than fans of the majority of other codes.

The reasoning may be less unpopular. I put it down to the lack of accessible statistical analysis and video analysis in the media, the complex nature of footy strategy and the relatively large amount of players compared to other sports.






On XT1635-02 using BigFooty.com mobile app

It may or may not be unpopular, but it's indisputably true.

 

[Geoffa32]

NEW OPINION

For those scrolling through that mess above this comment.

AFL fans have a poorer understanding of their own sport than fans of the majority of other codes.

The reasoning may be less unpopular. I put it down to the lack of accessible statistical analysis and video analysis in the media, the complex nature of footy strategy and the relatively large amount of players compared to other sports.






On XT1635-02 using BigFooty.com mobile app

The nature of a game with no fixed positions or any real zones on the field and heavy use of interpretation of the rules means it can be hard to analyse and know exactly what each player's role is.

It is also what makes it so great and truly unique IMO.

Two people can watch the same game sitting next to each other and analyse the game completley differently.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Tasfut]

Eagles will play in the grand final if the main playing core can stay healthy.

The Suns will or get close to making the 8.

Buckley will be sacked during the season.

 

[Freshwater]

An opinion that would be unpopular in the media/corporate/footy industry world but probably popular with the ordinary fan is too much of the MCG and other grounds is taken up with corporate boxes and restaurants that could accommodate thousands of ordinary fans. The new Kardinia park stands are even worse with a higher percentage of room devoted to corporates. Considering most of the money injected into these grand stands are from ordinary taxpayers we are paying for these fat cats. I'm no socialist either, I'm way too 'democratic' for that regime.
They will argue the money. Well70 the TV rights would still be the same and so would admission to games any loss of revenue would take off the over inflated salaries of so many in the 'industry'.

 

[sataris]

'Leg Speed' is the stupidest term ever coined.

Leadership groups are nonsense.

Most football fans are too stupid to tie their shoes.

 

[Sando22]

 

[royboy2]

We are 1 preseason game in and I'm already sick of the wank over the convicted drug cheats.

 

[Colonial]

We are 1 preseason game in and I'm already sick of the wank over the convicted drug cheats.

Youre in for a long season then

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[BotsMaster]

They have been complaining about the umpiring in the 2009 prelim and Riewoldt's free kick for the last 7 years, not just 7 years ago, pretty hard to not remember it.

Cam Mooney's tackle on Gwilt in 2010 was not a push in the back.