GT, Dermy etc. after Game on Friday night on SEN, RE Harvey.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
It would not have mattered if it was someone besides GT and Derm that made the comments.
Reaction on this forum would have been the same for such ill considered cooments about a veteran player playing in what is basically a practice match.....and made more so because Harvey's game on the whole was actually quite ok.
Reaction on this forum would have been the same for such ill considered cooments about a veteran player playing in what is basically a practice match.....and made more so because Harvey's game on the whole was actually quite ok.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12754
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 763 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
A couple of points sRrsaintsRrising wrote:It would not have mattered if it was someone besides GT and Derm that made the comments.
Reaction on this forum would have been the same for such ill considered cooments about a veteran player playing in what is basically a practice match.....and made more so because Harvey's game on the whole was actually quite ok.
1. Would the defence of the commentators be so quick and forthright if it had been Dermie and OX (or anybody else) other than GT?
2. AFAIK no other commentators shared this particular view of Harves on the night, so therefore your 'hypothetical' about this forum's reaction to these comments cannot be 'tested'. Unfortunately it appears only Dermie and GT saw it that way, so they alone are entitled to the 'bouquets' if they are correct and the 'brickbats' if they are not.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 907
- Joined: Fri 12 Nov 2004 10:06am
I wouldn't even give Dermie the acknowledgement of discussing his comments. Didn't he make a fool of himself trying to extend his career at the Swans & Collingwood for more $$, after it was obvious to the Hawks (and just about everyone else) that he was a shadow of his former greatness and his playing days had passed him?
If anyone embarrassed himself at the end of his career was him. Go and see how bad this twit actually was, when he tried to prolong his career (and that's of course, when he was able to actually get on the park!!).
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
If anyone embarrassed himself at the end of his career was him. Go and see how bad this twit actually was, when he tried to prolong his career (and that's of course, when he was able to actually get on the park!!).
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23208
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 735 times
- Been thanked: 1776 times
You got it in 1 Magic......Plugger66 - why dont you miss the point for a third time?Mr Magic wrote:But he's entitled to voice his opinion, afterall he is a paid media commentator/journalist!Quixote wrote:Mr Magic wrote:Anybody backing Dermie and GT's opinions?Quixote wrote: BTW plenty of talk right now SEN on this...
Generally not. Consensus is that they are paid for their opinions and therefore have not only a right but a responsibility to express them.
Ox reckons they would be regretting their words, but Ox is a donkey.
![]()
There's nothing wrong with giving an unpopular opinion. I think the point here is that this opinion was given by Dermie and GT based on viewing Harves for a half of a NAB game.
Its got stuff all to do with "freedom of commentator expression" OR the need for GT to be pro/anti St Kilda in his comments (most listeners just want an honest, objective appraisal - not media attention , head line grabbing beat ups) - its all about listeners having the right to at least a modicum of "professional opinion" from so called experts.They made their "considered opinions" known on the back of 1 NAB CUP GAME??? (Brereton painting Harvey as a sad dilapidated old man - if your comfortable and think thats accurate them come out and tell us all so - I dont accept that at all). Grant was along for the ride and this morning again re-iterated that Dermot "had it about right"(I heard him also). Again if you think thats ok then voice your views on it but spare us all the "freedom of speech for dumb football commentary" lines.
My principle beef with this whole thing isnt the words as such.....they come from morons....what annoys me most is the fact that its ok to have a shot at Harveys expense......but I gurantee you in Glen Archers last year (where he looked shot from rd 6) they would not even of dreamed of commenting in such a manner....or Hirds, or Buckleys (even after hed broken down for the 100th time FFS)...but again its ok to pot a true champion who doesnt drop his pants for every TV station in the land - sickens me to the back teeth.
“Yeah….nah””
Another one where they are picking on the saints or a saints player. I think if think back the media was saying Buckley was gone many many times last yearand they said it about Hird when he had the foot injury years ago. Anyone can have an opinion and it is neither right nor wrong so GT is entilted to his and in this case I think he has gone to early. Gt also said on Saturday he hopes he proves him wrong.Teflon wrote:You got it in 1 Magic......Plugger66 - why dont you miss the point for a third time?Mr Magic wrote:But he's entitled to voice his opinion, afterall he is a paid media commentator/journalist!Quixote wrote:Mr Magic wrote:Anybody backing Dermie and GT's opinions?Quixote wrote: BTW plenty of talk right now SEN on this...
