The List is Good

[HighettMan]

On 15th but all developing sides work thier way up.

Melbourne are below us atm but will be top 4 again next year.

It’s been a developing side since 2013.

The 2009-2010 side that never was, was a developing side since 1999. What's your point.

That side hit its stride in 2004, winning 10 games on the trot, being a kick away from a grand final and had two All-Australians that year and the year before.

That’s my point.

Yeah we had sharp upward trajectory in 04 for sure then we dipped and plateaued for 5 years till 2009.

This current list had a sharp upward trajectory in 16 and 17. This list also had a dip and the sign's are we could rise sharply again.

Still not getting your point. You clearly believe development cycles should all be the same or should all just sharply and spectacularly rise to a flag in record breaking time and without a few hurdles along the way. There are rare exceptions but we are not one of them. Take Melbourne for example, prelim one year, wooden spoon the next. They will possibly be top 4 again next year.

BTW your signature is disgusting and repulsive.

Do you have a mother, sister, girlfriend or wife?

In the age of trying to educate the community about violence against women your signature is very out of step with how we should behave towards women.

My point is that if we’re still developing with largely the same list for the past six seasons and we still have no star players, no AA’s since 2014, not pushing for finals and can’t attract that star free agent the club keeps promising. Shiel practically halved his potential salary by telling us “thanks but no thanks.” This is more than just a case of the list “still developing,” this is the club having to do a rebuild of Richo’s previous rebuild.

So did you miss the point where I called you out on your disgraceful signature? Or do you think it is an appropriate way to treat woman?

[HighettMan]

I think we have started well by changing the coach. I think our list can improve markedly through trades and picks but my god it was refreshing to see the young blokes play with freedom.

So we are on our way to correcting & connecting the 3 pillars, coaching, recruiting & development.

It started last week. The new coach circus effect will dissipate quicky but I don't think we will hear the sound of a dead cat bouncing because we have a good list that has heen cruelled by jnjury.

What's changed in the past 2 weeks other than the coach. Jake is getting some touch and run in his legs jow that his pre season is almost completed and Jack L is back in the side. This guy alone creates real hardness and intensity and makes his teammates walk a little taller it would seem.

7 wins and we are still a mathematical chance of finals. Look through the list of players to come back too. Like I say a good list that can only get better.

How foolish do the board look now, they sacked a coach when all the club needed was Jake with some run in his legs & a small forward who is just establishing himself in the 22 to return from a knee injury. As long as these two stay on the park we can't lose!

How's the bring back Richo petition going?

You really don't pay attention do you. Richo is gone now and I couldn't care any less worrying about what's in the rear vision mirror.

Your other points are just petty childish comments.

[Ghost Like]

It was unfair, you never did say whether Richo should stay on or be replaced. You prefer not to make a definitive comment, deflect with questions rather than answer them, endeavour to be sarcastic if belittling fails.

You speak of posters identifying things to suit their narrative. I am suggesting linking Carlisle and Lonie is a hail Mary to suit a narrative not wanting to acknowledge a change of coach.

[SydneySainter]

On 15th but all developing sides work thier way up.

Melbourne are below us atm but will be top 4 again next year.

It’s been a developing side since 2013.

The 2009-2010 side that never was, was a developing side since 1999. What's your point.

That side hit its stride in 2004, winning 10 games on the trot, being a kick away from a grand final and had two All-Australians that year and the year before.

That’s my point.

Yeah we had sharp upward trajectory in 04 for sure then we dipped and plateaued for 5 years till 2009.

This current list had a sharp upward trajectory in 16 and 17. This list also had a dip and the sign's are we could rise sharply again.

Still not getting your point. You clearly believe development cycles should all be the same or should all just sharply and spectacularly rise to a flag in record breaking time and without a few hurdles along the way. There are rare exceptions but we are not one of them. Take Melbourne for example, prelim one year, wooden spoon the next. They will possibly be top 4 again next year.

BTW your signature is disgusting and repulsive.

Do you have a mother, sister, girlfriend or wife?

