Brett Delidio Quote

[SaintPav]

The club has make some poor decisions in recent years but I reckon not recruiting Ben wasn't one of them. You're entitled to your opinion BM but I see no point in this thread at all.

[Spinner]

Spinner, come on man.... That is not very well thought out.
We've covered those areas already
He punched Connors because he deserved it for acting like a dick, which is why he was banned for 8 weeks
He had a bad reaction to sleeping pills which was ultimately a beat up non story.
He did his hammy once
He played nearly all the games and was top 5 in their B&F

Don't post rubbish to make a point, better off just saying I don't agree...

It was extremely well thought out. Why don't you take responsibility for your comment and stop making childish excuses when people challenge them.

He was suspended for a week regarding the Connors incident.
Hamstring only once? Well why did he miss 12 games?
2009 - R2-6, R9, R16
2010 - R2, R4 R7-8 R15
Please also detail which he missed for any injury he had sustained and the suspension. Dont think byes were around back then.
Bad reaction? Ok Well give him that one. Benefit of the doubt for a drug addict.
As stated before Richmond won 4 and 5 games respectively. Not exactly an achievement top 5 in best and fairest.


Now your points have been addressed once again. Please continue to ignore them and post your usual rubbish.

[BigMart]

At least address them well

He was suspended for being out, 1 week for belting a team mate sound soft??? Because it was almost deemed as fair enough as he deserved it. Ben had a hurtful of him. Connors got 8 weeks and was banished. They had to be deemed to be doing something, so a wet lettuce ban was given

He did a hamstring in R2 2009 and missed six. He never tore a hamstring thereafter, thing is you don't know why he was out. I can tell you, none of them were hamstring tears... Which at his age/history would be a 4 week lay off. He missed no more than 2 weeks in a row, and of course one was a suspension. He was rested once.

You'd take 32 games from 44 from pick 97 in the combined drafts

Really your clutching at straws....

[Spinner]

At least address them well

He was suspended for being out, 1 week for belting a team mate sound soft??? Because it was almost deemed as fair enough as he deserved it. Ben had a hurtful of him. Connors got 8 weeks and was banished. They had to be deemed to be doing something, so a wet lettuce ban was given

He did a hamstring in R2 2009 and missed six. He never tore a hamstring thereafter, thing is you don't know why he was out. I can tell you, none of them were hamstring tears... Which at his age/history would be a 4 week lay off. He missed no more than 2 weeks in a row, and of course one was a suspension. He was rested once.

You'd take 32 games from 44 from pick 97 in the combined drafts

Really your clutching at straws....

Anyone mention he was a drug addict?

And where did your B&F comments go? That's right - Richmond were next to awful.



Clutching at a pipe more fitting of this scenario.

[Little Dozer]

Clutching at a pipe more fitting of this scenario.

I see what you did there.

I think Cousins would have been invaluable in the Grand Finals. That alone would have made recruting him worthwile.

[gringo]

Clutching at a pipe more fitting of this scenario.

I see what you did there.

I think Cousins would have been invaluable in the Grand Finals. That alone would have made recruting him worthwile.

Interestingly i think the fact that we lost Harves meant that some of the young guys at the time realised that they needed to be the play makers rather than the followers. Getting a big name doesn't always have the desired effect on a young establishing group. Who knows what effect it would have had on even getting to a GF. History shows we got there but couldn't get up on the day. Changing sliding door moments may have completely changed the outcome if things went wrong.

Ben may have been better off where he was able to use his mentoring, perhaps alienated and marginalised he could have slipped backwards and caused disharmony, it's so hypothetical it's ridiculous to contemplate. If we had got Lovett and the Saints boys didn't have a party we may have won the 2010.

[defacto]

Clutching at a pipe more fitting of this scenario.

I see what you did there.

I think Cousins would have been invaluable in the Grand Finals. That alone would have made recruting him worthwile.

Interestingly i think the fact that we lost Harves meant that some of the young guys at the time realised that they needed to be the play makers rather than the followers. Getting a big name doesn't always have the desired effect on a young establishing group. Who knows what effect it would have had on even getting to a GF. History shows we got there but couldn't get up on the day. Changing sliding door moments may have completely changed the outcome if things went wrong.

Ben may have been better off where he was able to use his mentoring, perhaps alienated and marginalised he could have slipped backwards and caused disharmony, it's so hypothetical it's ridiculous to contemplate. If we had got Lovett and the Saints boys didn't have a party we may have won the 2010.

well summed up.

i reckon if we got him, we wouldnt have made the grand final. would have been sent home during one of the finals.

[Spinner]

Ross was quoted saying to the group "dont think a 30 year old is going to come in and make it all happen".

Montagna would not have bridged the gap from good to great. Nor players like Gram.

The whole midfiled stepped up.



Simply slotting Cousins in just doesn't work. But if you want to continue to use simple analogy and assess hypothetical situations. Well Cousins would have been injured in the Qualifying Final anyway.

[joffaboy]

Simply slotting Cousins in just doesn't work.

It does if you believe in a linear progress from a straw man argument.

It ignores the fact that we won 19 games in a row and lost a GF in 09 because of terrible kicking in front of goal.