Generally not. Consensus is that they are paid for their opinions and therefore have not only a right but a responsibility to express them.
Ox reckons they would be regretting their words, but Ox is a donkey.
![]()
There's nothing wrong with giving an unpopular opinion. I think the point here is that this opinion was given by Dermie and GT based on viewing Harves for a half of a NAB game.
Its got stuff all to do with "freedom of commentator expression" OR the need for GT to be pro/anti St Kilda in his comments (most listeners just want an honest, objective appraisal - not media attention , head line grabbing beat ups) - its all about listeners having the right to at least a modicum of "professional opinion" from so called experts.They made their "considered opinions" known on the back of 1 NAB CUP GAME??? (Brereton painting Harvey as a sad dilapidated old man - if your comfortable and think thats accurate them come out and tell us all so - I dont accept that at all). Grant was along for the ride and this morning again re-iterated that Dermot "had it about right"(I heard him also). Again if you think thats ok then voice your views on it but spare us all the "freedom of speech for dumb football commentary" lines.
My principle beef with this whole thing isnt the words as such.....they come from morons....what annoys me most is the fact that its ok to have a shot at Harveys expense......but I gurantee you in Glen Archers last year (where he looked shot from rd 6) they would not even of dreamed of commenting in such a manner....or Hirds, or Buckleys (even after hed broken down for the 100th time FFS)...but again its ok to pot a true champion who doesnt drop his pants for every TV station in the land - sickens me to the back teeth.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12754
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 763 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Plugger, both examples you gave are not reasonable - both those players had questions raised about their careers by the media because of injuries. In Harves' case it had nothing to do with injury, just that he was 'past it'.
What I cannot fathom is you seem to have no problem with labelling Dermie's comments as wrong but not GT's?
Surely one cannot be correct and the other wrong given that it appears Dermie made the comments and GT endorsed them?
Why the spirited defense of GT's role in this? Even if you are an unabashed admirer of his, not everything he says/does must be correct. On the flip side if you are an unabashed critic of his, not everything he says /does is necessarily wrong.
What I cannot fathom is you seem to have no problem with labelling Dermie's comments as wrong but not GT's?
Surely one cannot be correct and the other wrong given that it appears Dermie made the comments and GT endorsed them?
Why the spirited defense of GT's role in this? Even if you are an unabashed admirer of his, not everything he says/does must be correct. On the flip side if you are an unabashed critic of his, not everything he says /does is necessarily wrong.
I actually said I think he is wrong if you read it. What I am sticking up for is his right to an opinion and I never said Dermott didnt have a right either. If you can show me this fair enough.Mr Magic wrote:Plugger, both examples you gave are not reasonable - both those players had questions raised about their careers by the media because of injuries. In Harves' case it had nothing to do with injury, just that he was 'past it'.
What I cannot fathom is you seem to have no problem with labelling Dermie's comments as wrong but not GT's?
Surely one cannot be correct and the other wrong given that it appears Dermie made the comments and GT endorsed them?
Why the spirited defense of GT's role in this? Even if you are an unabashed admirer of his, not everything he says/does must be correct. On the flip side if you are an unabashed critic of his, not everything he says /does is necessarily wrong.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12754
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 763 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Plugger, no problem.plugger66 wrote:I actually said I think he is wrong if you read it. What I am sticking up for is his right to an opinion and I never said Dermott didnt have a right either. If you can show me this fair enough.Mr Magic wrote:Plugger, both examples you gave are not reasonable - both those players had questions raised about their careers by the media because of injuries. In Harves' case it had nothing to do with injury, just that he was 'past it'.
What I cannot fathom is you seem to have no problem with labelling Dermie's comments as wrong but not GT's?
Surely one cannot be correct and the other wrong given that it appears Dermie made the comments and GT endorsed them?
Why the spirited defense of GT's role in this? Even if you are an unabashed admirer of his, not everything he says/does must be correct. On the flip side if you are an unabashed critic of his, not everything he says /does is necessarily wrong.