In the age of trying to educate the community about violence against women your signature is very out of step with how we should behave towards women.

My point is that if we’re still developing with largely the same list for the past six seasons and we still have no star players, no AA’s since 2014, not pushing for finals and can’t attract that star free agent the club keeps promising. Shiel practically halved his potential salary by telling us “thanks but no thanks.” This is more than just a case of the list “still developing,” this is the club having to do a rebuild of Richo’s previous rebuild.

So did you miss the point where I called you out on your disgraceful signature? Or do you think it is an appropriate way to treat woman?

Okay, I’ll bite.

You’re choosing to spin the context of my signature to make yourself appear as if you have the default moral high ground in this argument. I can accept why others would find it inappropriate and I’m happy to remove it if it offends, but to suggest that I endorse what you’re suggesting is unfounded smear.

[Life Long Saint]

You’re choosing to spin the context of my signature to make yourself appear as if you have the default moral high ground in this argument. I can accept why others would find it inappropriate and I’m happy to remove it if it offends, but to suggest that I endorse what you’re suggesting is unfounded smear.

Nowhere in that sig does it indicate violence, rape, or inappropriate behaviour.
Are men and women not allowed to have sex any more? Or is nobody allowed to have sex with the prom queen?

[Crossy66]

You’re choosing to spin the context of my signature to make yourself appear as if you have the default moral high ground in this argument. I can accept why others would find it inappropriate and I’m happy to remove it if it offends, but to suggest that I endorse what you’re suggesting is unfounded smear.

Nowhere in that sig does it indicate violence, rape, or inappropriate behaviour.
Are men and women not allowed to have sex any more? Or is nobody allowed to have sex with the prom queen?

I am glad someone called this out. I accept that a minority wont understand why its offensive and will try and twist the context

[HighettMan]

I suppose in the end it is a small internet enclave where mostly middle aged to older white self entitled men lurk. These incredibly antiquated views are bound to be openly expressed from the safety of anonymous social media accounts as a result.

Maybe get your mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to read the above, if you're not too embarrassed to let them that is.

[saynta]

Thankfully, I turned off the signature part of SS years ago, so I don't get to read crappy ego driven signature drivel.

I suggest other users do the same.

[Life Long Saint]

You’re choosing to spin the context of my signature to make yourself appear as if you have the default moral high ground in this argument. I can accept why others would find it inappropriate and I’m happy to remove it if it offends, but to suggest that I endorse what you’re suggesting is unfounded smear.

Nowhere in that sig does it indicate violence, rape, or inappropriate behaviour.
Are men and women not allowed to have sex any more? Or is nobody allowed to have sex with the prom queen?

I am glad someone called this out. I accept that a minority wont understand why its offensive and will try and twist the context

I wasn't judging its appropriateness or otherwise.
But show me exactly where in the signature it indicates "violence against women". Which was the offensive part of it according to "SydneySainter".

If you're sensitive enough to be offended by a signature, then you should explain what back story you've imagined in that short sentance.

[HighettMan]

You’re choosing to spin the context of my signature to make yourself appear as if you have the default moral high ground in this argument. I can accept why others would find it inappropriate and I’m happy to remove it if it offends, but to suggest that I endorse what you’re suggesting is unfounded smear.

Nowhere in that sig does it indicate violence, rape, or inappropriate behaviour.
Are men and women not allowed to have sex any more? Or is nobody allowed to have sex with the prom queen?

I am glad someone called this out. I accept that a minority wont understand why its offensive and will try and twist the context

I wasn't judging its appropriateness or otherwise.
But show me exactly where in the signature it indicates "violence against women". Which was the offensive part of it according to "SydneySainter".

If you're sensitive enough to be offended by a signature, then you should explain what back story you've imagined in that short sentance.

You are getting a bit lost in symantec's possibily.
Why do these types of social issues have to be deflected by irrelevant issues such as "if" someone is offended. Like racism, isn't it just time we just call out bad behavior towards other people...irrespective of race, sex etc.

Again, like racism I suppose you first have to understand what it is which leads me to your point about questioning where the violence is.

