This will sound like heresy

[Beej]

Haha, you really are clutching at straws now. Absolute first grade plank.

And you're acting like a child. "I didn't call you a racist, I called you a bigot."

big·ot (bgt)
n.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Now, as we were discussing Raph Clarke, which aspect of bigot would you have been referring to? I don't know what Raph's political view is and I don't know if he's a religious bloke.

Stunned.

You are a piece of work I tell ya.

[joffaboy]

Haha, you really are clutching at straws now. Absolute first grade plank.

And you're acting like a child. "I didn't call you a racist, I called you a bigot."

big·ot (bgt)
n.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Now, as we were discussing Raph Clarke, which aspect of bigot would you have been referring to? I don't know what Raph's political view is and I don't know if he's a religious bloke.

Stunned.

You are a piece of work I tell ya.

Mate, I deliberately went out of my way in that thread to specifically state I was not calling anybody a racist.

I can go and quote the posts if you like.

You are a bigot in the definition I meant, unless you think you can read my mind.

If you feel guilty about your attack on Raph Clarke, thats your s.hite. If you think that your position makes you a racist, thats for you to decide.

The fact is, I never called you a racist.

I asked you to produce the post where i did, and you couldn't.

You assumed that because i called your views bigotted that they I accused you of being racist.

You have proven on this thread and on the Raph Clarke one, that your views are bigotted in the definition I used the term, narrow minded and intolerant.

You have lied that i called you a racist. You can not come up with the evidence and have been caught out.

If you are so touchy about racism, when it is patently obvious to anyone that you have never been accused of it on here - especially by me - that you have an issue with your stance.

Sort out your issues before projecting you problems on to others.

May help if you take some responsibility for your issues if you have them.

[Beej]

Haha, you really are clutching at straws now. Absolute first grade plank.

And you're acting like a child. "I didn't call you a racist, I called you a bigot."

big·ot (bgt)
n.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Now, as we were discussing Raph Clarke, which aspect of bigot would you have been referring to? I don't know what Raph's political view is and I don't know if he's a religious bloke.

Stunned.

You are a piece of work I tell ya.

Mate, I deliberately went out of my way in that thread to specifically state I was not calling anybody a racist.

I can go and quote the posts if you like.

You are a bigot in the definition I meant, unless you think you can read my mind.

If you feel guilty about your attack on Raph Clarke, thats your s.hite. If you think that your position makes you a racist, thats for you to decide.

The fact is, I never called you a racist.

I asked you to produce the post where i did, and you couldn't.

You assumed that because i called your views bigotted that they I accused you of being racist.

You have proven on this thread and on the Raph Clarke one, that your views are bigotted in the definition I used the term, narrow minded and intolerant.

You have lied that i called you a racist. You can not come up with the evidence and have been caught out.

If you are so touchy about racism, when it is patently obvious to anyone that you have never been accused of it on here - especially by me - that you have an issue with your stance.

Sort out your issues before projecting you problems on to others.

May help if you take some responsibility for your issues if you have them.

Firstly, you cannot call someone who has criticised Raph Clarke a bigot and then backtrack and say that you didn't mean it in a racial context. That's ludicrous and you know it.

Bigot/racist ... whatever... it was an extremely poor choice of word.

The only issue I have is that I do not appreciate being called a bigot, a racist, or being accused of anything, just because I have a differing view.

And, believe me, we both know exactly what you meant when you initially said it. You probably didn't mean it, but I know what you meant at the time. Bigot/racist is an extremely strong slur, that is plainly obvious, and one which was not deserving for what I had posted in the thread regarding Raph Clarke.

[matrix]

[cowboy18]

My dictionary gives a different definition.

big·ot (bgt)
n.
Conjunction of "large" and internet short hand for "off topic", i.e. completely off topic.

e.g. "This thread has become really bigot" suggesting that the initial proposition raised in the thread is no longer being discussed.

[Richter]

Mate, I deliberately went out of my way in that thread to specifically state I was not calling anybody a racist.

I can go and quote the posts if you like.

..............

The fact is, I never called you a racist.
them.

Raph Clarke deserves critisism when warranted, but to abuse, insult, heckle and denigrate him to the point OLB has and others do smacks of an agenda that goes way beyond football.

[Violent Stool]

Maybe the club should have exited him out a year or so earlier?

[joffaboy]

Firstly, you cannot call someone who has criticised Raph Clarke a bigot and then backtrack and say that you didn't mean it in a racial context. That's ludicrous and you know it.

The only thing ludicrious is the fact that you accuse me of something and then cant back it up

Bigot/racist ... whatever... it was an extremely poor choice of word.