GT like any other commentator is entitled to voice his opinion on any matter. Ultimately the listeners (viewers in the case of tv and readers in the case of newspapers) will decide if GT and other commentators keep their jobs.
FWIW having now heard/read what both GT and Dermie said I think whilst both are certainly entitled to voice their own opinions, they made some 'stupid' remarks about an absolute legend of the game and should be subjected to the scrutiny those remarks have received.
I have less animosity to Dermott on this occasion as he has a past record in sometimes saying the first thing that pops into his head without really thinking it through.
This is at least the second time in a year that GT has made 'strange comments' about a player - Pavlich last year and Harves this year. Mind you he quite regularly made 'strange statements' whilst he was our coach ('ruckmen' , 'umpire's ego', 'Capuano' to name but 3) so maybe this is just symptomatic of GT's commentary ability?
Or is this symptomatic of what B4E believes is GT's machiavellian personality, and just an attempt by him to 'stick it' to Harves whom he wanted to 'exit out'?
None of us will ever truly know what motivated his comments - we can only ever speculate on it.
Oh and BTW, I look forward to your 'spirited defense' oif Patrick Smith next time he is pilloried on here for voicing his opinion.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
I will not stick up for Smith because he isnt an ex saints person and has never led the club to 3 finals appearances. You may not have noticed but I have never had a go at Hall or Spider on here either because unlike most if I liked a player I do not suddenly dislike them because they left to get better money because this is a business for players unlike supportors who it is a passion for.Mr Magic wrote:Plugger, no problem.plugger66 wrote:I actually said I think he is wrong if you read it. What I am sticking up for is his right to an opinion and I never said Dermott didnt have a right either. If you can show me this fair enough.Mr Magic wrote:Plugger, both examples you gave are not reasonable - both those players had questions raised about their careers by the media because of injuries. In Harves' case it had nothing to do with injury, just that he was 'past it'.
What I cannot fathom is you seem to have no problem with labelling Dermie's comments as wrong but not GT's?
Surely one cannot be correct and the other wrong given that it appears Dermie made the comments and GT endorsed them?
Why the spirited defense of GT's role in this? Even if you are an unabashed admirer of his, not everything he says/does must be correct. On the flip side if you are an unabashed critic of his, not everything he says /does is necessarily wrong.
GT like any other commentator is entitled to voice his opinion on any matter. Ultimately the listeners (viewers in the case of tv and readers in the case of newspapers) will decide if GT and other commentators keep their jobs.
FWIW having now heard/read what both GT and Dermie said I think whilst both are certainly entitled to voice their own opinions, they made some 'stupid' remarks about an absolute legend of the game and should be subjected to the scrutiny those remarks have received.
I have less animosity to Dermott on this occasion as he has a past record in sometimes saying the first thing that pops into his head without really thinking it through.
This is at least the second time in a year that GT has made 'strange comments' about a player - Pavlich last year and Harves this year. Mind you he quite regularly made 'strange statements' whilst he was our coach ('ruckmen' , 'umpire's ego', 'Capuano' to name but 3) so maybe this is just symptomatic of GT's commentary ability?
Or is this symptomatic of what B4E believes is GT's machiavellian personality, and just an attempt by him to 'stick it' to Harves whom he wanted to 'exit out'?
None of us will ever truly know what motivated his comments - we can only ever speculate on it.
Oh and BTW, I look forward to your 'spirited defense' oif Patrick Smith next time he is pilloried on here for voicing his opinion.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12754
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 763 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
That's fine and understandable, but just because he is an ex-saint and led the Club to 3 finals appearances doesn't mean you shouldn't hold him accountable for what he is saying publicly. If anything the fact that he is so intimate with the innermost workings of both the Club and the individual players make GT's comments on Harves worse and ,IMHO, even less of a reason to jump to his defense.plugger66 wrote:I will not stick up for Smith because he isnt an ex saints person and has never led the club to 3 finals appearances. You may not have noticed but I have never had a go at Hall or Spider on here either because unlike most if I liked a player I do not suddenly dislike them because they left to get better money because this is a business for players unlike supportors who it is a passion for.Mr Magic wrote:Plugger, no problem.plugger66 wrote:I actually said I think he is wrong if you read it. What I am sticking up for is his right to an opinion and I never said Dermott didnt have a right either. If you can show me this fair enough.Mr Magic wrote:Plugger, both examples you gave are not reasonable - both those players had questions raised about their careers by the media because of injuries. In Harves' case it had nothing to do with injury, just that he was 'past it'.
