Still angry

[The OtherThommo]

The cohort has been having a discussion, as we do, and post last Fridee night, there was much similar to what I've read here - potting individual players, questioning the futures of blokes who haven't even had a chance to stamp a career, worse, even potting their willingness to compete, taking the long handle to blokes who have basic numbers that have been OK (often displaying an inability to measure comparative performance), and warping them into fictional 'narratives', all the while running a disrespectful underlying questioning of the odd player with damn fine careers behind them.

But, that's all OK - this is an argument. I spent my entire working life being very well rewarded for my ability to see beyond the comfy 'meme', and being able to provide a coherent view of how the 'system' worked. I could design it, explain how to build it, measure the progress as it was being built, audit the end result against the design intent, work out how to improve it as it went on, and audit that, too - it's a cycle.

This too, is an industry, with an infrastructure that defines potential, and inputs and outputs that define the variability likely to stem from that potential.

So, as much of the cohort headed off into 'individual responsibility' land, this was the first response (after waiting 48 hours for the venting to settle down), in response to an explanation that was headed "Poor structure":

"http://www.afl.com.au/match-centre/2017/12/adel-v-stk

RHS you’ll see the team level statistical comparison. Leaving aside the Free Kicks, there’s only 1 comparison that points to the score differential – Inside 50’s. Everything else indicates competitiveness.

Further down that page, you’ll see the team breakdown by player. There are Basic and Advanced tabs, with a facility to order each stat in both directions.

Do a few comparisons, and see what you come up with. For example, I ordered Disposal Efficiency by player. At the median (11th), them 75%, us 73.3%.

Playing around with those figures tells me we were individually competitive on most fronts, and that aggregates to group numbers where there’s only one key stat that evidences being uncompetitive. But, that stat, out of all of them, indicates something that no other stat does (bar the score) – effectiveness. You can be as efficient as you f****** well like, but if you’re not effective, you’re f***ed!

We’re getting our share….of OPPORTUNITIES, and the efficiency numbers tell us we’re thereabouts but, all up, we ain’t.

So, yep, the “poor structure” headline is right, but that’s only one part of becoming effective.

Our decision making is shot to bits, and I’m not just referring to the decision making of the bloke with the pill. It’s also the blokes without the pill, whether they be (potentially) the next link in the chain, or the bloke who should be looking after the bloke with the pill (and there’s more than just those 2 “blokes”, too).

We’re conservative, hesitant, indecisive (as well as making poor ones), flat, self-preserving, tunnel visioned and look lost.

AND WHO IN THE f*** IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT!?!?!?!

The most important part of the modern game is organisation, from thinking, to set ups, to patterns, to phases, to leadership.

Coaches (for parts of the ground, parts of time, development, ‘strategy’), psychs, sports scientists, leadership mentors, “media” organisers, leadership groups – the list is f****** endless.

I’m not suggesting all that is unnecessary. What I am suggesting is you don’t get the combination of all that right, you become disorganised.

This is a f****** complicated game nowadays. If a couple of the parts of the combination ain’t in sync, you see what we’ve seen for the last 3 weeks.

But, look at some of the other sides – geniuses one week, absolute rubbish the next. It happens with so many ‘inputs’ and ‘moving parts’. The more complex the endeavour, the greater the variability of output.

I’m gonna do it again – Luke Hodge. Clarkson got Hodge to continue on for 1 main reason – he understands how to organise on field.

And, based on what I’ve seen this year, I reckon that’s why Montagna is still playing (not that he’s a “Hodge”).

One other matter, for free. The ratshit performances of the last 3 weeks followed straight after what ‘controversy’?

We’d been up and down until then (awful v Melb, could have beaten the Eagles in Perth, just fair v Bris, OK v the Pies – in a woeful game, fell away v Girlong, good v the Dorks, very good v GWS – although they’ve struggled since, found Carl frustrating, but won OK – and they are well coached)

And, then it all turned to s***. We got played after that ‘controversy’ against Carlton. Right from the top, we just let ourselves get put through the mincer.

Being mentally resilient also stems from being organised.

Being mentally resilient also means you don’t get self satisfied and ahead of yourselves after one very good performance.

It will be interesting to see what approach is taken at the selection table. The number of changes will only tell part of the story. Who and type will tell more."

