Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
yipper wrote:
Exactly. What Lyon has said is "on average, it takes 4 years to develop into an AFL player - UNLESS YOU ARE SOMEONE SPECIAL!!" Can't see how much clearer that needs to be, unless there is an agenda to try and nitpick every little thing or quote this particular coach does or utters.
Nice Ross Coloured Glasses you're wearing there.
What he said was (and if you're going to quotation marks, you're actually meant to quote what they say, not make it up or lie about it)....
"To become a good AFL player you’ve got to do a strong apprenticeship, unless you’re absolutely special. "
I disagree with this. I think it's nonsense. Hundreds of players have been good without playing for 4 years.
It's a silly theory. In all honesty, the only logic behind saying this would be to protect young guys from criticism early on in their careers. To buy them some time.
It's a good ploy in that regard, but in essence what he's actually saying is nonsense.
SainterK,
Don't waste your time playing 'this game'
He posts deliberately, IMO, in an ambiguous way so that when you read it logically (as he wants you to) it gives him the opportunity to 'thunder with indignation' that you are lying.
He's been using this same tactic for as long as I can remember on here.
If he bothers to try and offer an explanation as to why he's been 'wronged' you'll get this 'semantic' nonsense that he didn't actually write the words 'Ross Lyon said it would take 4 years', and therefore YOU ARE A LIAR.
What he did do was post in such a manner as to make you logically read his post in that manner, IMO of course.
Dodgystool knows what RL said... Dodgystool knows what Dodgystool said... Dodgystool knows that the difference between what he implied and what he actually said is murky and open to conjecture... that's just what he gets off on.
You are reaching into his pocket for him and fossicking around for something that is not there, while he simply lays back and enjoys the sensation in a very creepy way... hoping you wont stop too soon.
It just bugs me, that every thread, ends up turning into the same thing.
The more it bugs you, the more he 'enjoys' it... and the more he will 'enjoy' convincing you next time to reach into his pocket for the lolly that is not there.
It just bugs me, that every thread, ends up turning into the same thing.
The more it bugs you, the more he 'enjoys' it... and the more he will 'enjoy' convincing you next time to reach into his pocket for the lolly that is not there.
Sure, but for a poster that has 6000+ posts on here, I am obviously not the only one that needs to learn this lesson
It just bugs me, that every thread, ends up turning into the same thing.
The more it bugs you, the more he 'enjoys' it... and the more he will 'enjoy' convincing you next time to reach into his pocket for the lolly that is not there.
Sure, but for a poster that has 6000+ posts on here, I am obviously not the only one that needs to learn this lesson
Nup, indeed... and my initial post wasn't aimed at you in particular.
I get sucked into it too occasionally... but I always make sure I'm wearing industrial rubber gloves, and reach in with tongs
It just bugs me, that every thread, ends up turning into the same thing.
The more it bugs you, the more he 'enjoys' it... and the more he will 'enjoy' convincing you next time to reach into his pocket for the lolly that is not there.
Sure, but for a poster that has 6000+ posts on here, I am obviously not the only one that needs to learn this lesson
No, far too many of us are 'guilty' of 'feeding' his ego.
The real pity is that he is an intelligent and erudite poster when he wants to be.
Unfortunately since the 'GT sacking' he's used many of his posts to just 'play games' on here.
Speaking personally, I didn't mind during this season as we were 'racking up' wins, that he seemed to disappear off the forum.
Probably didn't want to appear on here as it might have been too difficult to denigrate Ross Lyon whilst we were winning?
I love it when a thread gets to the point where RodgerFox is calling somebody a liar
.LIAR
.LIAR
.LIAR
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
Mr Magic wrote:SainterK,
Don't waste your time playing 'this game'
He posts deliberately, IMO, in an ambiguous way so that when you read it logically (as he wants you to) it gives him the opportunity to 'thunder with indignation' that you are lying.
He's been using this same tactic for as long as I can remember on here.
If he bothers to try and offer an explanation as to why he's been 'wronged' you'll get this 'semantic' nonsense that he didn't actually write the words 'Ross Lyon said it would take 4 years', and therefore YOU ARE A LIAR.
What he did do was post in such a manner as to make you logically read his post in that manner, IMO of course.
It's just part of his 'trolling' game.
This is it in a nutshell and it truly is trolling/baiting and id have thought certainly against SS rules.
Its not an attempt at genuine discussion so why allow it?
This shyte doesn't work - Fox is one of them there triumphalists. We get beaten, he claims prior knowhow, and celebrates. He hates us, he follows us, but he hates us. His world revolves around our failure.