What I cannot fathom is you seem to have no problem with labelling Dermie's comments as wrong but not GT's?
Surely one cannot be correct and the other wrong given that it appears Dermie made the comments and GT endorsed them?
Why the spirited defense of GT's role in this? Even if you are an unabashed admirer of his, not everything he says/does must be correct. On the flip side if you are an unabashed critic of his, not everything he says /does is necessarily wrong.
GT like any other commentator is entitled to voice his opinion on any matter. Ultimately the listeners (viewers in the case of tv and readers in the case of newspapers) will decide if GT and other commentators keep their jobs.
FWIW having now heard/read what both GT and Dermie said I think whilst both are certainly entitled to voice their own opinions, they made some 'stupid' remarks about an absolute legend of the game and should be subjected to the scrutiny those remarks have received.
I have less animosity to Dermott on this occasion as he has a past record in sometimes saying the first thing that pops into his head without really thinking it through.
This is at least the second time in a year that GT has made 'strange comments' about a player - Pavlich last year and Harves this year. Mind you he quite regularly made 'strange statements' whilst he was our coach ('ruckmen' , 'umpire's ego', 'Capuano' to name but 3) so maybe this is just symptomatic of GT's commentary ability?
Or is this symptomatic of what B4E believes is GT's machiavellian personality, and just an attempt by him to 'stick it' to Harves whom he wanted to 'exit out'?
None of us will ever truly know what motivated his comments - we can only ever speculate on it.
Oh and BTW, I look forward to your 'spirited defense' oif Patrick Smith next time he is pilloried on here for voicing his opinion.
His former allegiance with Harves is, I believe, what has made so many sainters (and others) upset with the comments. He more than any other commentator, be it radio, tv or print knows what is going on at Moorabbin and what Harves pre-season program would be. His comments were and are a 'cheap shot' at a player who gave his all for GT when he was the coach.
And more importantly, the comments are nothing more than 'sensationalist' and I believe that was his intention. Of course that is purely my opinion but I'll bet it's an opinion shared by many if not most observers - casual and keen.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12754
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 763 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
And on Monday morning he repeated the sentiments on teh breakfast program on SEN.plugger66 wrote:But he didnt say the comments. He just agreed so I not sure he was just being sensationalist.
Surely given the circumstances over the last 18 months between himself and the Club he would be accutely aware that anything he says about the Club, its players, Board and staff will be severely analyzed.
I credit GT with more nouse than to think he is unaware of what he says publicly. I believe the the exact opposite is true - he knows exactly what he is saying. Just like when he made the crack about the 'umpire's ego'. I have always believed that was no 'off the cuff remark' but a deliberate tactic. Unfortunately for him, and more importantly the Club, the remarks produced the wrong result from the umpires.
So when Dermie makes a comment he should not even speak if agrees with the comment or should lie because he coached harvs. Not sure the saints are paying him but pretty sure SEN are so he must make a comment after what Dermie said surely.Mr Magic wrote:And on Monday morning he repeated the sentiments on teh breakfast program on SEN.plugger66 wrote:But he didnt say the comments. He just agreed so I not sure he was just being sensationalist.
Surely given the circumstances over the last 18 months between himself and the Club he would be accutely aware that anything he says about the Club, its players, Board and staff will be severely analyzed.
I credit GT with more nouse than to think he is unaware of what he says publicly. I believe the the exact opposite is true - he knows exactly what he is saying. Just like when he made the crack about the 'umpire's ego'. I have always believed that was no 'off the cuff remark' but a deliberate tactic. Unfortunately for him, and more importantly the Club, the remarks produced the wrong result from the umpires.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12754
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 763 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
Hey Plugger, GT is a big boy who knows exactly what he is saying/doing. Nothing anyone on here says/does will influence him one way or the other. The issue here surely is what he said reasonable in the circumstances. Many on here and on talkback radio feel that it wasn't.plugger66 wrote:So when Dermie makes a comment he should not even speak if agrees with the comment or should lie because he coached harvs. Not sure the saints are paying him but pretty sure SEN are so he must make a comment after what Dermie said surely.Mr Magic wrote:And on Monday morning he repeated the sentiments on teh breakfast program on SEN.plugger66 wrote:But he didnt say the comments. He just agreed so I not sure he was just being sensationalist.