From there, some of the cohort resorted to "I like him", "I don't like him, "Why didn't Richo change assistants?", "X can't coach", "Y should be given more to do", "this bloke's finished ('...never been any good, anyway', to boot, in some cases), 'this bloke will never be any good', et cetera, et freaking cetera.

Then as a P.S.:

"There’s too much talk about who we’re getting next. f*** that! Would a Josh Kelly want to come to us if we slide down the ass end and don’t give a yelp? Very few blokes now move just because of money. They want to play in successful sides. And, fair dinkum, do people not understand that player managers – the ones who are any good, anyway - will be looking to deal with clubs who can help maximise a player’s earning potential over their career, and beyond, and not just the next few years? Where’s the greater earning potential – “3 time premiership player” or “genius in a side that finished an average of 14th”?).

How many blokes went to Hawthorn for less dosh than they could have got elsewhere? How do Girlong keep picking up what they want, and keep what they want?"

So, today, after there was some more concentration on INDIVIDUAL players, this followed in response:

"In reference to what I mentioned yesdee, about how we rolled over in the face of the Murphy ‘controversy’, I recall seeing a clip of Richardson’s response on AFL 360.

When he started to mouth words like ‘overstepped the mark’, and ‘we probably went too far’, he legitimised the baying crowd of hacks and has beens who had launched into us (e.g. Ralph, Roos), without having a f****** clue as to what had actually happened. Then we got, “yes, I rang ‘Murph’, I have good relationship from my time at Carlton’, and ‘Gears gave him a call’, there was f****** oxygen in unlimited supply.

Although the issues are in no way similar, he should have tacked this way in the Murphy matter:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/s ... wps1c.html

You see, all these mudderfuggers should be deprived of oxygen, not handed a supply of extras. They all have their self interested agendas, be it trying to maintain prominence in a crowded ‘market place’, or a venal hatred of people who don’t toe their line (not “the” line, “their” line).

Remember Montagna wanting out if Scott Watters had kept the coaching job (wanted to go to E’dope, too)?

Besties with Watters, and frequently said so during the coaching ‘troubles’?

Brereton, of course. Anyone who thinks what Brereton said re Montagna wasn’t influenced by past events, is a knob head.

So, Richardson got this one right – he stood up.

Unlike last time, when he equivocated and, thereby, legitimised a whole lot of s*** about the people he was ‘managing’.

Unless someone presents you with a) evidence and b) legitimate process, you do NOT equivocate, particularly publicly. Because, if you do equivocate, you raise doubt – ‘our coach’ or just ‘an industry man’?

You STFU and stick phat."

Those who have the responsibility to manage the 'system' must choose, because the psyche of a group within the system is inherently fragile e.g. because of all the individual psyches - and beyond - interacting.

Being rigidly organised leads to coherence, and without that you will struggle to perform on most fronts, particularly as a group.

The standard of games, along with the volatility of performances by sides week by week, suggests the game is struggling to eke out less and less improvements in performance from the group entities participating - it's close to a limit.

Whether you grasp at something like 'the law of diminishing returns', or similar, there must be a recognition of how so little going tits up can result in a much greater system failure.

It's just the way s*** increasingly works, and not just in sport.

Joey seems to have become some sort of magnet for blame in recent weeks. I've never been the greatest of Joey fans. But, I well respect a bloke with a career as rich as his, and I'll be damned if I'll ever resort to the easy out of allocating him disproportionate individual responsibility for group performances in the last 1% of his career.

It's a logical fallacy of epic proportions. But, it's easy.

[damienc]

Well said. I agree.

[one point]

Thanks for sharing. Good read. Insightful observations.

[Joe Bloggs]

So we are disorganised. In a nut shell.

[satchmo]

Actually, Thommo, I reckon the clubs especially official response to the 'Murphy affair' seemed well and truly Fishy .
Which reminds me of something I learned during the 'essendon whacking shitloads of performance enhancing drugs into the veins of young athletes saga'...Power is not usually held by the people appearing to hold power. It's usually some slime bag lurking in the shadows wielding it.

[White Winmar]

That's some good work ToT. Food for thought.