It assumes everything would have been EXACTLY the same with Cousins in the team in ALL aspects of the sliding doors scenario.

The media would not have beat up the Gardiner/Cousins being back together.

The team would have won 19 straight

Cousins would not have been busted for his drug addiction again.

Cousins would not have been injured.

Cousins could play Lyons gameplan.

It is ludicrious scenario.

the thing that disturbs me the most is advocating for a person who admits to the coach that he is STILL a practicing illegal drug user to have influences over the likes of Stanley and Steven and other young players at the Saints.

If Lyon had have known what he did about Cousins and drafted him, and it came out (in a scenario where the addiction was exposed mid season) we would have lsot a player, a coach, and never had the chance to even play in the Grand Finals.

lets face it, Cousins was a spent force with the Tigers and this whole argument is one of ego stroking and BS.

[loris]

Ross was quoted saying to the group "dont think a 30 year old is going to come in and make it all happen".

Montagna would not have bridged the gap from good to great. Nor players like Gram.

The whole midfiled stepped up.



Simply slotting Cousins in just doesn't work. But if you want to continue to use simple analogy and assess hypothetical situations. Well Cousins would have been injured in the Qualifying Final anyway.

Yes spinner so many forget that oft quoted remark to the players of Ross Lyon............... thankfully he threw it at the boys and they responded positively. Puts paid to the incorrect story that Lyon wanted Cousins and the Board did not eh?

[skeptic]

Ross was quoted saying to the group "dont think a 30 year old is going to come in and make it all happen".

Montagna would not have bridged the gap from good to great. Nor players like Gram.

The whole midfiled stepped up.



Simply slotting Cousins in just doesn't work. But if you want to continue to use simple analogy and assess hypothetical situations. Well Cousins would have been injured in the Qualifying Final anyway.

Yes spinner so many forget that oft quoted remark to the players of Ross Lyon............... thankfully he threw it at the boys and they responded positively. Puts paid to the incorrect story that Lyon wanted Cousins and the Board did not eh?

wow

I understand both sides of this argument but come on...

you're seriously saying that this one throw away line by RL inspired the team to near premiership greatness

the hero worship on this forum amazes me.

Cousins = premiership
No Cousins = inspiration to near premiership status

[Spinner]

Ross was quoted saying to the group "dont think a 30 year old is going to come in and make it all happen".

Montagna would not have bridged the gap from good to great. Nor players like Gram.

The whole midfiled stepped up.



Simply slotting Cousins in just doesn't work. But if you want to continue to use simple analogy and assess hypothetical situations. Well Cousins would have been injured in the Qualifying Final anyway.

Yes spinner so many forget that oft quoted remark to the players of Ross Lyon............... thankfully he threw it at the boys and they responded positively. Puts paid to the incorrect story that Lyon wanted Cousins and the Board did not eh?

wow

I understand both sides of this argument but come on...

you're seriously saying that this one throw away line by RL inspired the team to near premiership greatness

the hero worship on this forum amazes me.

Cousins = premiership
No Cousins = inspiration to near premiership status

Thanks Straw man.

[Spinner]

Simply slotting Cousins in just doesn't work.

It does if you believe in a linear progress from a straw man argument.

It ignores the fact that we won 19 games in a row and lost a GF in 09 because of terrible kicking in front of goal.

It assumes everything would have been EXACTLY the same with Cousins in the team in ALL aspects of the sliding doors scenario.

The media would not have beat up the Gardiner/Cousins being back together.

The team would have won 19 straight

Cousins would not have been busted for his drug addiction again.

Cousins would not have been injured.

Cousins could play Lyons gameplan.

It is ludicrious scenario.

the thing that disturbs me the most is advocating for a person who admits to the coach that he is STILL a practicing illegal drug user to have influences over the likes of Stanley and Steven and other young players at the Saints.

If Lyon had have known what he did about Cousins and drafted him, and it came out (in a scenario where the addiction was exposed mid season) we would have lsot a player, a coach, and never had the chance to even play in the Grand Finals.

lets face it, Cousins was a spent force with the Tigers and this whole argument is one of ego stroking and BS.

Great post. Coupled with the fantastic Margin Call signature quote.

Straw people. Love it.

[joffaboy]

Cousins = premiership
No Cousins = inspiration to near premiership status

[matrix]

unreal

seriously, six pages of: 'i got it right' ?

[SainterK]

Not quite, six pages of 'if it was up to me'

[saint66au]

Looking forward to the "I abused John Beveridge on draft day when he drafted Brad Howard and I was right and he was wrong" thread

[BigMart]

I do remember the caninig I did get for Brad Howard....

Almost as much as when I questioned Justin Sweeneys character...

I copped it for Luke Ball defending

Lovett Bashing

And of course Benny still

I know people don't like to hear things that denigrate the great club they follow, but dont be so blind that you can't see sense

None of these were smart, bold, brilliant predictions by me.... They were common sense followers of footy would have understood

The fact that one eyed bozos can't even admit the ridiculous arguments after the fact is beyond.

Instead of argueing because you don't like the point being made, why not consider the point might actually be right. IMO any half intelligent footy person would agree...

