Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Scollop wrote: ↑Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:17pm
Hardwick said Acres is 190 cm
He was referring to their big midfielders like Fyfe and Mundy and he mentioned that Bake is a "190 cm winger"
No he said 197cm. I even replayed that bit with the sub titles on. I suggest you do the same. Came up 197cm. I did that because I thought I was hearing things. I wasn't.
I'm not going to be rude at all
I just suggest you ask a third party. Preferably someone under the age of 70
Scollop wrote: ↑Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:17pm
Hardwick said Acres is 190 cm
He was referring to their big midfielders like Fyfe and Mundy and he mentioned that Bake is a "190 cm winger"
No he said 197cm. I even replayed that bit with the sub titles on. I suggest you do the same. Came up 197cm. I did that because I thought I was hearing things. I wasn't.
I'm not going to be rude at all
I just suggest you ask a third party. Preferably someone under the age of 70
Scollop wrote: ↑Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:17pm
Hardwick said Acres is 190 cm
He was referring to their big midfielders like Fyfe and Mundy and he mentioned that Bake is a "190 cm winger"
No he said 197cm. I even replayed that bit with the sub titles on. I suggest you do the same. Came up 197cm. I did that because I thought I was hearing things. I wasn't.
You were hearing things. He said 190 centimetres. He may have said 197 metres but that woud make him a very, very tall wingman.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
Scollop wrote: ↑Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:17pm
Hardwick said Acres is 190 cm
He was referring to their big midfielders like Fyfe and Mundy and he mentioned that Bake is a "190 cm winger"
No he said 197cm. I even replayed that bit with the sub titles on. I suggest you do the same. Came up 197cm. I did that because I thought I was hearing things. I wasn't.
You were hearing things. He said 190 centimetres. He may have said 197 metres but that woud make him a very, very tall wingman.
To my ear he says Acres is a 190 centimetre wingman.
Later he says he can't understand why St Kilda let him and 14 draft picks go for a midget who can't win his own ball
Proudly assuming the title of forum Oracle and serving as the inaugural Saintsational ‘weak as piss brigade’ President.
Scollop wrote: ↑Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:17pm
Hardwick said Acres is 190 cm
He was referring to their big midfielders like Fyfe and Mundy and he mentioned that Bake is a "190 cm winger"
No he said 197cm. I even replayed that bit with the sub titles on. I suggest you do the same. Came up 197cm. I did that because I thought I was hearing things. I wasn't.
You were hearing things. He said 190 centimetres. He may have said 197 metres but that woud make him a very, very tall wingman.
No I wasn't hearing things. I replayed the coach's interview with the captions on. It came up in translation as 197cm. Now I don't think for one moment he is that tall, but that is what that Hardwick prick said.
If you are going to keep it to footy you may review not only the posts but the recurring opinions attaching to contributors “names”
Simply, if you are going to allow such opinion attaching to every contribution those with such opinion are going to be called out and, in my view, need to be
To the top wrote: ↑Thu 03 Sep 2020 6:10pm
If you are going to keep it to footy you may review not only the posts but the recurring opinions attaching to contributors “names”
Simply, if you are going to allow such opinion attaching to every contribution those with such opinion are going to be called out and, in my view, need to be
I have no idea what you are referring to
But
if you want to post left wing crap, do it on the general forum for f*** sake.
To the top wrote: ↑Thu 03 Sep 2020 6:10pm
If you are going to keep it to footy you may review not only the posts but the recurring opinions attaching to contributors “names”
Simply, if you are going to allow such opinion attaching to every contribution those with such opinion are going to be called out and, in my view, need to be
I have no idea what you are referring to
But
if you want to post left wing crap, do it on the general forum for f*** sake.
Yep, only right-wing/conservative/racist crap on here thanks!