[Verdun66]

Our confidence evaporated in the week of Sledgegate. Haven't been the same since. We don't handle a crisis well. History proves it. Hopefully something galvanises us in coming weeks and we do ourselves justice.

[To the top]

And it is not just St Kilda or football

Look at Turnbull today, under the pressure he is under

So we all have to be Australian Patriots - wearing bandanas and carrying weapons no doubt!

And there is the attack on where most dole bludgers live (courtesy of Murdoch)

Fortunately the under 35 demographic is replacing the over 55 demographic, which is dying

This under 35 demographic is far better educated per se than their forebears - and the benefit if that education is that they are not dictated to by tired, worn out cliches designed to entrench

They are educated to question

That is what we have educated them to do

So we see the under 35 support for Sanders, for Macron and for Corbyn despite the trenchant attacks of Murdoch in support of those he controls

And in Australia, both in the last election and in subsequent polling

So it is not just in footy, as the head contribution says

And, as I have put elsewhere, in respect to St Kilda, we are building our youth resources who will say to the Senior players what Ditterich said all those years ago

It is called the future and if you lose confidence in the future you are f...ed

And the future is the youth we have educated - educated to use that education to question and to change things

It is their future, not ours

So support them to the fullest, in life and in footy

[ace]

And it is not just St Kilda or football

Look at Turnbull today, under the pressure he is under

So we all have to be Australian Patriots - wearing bandanas and carrying weapons no doubt!

And there is the attack on where most dole bludgers live (courtesy of Murdoch)

Fortunately the under 35 demographic is replacing the over 55 demographic, which is dying

This under 35 demographic is far better educated per se than their forebears - and the benefit if that education is that they are not dictated to by tired, worn out cliches designed to entrench

They are educated to question

That is what we have educated them to do

So we see the under 35 support for Sanders, for Macron and for Corbyn despite the trenchant attacks of Murdoch in support of those he controls

And in Australia, both in the last election and in subsequent polling

So it is not just in footy, as the head contribution says

And, as I have put elsewhere, in respect to St Kilda, we are building our youth resources who will say to the Senior players what Ditterich said all those years ago

It is called the future and if you lose confidence in the future you are f...ed

And the future is the youth we have educated - educated to use that education to question and to change things

It is their future, not ours

So support them to the fullest, in life and in footy

You won't remember Joan Kirner former ALP state premier who told an ALP conference that the ALP needed to use the education system to indoctrinate new Labor voters.
When she lost government she was immediately employed by ALP Prime Minister Bob Hawke at tax payers expense to work on education curriculum.

One day you may wake up and realise that you were duped by your education.
But it will then be too late because you will be one of those over 55s who look on the young and say there are none so blind as those who can't see what is in front of them.
The baby boomers found a way to go to moon, luckily they didn't have your education, they would never have made it.
No need for engineering when you have Arts and Law degrees that qualify you to know everything simply by answering your own questions.

[White Winmar]

My two progeny have both recently completed university. Both lament the fact that you are rewarded for repeating the script you're fed in the PC echo chamber that values virtue signalling above all else. Brainwashing is how they have described it. At least mine are aware enough to know what's going on. For the record, the girl did nursing and the boy electronic engineering, thereby steering well clear of the PC bulls*** fed to our young in the social sciences.

[Johnny Member]

Don't really agree ToT, re the response to 'Murphy-Gate'.


Richardson and the club had no choice but to roll over on the Murphy thing. The very fact that it was perceived by everyone as 'sexist' and 'misogynistic' etc., the club had to roll over.

There are certain topics at certain times when you simply have to take one for the team.


The club had to be political about that one. They had to 'make it go away'. And they did that. They did it very well.

It made me sick in the guts that they had to - but it was the right thing to do. Right for the club to avoid a world of s*** that would still be raining down on them, all if they had have shown the slightest whiff of 'Aww come on, it was just a bit of boys will be boys - harden up everyone!'.

No matter what they said, that's what the baying mob was going to hear. No matter what they meant, that's what they would have interpreted and ran with.

I mean FFS, Adam Simpson had to do a press conference because he did a video of two frozen chickens rooting!


AFL clubs are merely franchises of the AFL designed to capture more of the market. Clubs tow the line. Individuals that don't within clubs, aren't heroes or martyrs - they're foolish. Hird tried, and it nearly killed him. GT did and it probably cost us a flag.

