Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
plugger66 wrote:You are right. I have no idea how much it effects him being Captain but neither do you. It hasnt effected him in 5 or so years but now all of a sudden when he is out of form we are looking for other excuses. And even if he wasnt Captain and he was playing how he is there would be exactly the same focus on him in these footy shows because of the player he is not because he is our captain.
You are right, I have no idea, it's just an opinion.
I agree there would be focus on him on him anyway because of his position and status in the game, that's kind of my point, surely that's enough?
Anyways, had my say.
Is a significantly poor opinion to say the least.
Very poor.
Poor in the sense that I worry about him and his wellbeing, or poor because my opinion differs to yours?
Don't get why people think it's the best thing to push him to breaking point?
Anyways, I remember you disagreeing with me about a certain defender a couple of years ago, said he wouldn't make it
Well if we all agreed, it would be pretty boring, your honour.
Not sure what relevance this has to the entire thread....
None whatsoever
Thought so.
Anyways a few questions.
Who would you give it to?
Who do you then give it to when that players form begins to wavier?
Who do you give it to after that?
Also, and this is not the reason why Riewoldt should continue with the captaincy... But what type of look is it for the entire football world if the club took the captaincy off their best player, most mature player, most consistent player, the face of the club... all because his form waivered once in ten years....
Rabble, Crumbling, Weak... These are all words that would describe the above.
In fact removing the captaincy from Riewoldt would probably affect him more as a professional athlete.
plugger66 wrote:You are right. I have no idea how much it effects him being Captain but neither do you. It hasnt effected him in 5 or so years but now all of a sudden when he is out of form we are looking for other excuses. And even if he wasnt Captain and he was playing how he is there would be exactly the same focus on him in these footy shows because of the player he is not because he is our captain.
You are right, I have no idea, it's just an opinion.
I agree there would be focus on him on him anyway because of his position and status in the game, that's kind of my point, surely that's enough?
Anyways, had my say.
Is a significantly poor opinion to say the least.
Very poor.
Poor in the sense that I worry about him and his wellbeing, or poor because my opinion differs to yours?
Don't get why people think it's the best thing to push him to breaking point?
Anyways, I remember you disagreeing with me about a certain defender a couple of years ago, said he wouldn't make it
Well if we all agreed, it would be pretty boring, your honour.
Not sure what relevance this has to the entire thread....
None whatsoever
Thought so.
Anyways a few questions.
Who would you give it to?
Who do you then give it to when that players form begins to wavier?
Who do you give it to after that?
Also, and this is not the reason why Riewoldt should continue with the captaincy... But what type of look is it for the entire football world if the club took the captaincy off their best player, most mature player, most consistent player, the face of the club... all because his form waivered once in ten years....
Rabble, Crumbling, Weak... These are all words that would describe the above.
In fact removing the captaincy from Riewoldt would probably affect him more as a professional athlete.
plugger66 wrote:You are right. I have no idea how much it effects him being Captain but neither do you. It hasnt effected him in 5 or so years but now all of a sudden when he is out of form we are looking for other excuses. And even if he wasnt Captain and he was playing how he is there would be exactly the same focus on him in these footy shows because of the player he is not because he is our captain.
You are right, I have no idea, it's just an opinion.
I agree there would be focus on him on him anyway because of his position and status in the game, that's kind of my point, surely that's enough?
Anyways, had my say.
Is a significantly poor opinion to say the least.
Very poor.
Poor in the sense that I worry about him and his wellbeing, or poor because my opinion differs to yours?
Don't get why people think it's the best thing to push him to breaking point?
Anyways, I remember you disagreeing with me about a certain defender a couple of years ago, said he wouldn't make it
Well if we all agreed, it would be pretty boring, your honour.
Not sure what relevance this has to the entire thread....
None whatsoever
Thought so.
Anyways a few questions.
Who would you give it to?
Who do you then give it to when that players form begins to wavier?
Who do you give it to after that?
Also, and this is not the reason why Riewoldt should continue with the captaincy... But what type of look is it for the entire football world if the club took the captaincy off their best player, most mature player, most consistent player, the face of the club... all because his form waivered once in ten years....
Rabble, Crumbling, Weak... These are all words that would describe the above.
In fact removing the captaincy from Riewoldt would probably affect him more as a professional athlete.
For mine though, this isn't about form, it's about him.
A form slump doesn't bother me one bit.
I just care that he looks troubled, sad, burdened.
Anyway, I thought it didn't matter what the football world thought externally, or does that only apply sometimes?
Rabble, Crumbling, Weak?
Meh, they say that about St Kilda anyhow, who cares.
He will even sad and troubled if he loses the Captaincy. May not have the burden of being Captain but will carry around the burden of losing it when he didnt want to. Anyway all I see is a person pissed off with his form.
plugger66 wrote:He will even sad and troubled if he loses the Captaincy.
Probably short term he would. But then he might look 10 years younger like Ricky Ponting and start producing again what we know he's capable of.
Is that the same Ricky Ponting who averaged just over his long term average in India or is it Michael Clarke, the new Captain, who averaged way over his long term average. Why is it just this year it is the captaincy effecting him? Anyway who should be Captain?
plugger66 wrote:He will even sad and troubled if he loses the Captaincy.
Probably short term he would. But then he might look 10 years younger like Ricky Ponting and start producing again what we know he's capable of.
Is that the same Ricky Ponting who averaged just over his long term average in India or is it Michael Clarke, the new Captain, who averaged way over his long term average. Why is it just this year it is the captaincy effecting him? Anyway who should be Captain?
Ponting should have been stripped of the captaincy three years ago. We missed three years of good batting from him because he wasn't.