Surely given the circumstances over the last 18 months between himself and the Club he would be accutely aware that anything he says about the Club, its players, Board and staff will be severely analyzed.
I credit GT with more nouse than to think he is unaware of what he says publicly. I believe the the exact opposite is true - he knows exactly what he is saying. Just like when he made the crack about the 'umpire's ego'. I have always believed that was no 'off the cuff remark' but a deliberate tactic. Unfortunately for him, and more importantly the Club, the remarks produced the wrong result from the umpires.
You obviously feel thst it was and have jumped to his defense.
Good on you.
I just hope that GT proves in the long run to be worthy of your wholehearted defense of him and doesn't turn out to be a disappointment to you.
In the meantime I must say I have enjoyed debating this issue with you but on this one (admittedly like many others) you and I wil have to agree to disagree.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23208
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 735 times
- Been thanked: 1776 times
Your dancing around with semantics plugger - "GT is ok cause he just went along wuith what Dermie said....and so didnt say it??.."
Really Plugger - your a better poster than this and you know it.
For the record - I did not hear anyone EVER infer that Buckley or Hirds career had come to a "sad" end because they were in supposed decline on the back of 1 nothing game - you heard the comments Brereton made (Grant agreed as 'about right' then and again next day). Its potting a bloke - and in Grants case a player he should know with his age alone would take time to build into his final season. Its cheap, smug, attention seeking stuff at the expense of a gentleman of the game. If its good enough to hold Rob Harvey accountable over 1 game - then surely Grant and stupid in tow should be held accountable for pathetic, inane, ill founded accusations that IMO do nothing but cast a slur over a legends career.
I guarantee you it wouldnt be said about Shane Crawford - and hes been a rabble for the past 3 yrs (pantsed by Harvs everytime).
Oh...and Dermott "once again" couldnt resist the "hes never been a great kick" I actually disagree with this myth. Over the 20-30 metre range Harvey is one of the better "set up" kicks to a leading fwd thats been round (ask Lockett). I acknowlegd hes not a prodigious long kick of the ball or noted goal kicker - but theres more in kicking than simply these 2 items. Again though this suits Dermutts whole agenda of bringing down a champ.....its lazy and half @ssed and smacks of jealousy..its all about "lets kick him while hes down after 1 game AND GRAB SOME HEADLINES AT HIS EXPENSE WHILE WE ARE AT IT" FFS.
Really Plugger - your a better poster than this and you know it.
For the record - I did not hear anyone EVER infer that Buckley or Hirds career had come to a "sad" end because they were in supposed decline on the back of 1 nothing game - you heard the comments Brereton made (Grant agreed as 'about right' then and again next day). Its potting a bloke - and in Grants case a player he should know with his age alone would take time to build into his final season. Its cheap, smug, attention seeking stuff at the expense of a gentleman of the game. If its good enough to hold Rob Harvey accountable over 1 game - then surely Grant and stupid in tow should be held accountable for pathetic, inane, ill founded accusations that IMO do nothing but cast a slur over a legends career.
I guarantee you it wouldnt be said about Shane Crawford - and hes been a rabble for the past 3 yrs (pantsed by Harvs everytime).
Oh...and Dermott "once again" couldnt resist the "hes never been a great kick" I actually disagree with this myth. Over the 20-30 metre range Harvey is one of the better "set up" kicks to a leading fwd thats been round (ask Lockett). I acknowlegd hes not a prodigious long kick of the ball or noted goal kicker - but theres more in kicking than simply these 2 items. Again though this suits Dermutts whole agenda of bringing down a champ.....its lazy and half @ssed and smacks of jealousy..its all about "lets kick him while hes down after 1 game AND GRAB SOME HEADLINES AT HIS EXPENSE WHILE WE ARE AT IT" FFS.