I think it is totally accurate when use in the definition I did. Rigid and intolerant to anyone elses views

The only issue I have is that I do not appreciate being called a bigot, a racist, or being accused of anything, just because I have a differing view.

So now the word bigot and racist is interchangable???

Mabye in your world but anybody with more than a 5th grade education, there is more than one definition to a word.

Your protest is laughable, when it has been stated over and over again that nobody called you racist.

You twist and skew it around for your own precious purposes.

Really this has become very sad.

And, believe me, we both know exactly what you meant when you initially said it.

No I WONT believe you. Just because you post it doesn't make it true. You dont understand the context I posted it it, it is plainly obvious. You blithely and incorrectly assume that the use of the word bigot implied I overtly was calling you racist. Now you try and tell me black is white, when I specifically posted on that thread that i was calling nobody on that thread a racist.

Fair Dinkum, just because you MAY have a modicum of guilt, dont put your issues on to me.

Ttry being an adult and face your issue instead of abbrogating responsibility and attributing blame to somebody else

You probably didn't mean it, but I know what you meant at the time

I didn't mean it and I didn't know what iw as writing? But you did? Oh my the guilt.

Bigot/racist is an extremely strong slur, that is plainly obvious, and one which was not deserving for what I had posted in the thread regarding Raph Clarke.

If you believe that I called you a racist , there is obviously no dissuading you, regardless of the evidence.

OK considering you couldn't come up with the post where I called you a racist, here is mine from the other thread

The facts are that lazy hatefilled bursts of insults (not rational critisism but general subjective abuse) such as we have experienced from OLB does nothing but harm the player in question.

Interesting that a couple of posters took my opinion of an ulterior motive toward some of our players to mean I was saying that they were racially abusing him.

Even when I stated that I was accusing nobody in this thread of that i get personally attacked by OLB and by iwantmyseats.

I either touched a nerve and they feel guilty or they dont want me to hold a general opinion on the way the Clarkes and Gwilt are insulted and abused by supporters.

Either way they are hypocrites - complaining that because we dont want unsubstantiated abuse of players we are stifling their opinion - or conversely want to stifle my opinion that some of the hate and abuse is race based.

It is a fact that aboriginal and other "black" players still get racially abused at the footy.

FFS I heard Harry O'Brien get called an "abo c*nt" by some imbicile (considering Harry O'Brien is Brazilian - but I suppose one black is the same as the rest to these neanderthals ).

I agree with mb. the Saints had a proud heritage with culture and ethnic minorities. FGS we've had Jewish players (even a premiership player) Italians- Greeks - and many other nationalities.

One of our greats was Nicky Winmar (whom I also heard racially abused but that was 20 years ago). I shudder to think any rational person would abuse Nicky because he is aboriginal.

I dont know if it is racial - however to me it seems these people I hear on the radio with their hate filled vitriol and personal abuse toward Raph in particular have more on their agendas.

I heard some disgusting bogan clown on Fineys show on Sunday night saying he was yet to hear a rational explanation why Raph Clarke was in the team. Finey said it was because he was more mobile that Maguire and that he could play in more positions. the clown then said "well thats not acceptable" and Finey - exasperated - said - "well that is the reason".

You see the Raph haters will not accept any rational reasoning. When given a reason it doesn't suit their hate to agree.

It is very worrisome that these types are supposed to be supporters.

As EVERYONE here said - no player is above critisism - but to make it so personal and hateful toward Raph points towards something more sinister.

As i said more than once on this thread I am not pointing fingers at anyone here.

Actually there are two quotes. I could find more if I looked.

So there is the evidence....

To bad you couldn't afford me the say courtesy when you flagrantly and incorrectly accused me of saying you were racist.

Simple question?

Are you a racist?

If not, why all the carry on when it has been proven time and time again that you were not call a racist?

What is you motive? To stifle anybody elses POV? To only adhere with your rigidg views?

To me that is a very biggoted attitude.

[matrix]

you guys need a new hobby........

?

?

perhaps?

[joffaboy]

Mate, I deliberately went out of my way in that thread to specifically state I was not calling anybody a racist.

I can go and quote the posts if you like.

..............

The fact is, I never called you a racist.
them.

Raph Clarke deserves critisism when warranted, but to abuse, insult, heckle and denigrate him to the point OLB has and others do smacks of an agenda that goes way beyond football.

Good quotes richter.

The agenda toward Raph does go way beyond football. there seems to be an orchestrated attack on him without any real objectivity.

Is it personal? It is the way he plays? Is it something else?

[joffaboy]

you guys need a new hobby........