[SaintPav]

I really enjoyed reading this.

It's obvious though that Richardson's response was driven by his higher ups.

I can understand why they took this approach but the club really is hamstrung by its history and the way the media loves to portray it, but it's mostly bull sh*t.

The Brereton article should really have been dismissed and ignored as that is the best response to a targeted insult because that's what it was.

[To the top]

And when education was the preserve of wealth?

Including private schools and University?

When you had to be wealthy enough to attend University?

The responses are narrow and defensive - yes, you learn and are examined on text and particularly in some disciplines including because of the importance of precedence and practice and where precedence and practice are always built on courtesy of education

But what you do recognise and accept is that learning is an advancement and that learning, including from text, establishes the base and you expand from that base

Education embraces knowledge and knowledge is the catalyst for questioning

If you think that education, knowledge and the resultant penchant to question are a party political conspiracy then God help you

No doubt the born to rule class!!

And if you are so intimidated then that is your problem - but get used to it because there is no turning back even allowing for the Turnbull government attacks on the University sector which are reprehensible

And on the economic front what is the contribution of education to the Victorian economy?

It is Victoria's biggest industry

[White Winmar]

You would hope that learning would advance as time goes on, TTT. That's just the natural order of things. When I first went to university,( when our lectures were still held in caves!) it was free, thanks to the generosity of the taxpayer and the foresight of St.Gough, the patron saint of tertiary students. Uni was a wild mix of ideas that were freely expressed with the greatest threat being a bit of ridicule from your fellow piss and pot heads. You were even encouraged by the teaching staff to be a bit of a smartarse c*nt, just like they were. Those were the days!

Fast forward to the late 90's and in doing a bit of post grad, the scene had changed. The Science Faculty at Monash was basically broke and the pressure was on staff and students to do research that would attract funding, rather than what was of interest in furthering knowledge in the field. The political atmosphere had changed also. Political Censorship had entered the fray. There were things you were not allowed to discuss openly and certain views were openly attacked. Not the hotbed of free thinking I remembered, but by that stage I was married with kids, working and was there to complete my studies as quickly as possible and get the hell out.

My children's experience in their Four+ years at RMIT and Monash were very different to mine. The Born to rule mentality has been replaced with groupthink, that has its roots firmly set in left wing ideology. There has been resistance from conservative elements which are starting to re emerge. My kids both did contact and course intense degrees, which gave little time for anything else, as they also worked part time. My son, in particular tells me nonsense like campus "rape culture", gender fluidity, LGBTIQ, the destruction of the white male patriarchy are the issues de Jour these days. To speak out against the orthodoxy is to not just ridicule, but academic sanction.

God help you if you believe the social engineers are not doing some of their best work in shaping attitudes. Fortunately, when the youngsters hit the working world, they have enough sense to recognise the crap they've been fed. Think Roz Ward and co horts. She and her type could only survive and sprout her vile doctrine in the sheltered workshop of government sponsored academia. The yoong folk o' today are smarter than we think. They have enough intelligence and the wherewithal to see through the nonsense, unlike some of the old relics who still dream of revolution while wearing their Che Guevara berets and t shirts.

[degruch]

We’re conservative, hesitant, indecisive (as well as making poor ones), flat, self-preserving, tunnel visioned and look lost.

This happened with the Sydney game, the Swans being hyped by the press and their stars backed into a corner over their own poor form, came out firing (and fumbling) and we folded like a deck of cards against a bottom 4 team on our own heap! Sledgegate was a mere coincidence IMO, but may have added to the doubt that seems to have rippled through the team. As we folded limplessly to a very gettable Western Bulldogs, and pulled out the usual against the Crows, what it did highlight to me was:

(a) Structurally, we need a link-man...this was the first game with Roo stranded in the F50 or absent, our half back flank froze in their tracks without fail. IMO chasing Dusty Martin becomes a clearer solution with each passing week, throw everything we've got at him.
(b) Mentally, as we've always been, we lack any form of killer instinct...1971 GF, Animal Enclosure, the 1980's, 1997 GF, 2010 GF, the list goes on. I really can't see why it was necessary to 'fall on our sword' over Sirengate, we could have easily ignored it in true Hawthorn style, continued sledging and winning all the way to a premiership!