“Yeah….nah””
Absolutely - hurts a bloke who was a champion in his day who saw his own career turn into an embarrassment through his pathetic demise with Sydney and Collingwood.Teflon wrote:Again though this suits Dermutts whole agenda of bringing down a champ.....its lazy and half @ssed and smacks of jealousy..its all about "lets kick him while hes down after 1 game AND GRAB SOME HEADLINES AT HIS EXPENSE WHILE WE ARE AT IT" FFS.
Also what was with KB agreeing with it?
Oh that's right, same station.
The Great Man will reveal these fools for who they are and where they stand in so-called expert commentary.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23208
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 735 times
- Been thanked: 1776 times
KB agreed huh? now thats "past it" should have been retired long ago by now.Iceman234 wrote:Absolutely - hurts a bloke who was a champion in his day who saw his own career turn into an embarrassment through his pathetic demise with Sydney and Collingwood.Teflon wrote:Again though this suits Dermutts whole agenda of bringing down a champ.....its lazy and half @ssed and smacks of jealousy..its all about "lets kick him while hes down after 1 game AND GRAB SOME HEADLINES AT HIS EXPENSE WHILE WE ARE AT IT" FFS.
Also what was with KB agreeing with it?
Oh that's right, same station.
The Great Man will reveal these fools for who they are and where they stand in so-called expert commentary.
“Yeah….nah””
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23208
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 735 times
- Been thanked: 1776 times
- Violent Stool
- Club Player
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Thu 05 Jul 2007 10:53am
I thought this thread was about comments on Robert Harvey. Not Grant Thomas?Teflon wrote:FWIW - I pray Ross Lyon can win a flag with us cause should he Im gonna shove Grants "Preliminary final king" claim right down his f@rgon throat.
On topic, the comments were wrong and stupid. I didn't hear them, but if what's reported to have been said, it's jusy unbelievably stupid to be making 'big calls' after a praccy match.
How far down the rabbit hole do you really want to go?
- markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15548
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 81 times
It was a practice match.
I thought Harvey was (at very least) serviceable.
GT is a grub, he and 'Derm' carry on like a couple of school kids at times... who think a fart joke is the height of humour.
Perhaps GT has a problem with Harvey considering the none-too-subtle praise of RL and his training program by Harvey, and the fact that GT was not invited to the testimonial....
I thought Harvey was (at very least) serviceable.
GT is a grub, he and 'Derm' carry on like a couple of school kids at times... who think a fart joke is the height of humour.
Perhaps GT has a problem with Harvey considering the none-too-subtle praise of RL and his training program by Harvey, and the fact that GT was not invited to the testimonial....
- mbogo
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:40pm
- Location: Hogwarts
- Been thanked: 32 times
I heard the comment during the game and was astounded and commented to my friends immediately "sh*t he hates Harves, doesn't he?"
It just seems to me that GT is smarting over every game that Harves plays well, since it impacts on his ego-driven character. GT wanted to "exit HArves out" about 2 1/2 to 3 years ago - and I do not know why! Harves played some great footy after the initial comment - and then GT made the "exit him in" comment.
Now, it seems, he still wishes him exited.
I think it is clear that Harves was not one of the "inner sanctum" Sunday breakfast type of players that GT liked to have around. He immediately sang praises for Ross Lyon - and still plays well. I look forward to more of the same from Harves this week and this year - he had 16 possies in 1/2 of a practise match - and was undeserving of the scathing attack.
Both GT and Dermott are "shoot from the lip", half-brained, narcissists of the highest order. Their comments are all about them - not football!!
It just seems to me that GT is smarting over every game that Harves plays well, since it impacts on his ego-driven character. GT wanted to "exit HArves out" about 2 1/2 to 3 years ago - and I do not know why! Harves played some great footy after the initial comment - and then GT made the "exit him in" comment.
Now, it seems, he still wishes him exited.
I think it is clear that Harves was not one of the "inner sanctum" Sunday breakfast type of players that GT liked to have around. He immediately sang praises for Ross Lyon - and still plays well. I look forward to more of the same from Harves this week and this year - he had 16 possies in 1/2 of a practise match - and was undeserving of the scathing attack.
Both GT and Dermott are "shoot from the lip", half-brained, narcissists of the highest order. Their comments are all about them - not football!!
This is a team game and there is no room for individuals who think they are above walking through the fire.