His orifices leak Grant Thomas joy. Those of us who don't give a freckle o'ratus about individual celebration, but remain keenly interested in how the CLUB progresses, to coin a phrase, "Spit in your general direction".
GT addiction is somewhat more than tiresome. Now it's pathetic. We have a footy club that is so well managed we have become the envy. And, as it gets harder to improve, because of all these concessions, we will grow (albeit more slowly).
'I have no new illusions, and I have no old illusions' - Vladimir Putin, Geneva, June 2021
The OtherThommo wrote:This shyte doesn't work - Fox is one of them there triumphalists. We get beaten, he claims prior knowhow, and celebrates. He hates us, he follows us, but he hates us. His world revolves around our failure.
His orifices leak Grant Thomas joy. Those of us who don't give a freckle o'ratus about individual celebration, but remain keenly interested in how the CLUB progresses, to coin a phrase, "Spit in your general direction".
GT addiction is somewhat more than tiresome. Now it's pathetic. We have a footy club that is so well managed we have become the envy. And, as it gets harder to improve, because of all these concessions, we will grow (albeit more slowly).
While I don't agree with much of what RF posts lately he does post positively about the Saints quite often. During the finals he was surprisingly positive.
That said, this is a forum, and people can post an opposing view...
This is not the ABC board during the Howard rule.
Here's some advice I was given as a kid..."DON'T GET SUCKED IN!"
Are you still alive, Leo? In the old social club days, you Leo, either tried to empty me out, or you wanted to drink with me, for some strange reason. Cantwell, wasn't it? By crikey you were a porky punter.
Admirable defence of the indefensible, Leo? But, by Jimeney, Rog has been at this relentless bagging of RTB for some time now.
It's a cred thing. Cantwell was the name, yes? I actually had to front the SC Board a couple of times back then, when you were in charge. I won each time (grand criterion, logic).
'I have no new illusions, and I have no old illusions' - Vladimir Putin, Geneva, June 2021
The OtherThommo wrote:Are you still alive, Leo? In the old social club days, you Leo, either tried to empty me out, or you wanted to drink with me, for some strange reason. Cantwell, wasn't it? By crikey you were a porky punter.
Admirable defence of the indefensible, Leo? But, by Jimeney, Rog has been at this relentless bagging of RTB for some time now.
It's a cred thing. Cantwell was the name, yes? I actually had to front the SC Board a couple of times back then, when you were in charge. I won each time (grand criterion, logic).
I think you might be thinking of someone else TOT.
This had the potential to be a great thread, until it was taken over by arguements on page 1. Why does that happen to so many great threads around here?
I would agree if the arguements were civil, but I was being polite. They always end up in name calling which I don't think is called for.
Hey, but thats just my opinion.
The whole point of the thread gets missed when people start personally attacking each other...turns a great thread into ego driven crap. I'm new around here but I've noticed it happens a lot. I'll be reading a great thread ...constructive arguements, differing points of view etc etc... Then the crap starts, and the thread itself gets lost amid three pages of quotes and counter quotes and name calling etc. I feel then that I need to keep out of it and that I can't contiubute to the original point of the thread. Just a shame.
saintnick12 wrote:I would agree if the arguements were civil, but I was being polite. They always end up in name calling which I don't think is called for.
Hey, but thats just my opinion.
The whole point of the thread gets missed when people start personally attacking each other...turns a great thread into ego driven crap. I'm new around here but I've noticed it happens a lot. I'll be reading a great thread ...constructive arguements, differing points of view etc etc... Then the crap starts, and the thread itself gets lost amid three pages of quotes and counter quotes and name calling etc. I feel then that I need to keep out of it and that I can't contiubute to the original point of the thread. Just a shame.
Whilst some of us feel the need to enter into the arguments, there are others who just ignore them and keep posting in threads that interest them.
It's a forum, do whatever you feel comfortable with.
There are some (and I include myself in this category on occasions) who see 'warning signs' in particular posts by particular posters of agendas about to be pushed. Agendas that are designed to derail the current thread into a direction that that particular poster wants to push.
Agendas that have been discussed/debated/argued so may times that most involved in the debate/discussion/argument know what will be posted by whom and when well before it is.
^Yep, exactly. And because I don't want to get involved in that, I then don't contribute at all to that thread, when I otherwise would have. As you suggested, I then go and find another one that intrests me. Just a shame, cos this particular one did really interest me...but its been lost now.