We're a soft target as a club currently, Judd, Dermott, Barratt, Wilson, etc. are rightly having a field day and it can't just be the fans that are sick of it, surely? I hope the team has the gumption to rectify onfield, and the club has the kahunas do so during the trade/draft period at the end of this year, otherwise we'll be stuck in a Richmond-esque limbo-land for the next decade.

[To the top]

But, in acknowledging the inclusion in the lead presentation, it is not just Football but elsewhere.

What the analysis of votes cast in Australia, in the US, in France and now in the UK shows is that the age demographic of 18-25 voted for Shorten, for Sanders in the Primaries, for Macron and for Corbyn, and where those in Nations which have Murdoch, Murdoch relentlessly attacked those who attracted that 18-25 vote.

The same trend was observed in the 25-35 age bracket.

I returned to The University of Adelaide in 1976, able then to move between the Staff Club and the Union Bar (with its "Green" beer!) and it was a totally different place from what it was 10 or more years prior.

[Linton Lodger]

That's a really good and interesting post OtherThommo.

However, I don't know if we can blame the last 3 weeks on Sledgegate.

I would have loved Richo to say (in reference to Sledgegate): "Murphy spat at one of our players, after some tit for tat sledging and we flew the flag". "We have no regrets, move on thank you".

Unfortunately, if he had said that, the media would have gone on and on until they got their way. You see Journos will bully and bully until they get the response they want. As it was, Caro wrote FOUR bloody stories on the matter! And it all went a lot further than it should of, because the Press still didn't like our response. Also, it should be noted that what Richo said may not have been his call, the messaging was probably decided on by the Club's media people under oversight from the CEO.

I am of the view that The Club's handling of the Kim Duthie saga was an utter disgrace. We had players tormented and victimsed by a sociopathic little b*tch and we rolled over. Duthie should have been subjected to criminal complaints and served with a Defamation Writ for 7 figures. She would have pulled her head in then, not to mention ending up with a criminal record. Instead the viper was showered in sympathy and allowed to run amok.

The Club dealt with Sledgate in a far better manner and no doubt their strategy was to kill the story as quickly as possible. Not ideal but understandable, I would doubt that it adversely impacted on the players. Our form against Carlton wasn't great anyway and similar to the next three games. The difference been that Sydney, Bulldogs & Adelaide were far superior opponents, not to mention the fact that I reckon Murphy's pansy like whining had an adverse affect on his game and lifted us on the day.

[The OtherThommo]

That's a really good and interesting post OtherThommo.

However, I don't know if we can blame the last 3 weeks on Sledgegate.

I would have loved Richo to say (in reference to Sledgegate): "Murphy spat at one of our players, after some tit for tat sledging and we flew the flag". "We have no regrets, move on thank you".

Unfortunately, if he had said that, the media would have gone on and on until they got their way. You see Journos will bully and bully until they get the response they want. As it was, Caro wrote FOUR bloody stories on the matter! And it all went a lot further than it should of, because the Press still didn't like our response. Also, it should be noted that what Richo said may not have been his call, the messaging was probably decided on by the Club's media people under oversight from the CEO.

I am of the view that The Club's handling of the Kim Duthie saga was an utter disgrace. We had players tormented and victimsed by a sociopathic little b*tch and we rolled over. Duthie should have been subjected to criminal complaints and served with a Defamation Writ for 7 figures. She would have pulled her head in then, not to mention ending up with a criminal record. Instead the viper was showered in sympathy and allowed to run amok.

The Club dealt with Sledgate in a far better manner and no doubt their strategy was to kill the story as quickly as possible. Not ideal but understandable, I would doubt that it adversely impacted on the players. Our form against Carlton wasn't great anyway and similar to the next three games. The difference been that Sydney, Bulldogs & Adelaide were far superior opponents, not to mention the fact that I reckon Murphy's pansy like whining had an adverse affect on his game and lifted us on the day.

I'm not suggesting "Sledgegate" is to blame, LL. I'm saying it's emblematic of a more general deficiency. It's a typical resort when we're "shown the door out of the tent".

I still maintain they blew it when they engaged, effectively, with the likes of Roos and Ralph.

