plugger66 wrote:Of course he is a hack. They all are. It makes so much sense. Strange that people know they are hacks. Sounds like they read the articles. I take it those who read and then complain are the same who watch all the TV show and then ring up about the language or who go a restaurant and eat all the meal and then tell the chief it was no good. I find those type of people such a delight to be around. They are a barrel of laughs.
That's all fine, but there's very limited choice for quality analysis. I often find it's either read and disagree or don't read at all. More often than not I find myself stopping after the match reports...
The very simple fact is that the AFL has blanketed the game with it's own peculiar of protectionism. That's trickled down to to the clubs who simply exist either as marketing departments for the code at large or deflectors of (non) scandal. They are forced to perform this function in order to attract their own sponsors and keep the Kings and Queens at AFL House in the good paddock. No surprises there.
The papers are staffed by lazy media release cut and pasters or tawdry gossip chasers or galoots who spend three years at uni to learn how to ask questions like 'So that was a great win how do you feel?".
As for Mick, like most of his ilk, I probably won't even notice he's not there.
I mean what do these people really add other than midweek puff?
You're better off waiting until the end of the year and reading The Footy Almanac... At least it's got a bit of honest soul...
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'