?

?

perhaps?

is the third one a road rager???

Anyway, this has gone completely off topic.

Suffice to say I will vet each and every word I use from now on and make sure I get the Saintsational politically correct definition of each and every word I ever use on the off chance that someone will get upset.

[Beej]

You dont understand the context I posted it it, it is plainly obvious. You blithely and incorrectly assume that the use of the word bigot implied I overtly was calling you racist.

I think it is totally accurate when use in the definition I did. Rigid and intolerant to anyone elses views

It seems as though not many, including yourself, actually thought you meant it in the context you claim to have meant it in...if these posts are anything to go by which were made soon after that disgraceful post of yours.

I also notice that Gwilt and X get more critisism than anybody except for mabye Jason Blake on this forum and on moron oops I mean talkback radio.

i just turn around and say...whilst smiling of course......are you a f***-wit or simply a red necked racist........their wives, girlfriends or accompanying hookers usually make them swap seats.........or they just stfu.....either way ....i don't have to put up with it and i won't......

I have heard this from the extremists and haters for years.

And thats the whole point this serial hater is incapable of getting.

Raph Clarke deserves critisism when warranted, but to abuse, insult, heckle and denigrate him to the point OLB has and others do smacks of an agenda that goes way beyond football.

leaving race out of this......

Yep its so pathetic I want to thump my head against the wall. JB and others do this, and its absolute bulls***! You criticise a raph or a gwilt with no race agenda whatsoever and they play the race card. Almost as bad as if it was actual racism in the first place ffs!

Raph and his indigenous brethren can't help the colour of their skin. But there's no reason in the world that you can't STFU: preferably for ever.

I wouldn't be surprised if the media and others in the broader Australian community soon start describing St Kilda fans as a bunch of bogan racists: the way the Pies fans used to be seen pre-Leon Davis.

It is a fact that aboriginal and other "black" players still get racially abused at the footy.

FFS I heard Harry O'Brien get called an "abo c*nt" by some imbicile (considering Harry O'Brien is Brazilian - but I suppose one black is the same as the rest to these neanderthals Rolling Eyes ).

If you meant it in a different context, nobody got it. You're attempt to squirm out of this one is impossible I'm afraid.

You are getting lower and lower all the time. But now, you have the nerve to defend your use of the word bigot in a thread about Raph Clarke because you claim there was no racial intent. A new low from a pitiful disgrace of a human being. *sigh*

[Winmar7Fan]

Was Harvey physically capable of playing this year?

21 touches average last season yes he may have lost a touch in 12 months but remember this team is far better now and he probably wouldn't have to work as hard. I'm sure he would be doing more than say Geary anyway.

Is the team performing better without him Is a huge question.

How much of an influential presence was he to all the players?
How Influential was he in the Club? We've all heard stories of the old school players from his era however true they were I don't know.

I believe the way they are playing now is a progressive evolvement of RLs structure and coaching to his credit and not anything at all with Harvey gone.

I suppose you could also throw in could RH being still out there lift and motivate them even more sniffing a real possible last chance of getting him a flag?

[Beej]

I believe the way they are playing now is a progressive evolvement of RLs structure and coaching to his credit and not anything at all with Harvey gone.

I suppose you could also throw in could RH being still out there lift and motivate them even more sniffing a real possible last chance of getting him a flag?

Exactly. I totally agree.

If, as the OP suggests, that Harvey leaving was the catalyst for the players lifting in order to fill the void left by him then can you imagine the reaction it would have had on the playing group had Harvey left when he was in his prime.

Imagine we had pushed Harvey out after his second Brownlow, when he was still at his peak. The void left by Harvey then would have been three times the size as it was at the end of last season. Can you imagine the response of the playing group then?

We would have been unplayable.

Because, apparently, it takes a legend leaving to get the best out of the rest of the players.

Which is why Essendon have been superb since Hird's retirement, why Collingwood have taken all before them since Buckley's retirement, why Adelaide's trophy cabinet has been bulging since Ricciuto's retirement and lets not forget North Melbourne who have been arguably the greatest AFL side ever since Carey left.

And West Coast, after losing not one, but TWO legends of the club in Judd and Cousins, they are setting the world alight now that their players have decided that it's time they finally fulfilled their potential.

Great theory.

*counting the days until Riewoldt calls time on his career*

[Milton66]

I think you're missing the point here, and your answers are jaded by your ongoing personal battle with JB.

No one is having a go at 35, but for FFS, why can't we discuss issues without this indignation cr@p?

The club is bigger than the indiviual and St Kilda is bigger than Harvey.