A piece of information that came to light, after I'd run the above via the cohort:

Marc Murphy was happy to let it lie. But, his old man wasn't. So, where did he go? His old Fitzroy goombardy, Roos.

And, as "Germie" was a rusted on Watters fan, who is Roos still rusted on to?

Lyon, of course. Recall Roos 'opinions' of us when Lyon departed?

You trust no-one in this caper, LL, they all have their self-interest driven agendas (remember how Fat Head Ed shifted the focus to us, and off Beams, in the "Schoolgirl" matter?).

I repeat my view - Richardson should never have equivocated over Sledgegate.

DO NOT GIVE THESE BASTARDS OXYGEN, EVER!!

[The OtherThommo]

So we are disorganised. In a nut shell.

Well done.

[The OtherThommo]

Actually, Thommo, I reckon the clubs especially official response to the 'Murphy affair' seemed well and truly Fishy .
Which reminds me of something I learned during the 'essendon whacking shitloads of performance enhancing drugs into the veins of young athletes saga'...Power is not usually held by the people appearing to hold power. It's usually some slime bag lurking in the shadows wielding it.

You've always impressed me as wise man, Satch.

[The OtherThommo]

Don't really agree ToT, re the response to 'Murphy-Gate'.


Richardson and the club had no choice but to roll over on the Murphy thing. The very fact that it was perceived by everyone as 'sexist' and 'misogynistic' etc., the club had to roll over.

There are certain topics at certain times when you simply have to take one for the team.


The club had to be political about that one. They had to 'make it go away'. And they did that. They did it very well.

It made me sick in the guts that they had to - but it was the right thing to do. Right for the club to avoid a world of s*** that would still be raining down on them, all if they had have shown the slightest whiff of 'Aww come on, it was just a bit of boys will be boys - harden up everyone!'.

No matter what they said, that's what the baying mob was going to hear. No matter what they meant, that's what they would have interpreted and ran with.

I mean FFS, Adam Simpson had to do a press conference because he did a video of two frozen chickens rooting!


AFL clubs are merely franchises of the AFL designed to capture more of the market. Clubs tow the line. Individuals that don't within clubs, aren't heroes or martyrs - they're foolish. Hird tried, and it nearly killed him. GT did and it probably cost us a flag.

Happy to agree to disagree, JM.

You always have a choice - the choices are largely driven by who you're aiming to please.

The thing is, Richardson didn't "take one for the team", he kept the bulls*** narrative aimed at the team alive (and breathing that freakin' oxygen).

Of course it's political - what isn't? And, if it's political, what's the driver - PR, or as Edward Bernays defined it, before Hitler nicked it (thereby rendering it unuseable)? Propaganda.

Many people shy from the word - 'oooh, conspiracy theories'.

Try 'media management'. Try 'communication management'. They're all traceable back to Bernays.

The minute you say something inclusive of a word like "probably", you legitimate the likes of Roos and Ralph.

So, how about this - say something like "I don't believe the facts of the incident are clearly evidenced. But, if someone can present us with those facts, we're happy....(now wait for it)......to work with our partners in the AFL towards the best outcome for all parties".

As for Adam Simpson having to go the mea culpa for a puppet show - a completely different scenario. He wasn't on ground in the heat of battle - he was just a witless d**khead. He should have got weeks for not being funny.

We got more humour raffling the same chicken for an entire season at my old cricket club.

[Waltzing St Kilda]

None of us actually knows what the response to Slegegate was BEHIND THE SCENES,
but some signs suggest that it wasn't want you'd hope it would be. One just hopes they
weren't berated and sent to re-education classes.

As for claims by Caro that just a few years ago the club's trademark was scandal -- that
should have been challenged vigorously. The scandals were mainly fake news peddled
by the likes of her without apology when they fell apart.

[The OtherThommo]

You would hope that learning would advance as time goes on, TTT. That's just the natural order of things. When I first went to university,( when our lectures were still held in caves!) it was free, thanks to the generosity of the taxpayer and the foresight of St.Gough, the patron saint of tertiary students. Uni was a wild mix of ideas that were freely expressed with the greatest threat being a bit of ridicule from your fellow piss and pot heads. You were even encouraged by the teaching staff to be a bit of a smartarse c*nt, just like they were. Those were the days!