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
To the top wrote: ↑Thu 03 Sep 2020 6:10pm
If you are going to keep it to footy you may review not only the posts but the recurring opinions attaching to contributors “names”
Simply, if you are going to allow such opinion attaching to every contribution those with such opinion are going to be called out and, in my view, need to be
If you’re talking about signatures, I can’t do anything about that. If you would like the policy on signatures to change, send a PM to backfromusa.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
To the top wrote: ↑Thu 03 Sep 2020 6:10pm
If you are going to keep it to footy you may review not only the posts but the recurring opinions attaching to contributors “names”
Simply, if you are going to allow such opinion attaching to every contribution those with such opinion are going to be called out and, in my view, need to be
I have no idea what you are referring to
But
if you want to post left wing crap, do it on the general forum for f*** sake.
Yep, only right-wing/conservative/racist crap on here thanks!
Right wing, conservative views, yes. Conservatives don't have a mortgage on racism, Chuck.
To the top wrote: ↑Thu 03 Sep 2020 6:10pm
If you are going to keep it to footy you may review not only the posts but the recurring opinions attaching to contributors “names”
Simply, if you are going to allow such opinion attaching to every contribution those with such opinion are going to be called out and, in my view, need to be
I have no idea what you are referring to
But
if you want to post left wing crap, do it on the general forum for f*** sake.
Yep, only right-wing/conservative/racist crap on here thanks!
Right wing, conservative views, yes. Conservatives don't have a mortgage on racism, Chuck.
Yeah true, they had it paid off decades ago!
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
Wow! Acres has finally played a good game for the Dockers, 3 x games out from finals (in which they missed again) and suddenly some are questioning the trade? Those same people do realise that Blake hasn't been able to break into a bottom 6 team for the best part of the year?
He was always capable of playing good games. He was never able to play consistently. What's he in? His 6th year? Definitely worth the trade and would never be critical of the club for rolling the dice on Hill despite how critical I've been of him at times this year.
PADDLEPOP1001 wrote: ↑Sat 12 Sep 2020 4:47pm
Blake playing a very good game today that’s 3 in a row!
Not surprisingly he looks very good when played in position. Certainly compliments a good midfield, something he was never given an extended run at doing with us. Always draws a tackle and tries to put the ball to the advantage of a team mate. Very smart.
The draft pick was certainly enough for Hill. Like Hannebery we did not need to add to it.
Acres did some pretty impressive things on the field for us in some games and his upside was obvious. Not surprised.
He's the one I wish they never traded. We don't have enough strong, hard bodied players as it is.
johnearljames wrote: ↑Sat 12 Sep 2020 5:21pm
Acres skills and decision making are atrocious. Not a finals player. He would not stand up in big games or finals and is too inconsistent.
Hill, who has played in premiership quality sides is a much better and skilled winger.
Remembering that if you don't "stand up" or contribute during the H&A games, finals will not happen.
Can you name the other players at St Kilda who would stand up in finals? There are some obvious ones, not too many though.
skeptic wrote: ↑Sat 12 Sep 2020 6:08pm
Acres would easily be in our near 22
Would rather have him on the list than Hannebery
Of the current team, would rather see him in the forward line ahead of Kent, Lonie, Hind
I’d pbly rather be persevering with him than Geary at this point...
Reckon he’ll be a better player than Sinclair
I think he already is a better player than Sincs. If Acres plays on the wing or through the centre, it allows Billings & Gresham to rotate between the centre & forward line. This allows for the selection of more multi positional players, negating the need for all of Kent, Hind & Lonie.
skeptic wrote: ↑Sat 12 Sep 2020 6:08pm
Acres would easily be in our near 22
Would rather have him on the list than Hannebery
Of the current team, would rather see him in the forward line ahead of Kent, Lonie, Hind
I’d pbly rather be persevering with him than Geary at this point...
Reckon he’ll be a better player than Sinclair
I think he already is a better player than Sincs. If Acres plays on the wing or through the centre, it allows Billings & Gresham to rotate between the centre & forward line. This allows for the selection of more multi positional players, negating the need for all of Kent, Hind & Lonie.
Agree with this wholeheartedly
Sinclair is currently the forum love child that is way overrated at the moment but I was worried about the backlash that would come from suggesting that Blake was better.
Reality is that Acres has a degree of versatility about him that is quite desirable.
Could play in the centre or rest up forward and present both a marking threat against similar sized player or won the win ball and feed it out to the goal kickers