What if

My cousin played HF for Tas in 2006 and was opposed to Brad Howard, and he told me he was a good runner, but had no idea.

I knew a heap of young blokes who played against Tyabb and knew Sweeney to be a lazy pot head

I believed losing our Former Captain and B&F was worth some compensation

I thought the risk of recruiting a former champion with premiership experience with a nothing pick would have been a risk worth taking

I rated our player development was shithouse

That when Lovett was recruited (not after) it was a massive mistake. A lazy f*** with no discipline, and selfish as they come.

Also that Gary Ayres is useless

These were controversial threads, and at the end of the day, all of the bullsh** aside... Not sure the issue??

I haven't changed my position. Of any of these arguments.... In hindsight

Lenny, Cripps, Rooey and a few other things I posted have been proved incorrect in some ways and argued well.

[BigMart]

I argued Gary Ayres was not useless.. Stuffed that up, sorry.

BTW there have been countless times I have been well and truly on the wrong track, WRT recruiting, selection and analysis... But I'm just a supporter, so that can be expected. I definitely don't know more than the recruiters or coaches

Sam Fisher, James Gwilt, Terry Milera to name a few

2009 Frontal pressure evolution

These were master strokes of professionals

[plugger66]

BM surely you get why people get pissed off though. There is no point in the thread at all and that is why it gets people pissed off. He was never our player and it was 5 years ago. Big deal that he was brought up by Delideo. That is no need to start a I was right thread and the club stuffed up thread.

[Spinner]

I do remember the caninig I did get for Brad Howard....

Almost as much as when I questioned Justin Sweeneys character...

I copped it for Luke Ball defending

Lovett Bashing

And of course Benny still

I know people don't like to hear things that denigrate the great club they follow, but dont be so blind that you can't see sense

None of these were smart, bold, brilliant predictions by me.... They were common sense followers of footy would have understood

The fact that one eyed bozos can't even admit the ridiculous arguments after the fact is beyond.

Instead of argueing because you don't like the point being made, why not consider the point might actually be right. IMO any half intelligent footy person would agree...

What if

My cousin played HF for Tas in 2006 and was opposed to Brad Howard, and he told me he was a good runner, but had no idea.

I knew a heap of young blokes who played against Tyabb and knew Sweeney to be a lazy pot head

I believed losing our Former Captain and B&F was worth some compensation

I thought the risk of recruiting a former champion with premiership experience with a nothing pick would have been a risk worth taking

I rated our player development was shithouse

That when Lovett was recruited (not after) it was a massive mistake. A lazy f*** with no discipline, and selfish as they come.

Also that Gary Ayres is useless

These were controversial threads, and at the end of the day, all of the bullsh** aside... Not sure the issue??

I haven't changed my position. Of any of these arguments.... In hindsight

Lenny, Cripps, Rooey and a few other things I posted have been proved incorrect in some ways and argued well.

So you had a cousin against Howard... And friends play against Sweeney.

But fail to mention that you also had a computer that had the ability to load player profiles and found that Jamie Cripps did indeed not have a photo to be loaded.

I like your contacts.

[satchmo]

The problem with the hypothetical position is that it bares no responsibility to reality.

IF we took cousins
IF he stayed fit
IF he didn't do drugs
IF he didn't lead someone else (ie: former team mate) astray (and possibly visa versa)
IF he suited the gameplan
IF we made the finals
IF we made the Grand Final
We MIGHT have won

We definitely might have

We might have won anyway

Reality is that ten or so people with the clubs best interest at heart sat down and argued the possibility, and with all the information available to them decided not to do it.

Saying 'but we could have won the flag' means absolutely nothing. It doesn't change anything.

[BigMart]

It's not about whether we took Ben that's the point of the post.... The point has been lost in ridiculous arguments.... Which are even more hypothetical, because they are fanciful...

Point I was making was simple

There are many fools on here who have stupidly tried to argue Ben was average at best at Richmond?

Well, that doesn't seem to be the opinion of a gun who actually played there!

It is of course Only my opinion that Ben may well have assisted StK in 2009..... And that he was well worth the risk.... Anyone you recruit is a risk, his flaws were well document and he was a known quantity. I believe upside was greater than downside... Easy to cut him loose...

One thing that can't be done here though, is

Bash the hypothetical opinion I have.... And the premise of your argument being totally hypothetical.... It a contradiction in terms???

Spinner
Stick to the topic.... Your clutching at straws again

Is the best way you can win an argument to character assassinate??? How about argueing the point??

[dragit]

Sometimes it's good to quit while you are ahead,
You obviously can't do that in this case, but it would still be okay for you to quit.






Or keep going I suppose, what ev's…

[skeptic]

I know I was on a tangent

but you guys are kidding yourselves if you think that this throw away line lead to what happened in the 1st half of 09

it wasn't the players, their will, their hard work, their desire to win a premiership, it wasn't the coaching

the motivation for greatness came cause RL said this line that inspired them dramatically with thta line to do all that stuff

the significance of that moment has been clearly oversold... if u think otherwise ur insulting the players and the coach and all the hardwork/talent/skill/planning etc