My POV is that Harvey (a class act that he was) wouldn't make it in today's 22.

At his peak 5 years ago, then yes. But in 2009 at 38 years... no.

By default, Harvey retiring has a llowed another player to step in which can get the job done. To say he'd give more than Geary is cr@p. Geary gives better than Fiora. Ray gives as good as Harvey did last year.

I have no doubt we'd still be 14-0 with 35 on our list, but I'm not sure if he'd be playing seniors.

In a sense, you could also argue that having him available, may force the coach to compromise the structure to accomodate him. But that's merely speculating.

[Winmar7Fan]

I think you're missing the point here, and your answers are jaded by your ongoing personal battle with JB.

No one is having a go at 35, but for FFS, why can't we discuss issues without this indignation cr@p?

The club is bigger than the indiviual and St Kilda is bigger than Harvey.

My POV is that Harvey (a class act that he was) wouldn't make it in today's 22.

At his peak 5 years ago, then yes. But in 2009 at 38 years... no.

By default, Harvey retiring has a llowed another player to step in which can get the job done. To say he'd give more than Geary is cr@p. Geary gives better than Fiora. Ray gives as good as Harvey did last year.

I have no doubt we'd still be 14-0 with 35 on our list, but I'm not sure if he'd be playing seniors.

In a sense, you could also argue that having him available, may force the coach to compromise the structure to accomodate him. But that's merely speculating.

Are you serious? It wouldn't be too difficult Geary may turn into a good player but he's done bugger all for a while. So you think Harvey from where he was 8 months ago would be below Geary's level now? Boy you have got him suddenly hitting a brick wall.

Last year he more than held his spot even though he had slowed up. IMO even if he lost a bit more he still could have comprimised by spending more time on the bench and in a better team now could still be in our top 22.

At his peak 5 years ago, then yes. But in 2009 at 38 years... no.

What's this statement why does he have to be at his peak? He's been in the top 22 for the 4 years after that declining from his peak. 2008 at 37 years sounds as well beyond it too.

I've never been a Harvey worshipper to be jaded by my opinion and yes he was getting close but with a more than serviceable season last year and his stamina, endurance and commitment with a bit less game time I could see him get through another season.

Funny thing is at the end of last year virtually everyone thought he was still good enough and wanted him to go again and now he's gone and we've stepped up and don't need him, he wasn't going to be able to cut it now?

[SENsei]

Refreshing to read the latest few posts in this thread.

They were actually on topic.



This other tit for tat, racist - bigot, bulltish is as boring as Michael Atherton's commentary!!

[jay young]

we would of won the 04 flag with harvey had the stupid idiot saints supporters had not ran on the ground when gehrig kicked his ton we had port by the throat , the disruption stopped a match winning momentum (i still hold a grudge against saints supporters for doing this) i was yelling at the fools not to do it . So harvey should of played in a premiership cause anyone would of beaten brisbane , so anyone whos on this site who ran on the oval hang your head in shame .

[starsign]

we would of won the 04 flag with harvey had the stupid idiot saints supporters had not ran on the ground when gehrig kicked his ton we had port by the throat , the disruption stopped a match winning momentum (i still hold a grudge against saints supporters for doing this) i was yelling at the fools not to do it . So harvey should of played in a premiership cause anyone would of beaten brisbane , so anyone whos on this site who ran on the oval hang your head in shame .

impossible for them to realize at the time, but in retrospect you are indeed spot on!
that was the one that got away!

[reincarnated]

we would of won the 04 flag with harvey had the stupid idiot saints supporters had not ran on the ground when gehrig kicked his ton we had port by the throat , the disruption stopped a match winning momentum (i still hold a grudge against saints supporters for doing this) i was yelling at the fools not to do it . So harvey should of played in a premiership cause anyone would of beaten brisbane , so anyone whos on this site who ran on the oval hang your head in shame .

impossible for them to realize at the time, but in retrospect you are indeed spot on!
that was the one that got away!

You know when your club is unsuccessful when some supporters whinge about others running on the field when there was still 3 quarters to go.

Also the fact that we were flogged by the Lions twice in a 3 week period

But we would have won the GF obviously, it now makes perfect sense

[clarky449]

It was in the first quarter, I dont think it was a match turning moment

[asiu]

momentum is a big thing

we (as supporters) gave it up through an 'unco' response ....imo..fwtw



and thats not to say that the adelaide supporters who ran out wouldnt have stopped our momentum anyway

but then . that would have been smart



edit..

and couldnt believe the club didnt get online / on radio / on telly asking the fans to stay off ....we were talking about the issue here in the week preceeding