Fast forward to the late 90's and in doing a bit of post grad, the scene had changed. The Science Faculty at Monash was basically broke and the pressure was on staff and students to do research that would attract funding, rather than what was of interest in furthering knowledge in the field. The political atmosphere had changed also. Political Censorship had entered the fray. There were things you were not allowed to discuss openly and certain views were openly attacked. Not the hotbed of free thinking I remembered, but by that stage I was married with kids, working and was there to complete my studies as quickly as possible and get the hell out.

My children's experience in their Four+ years at RMIT and Monash were very different to mine. The Born to rule mentality has been replaced with groupthink, that has its roots firmly set in left wing ideology. There has been resistance from conservative elements which are starting to re emerge. My kids both did contact and course intense degrees, which gave little time for anything else, as they also worked part time. My son, in particular tells me nonsense like campus "rape culture", gender fluidity, LGBTIQ, the destruction of the white male patriarchy are the issues de Jour these days. To speak out against the orthodoxy is to not just ridicule, but academic sanction.

God help you if you believe the social engineers are not doing some of their best work in shaping attitudes. Fortunately, when the youngsters hit the working world, they have enough sense to recognise the crap they've been fed. Think Roz Ward and co horts. She and her type could only survive and sprout her vile doctrine in the sheltered workshop of government sponsored academia. The yoong folk o' today are smarter than we think. They have enough intelligence and the wherewithal to see through the nonsense, unlike some of the old relics who still dream of revolution while wearing their Che Guevara berets and t shirts.

Therein lies much of the tale of the capture of academia, by those who rule.

But, just to differ a touch, WW, on your closing argument, it was an old relic who dreams the dreams of Che T-shirts, who just upended the Brit political establishment, not quite a week ago.

And, which demographic got him there? The kids.

Oh, they're bright, alright. The biggest mistake the lever controllers made was to assume they weren't bright.

Even in Yanquiland, the % of the kid demographic who rate socialism as the most viable political system is north of 30% - IN AMERIKA!?!?

To assume is to prove yourself a fool.

[The OtherThommo]

I really enjoyed reading this.

It's obvious though that Richardson's response was driven by his higher ups.

I can understand why they took this approach but the club really is hamstrung by its history and the way the media loves to portray it, but it's mostly bull sh*t.

The Brereton article should really have been dismissed and ignored as that is the best response to a targeted insult because that's what it was.

The football environment is a nano sized replica of the really, really big picture, Pav, as I know you know (just started reading "The Case of Comrade Tulayev", BTW).

You can let history totally define your present, and your future, if you so choose.

Or, you can acknowledge your history, and seek to define your present and future by owning it, and yourselves.

To that end, I recommend tuning in to SBS at 8:30 on Sunday night, for the 1st 2 parts of Oliver Stone's interviews with Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.

There you will see the ultimate disrupter, someone who understands the need for a multipolar world, predefined by respecting the sovereignty of nations.

And, the freakin' AFL world would be far better for attending to the same principle.

And, no, I'm not a V.V.P. fanboi - I just respect his aims, and how he is masterfully working to bring it about. To break the "HO" stranglehold, it takes someone to lead the way.

Same, same, everywhere, in every human pursuit.

Bow to no foreign man or beast.

[The OtherThommo]

None of us actually knows what the response to Slegegate was BEHIND THE SCENES,
but some signs suggest that it wasn't want you'd hope it would be. One just hopes they
weren't berated and sent to re-education classes.

As for claims by Caro that just a few years ago the club's trademark was scandal -- that
should have been challenged vigorously. The scandals were mainly fake news peddled
by the likes of her without apology when they fell apart.

Wilson's mind is full of wet cement, Waltzing and, unless you add graphene/graphite to cement, electrical currents can't flow.

I well remember Wilson's performance during the E'dope matter. At one point, she published absolute tripe about the medicinal 'status' of the key drug. Quick message to the man who had journalistic standing at the same institution, suggesting he take a walk to recommend correction, was met with 'Oh, s***, she hasn't has she?', and off he went.

He returned a little later, with "I tried, but I doubt she'll correct".

She didn't, and I have not read or listened to one word she's contributed since.

When I wipe, I really wipe.