Maybe ask woman how they feel about the statement in the signature to get some insight. Im guessing the responses will be along the lines of something like the prom queen being a prize for the jocks taking and controlling.

Again like rasism if you seek to understand it, ask a person that experiences rasim what thier views are.

[Ghost Like]

I suppose in the end it is a small internet enclave where mostly middle aged to older white self entitled men lurk. These incredibly antiquated views are bound to be openly expressed from the safety of anonymous social media accounts as a result.

Maybe get your mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to read the above, if you're not too embarrassed to let them that is.

You and SydneySainter were having a good discussion about the list until the point you deflected to his sig. I would have thought if your real issue was his sig you'd report him after a PM expressing why you find it offensive and asking he remove it. Instead it was the "look at me" indignation...end of discussion.

Now we have your other faves, "white entitled men" and "safety of anonymous social media" (of which you are one, likely both). A very interesting insight. What wrong are you desperately trying to make up for? Don't answer that, I imagine it's extremely personal.

[Life Long Saint]

You are getting a bit lost in symantec's possibily.
Why do these types of social issues have to be deflected by irrelevant issues such as "if" someone is offended. Like racism, isn't it just time we just call out bad behavior towards other people...irrespective of race, sex etc.

Again, like racism I suppose you first have to understand what it is which leads me to your point about questioning where the violence is.

Maybe ask woman how they feel about the statement in the signature to get some insight. Im guessing the responses will be along the lines of something like the prom queen being a prize for the jocks taking and controlling.

Again like rasism if you seek to understand it, ask a person that experiences rasim what thier views are.

Nope. I'm not getting lost in anything. I just don't go around looking to be offended by everything.
How do you know that the "winner" isn't already the boyfriend of the prom queen?
The Prom Queen might be the one that wants the "winner". You're assuming the "winner" just takes the prom queen.
My point is that you've read an awful lot of back story into a movie quote about winning and losing.
I personally don't like the signature but I'm not offended enough to call it out.

Again, the quote said nothing of violence or even suggested anything non-consensual. That's all on you!

I'll ask my wife tonight what she thinks of it and whether or not she's offended by it.

But really, the best person to ask is the writer of the movie. After all, it's their line.

[Crossy66]

You’re choosing to spin the context of my signature to make yourself appear as if you have the default moral high ground in this argument. I can accept why others would find it inappropriate and I’m happy to remove it if it offends, but to suggest that I endorse what you’re suggesting is unfounded smear.

Nowhere in that sig does it indicate violence, rape, or inappropriate behaviour.
Are men and women not allowed to have sex any more? Or is nobody allowed to have sex with the prom queen?

I am glad someone called this out. I accept that a minority wont understand why its offensive and will try and twist the context

I wasn't judging its appropriateness or otherwise.
But show me exactly where in the signature it indicates "violence against women". Which was the offensive part of it according to "SydneySainter".

If you're sensitive enough to be offended by a signature, then you should explain what back story you've imagined in that short sentance.

Perhaps read through your response again and consider the ambiguity in the two paragraphs.
This is a footy forum so I am not going to try and explain a non footy issue to a particular demographic - you are who you are, some get it and a minority wont.

[HighettMan]

You are getting a bit lost in symantec's possibily.
Why do these types of social issues have to be deflected by irrelevant issues such as "if" someone is offended. Like racism, isn't it just time we just call out bad behavior towards other people...irrespective of race, sex etc.

Again, like racism I suppose you first have to understand what it is which leads me to your point about questioning where the violence is.

Maybe ask woman how they feel about the statement in the signature to get some insight. Im guessing the responses will be along the lines of something like the prom queen being a prize for the jocks taking and controlling.

Again like rasism if you seek to understand it, ask a person that experiences rasim what thier views are.

Nope. I'm not getting lost in anything. I just don't go around looking to be offended by everything.
How do you know that the "winner" isn't already the boyfriend of the prom queen?
The Prom Queen might be the one that wants the "winner". You're assuming the "winner" just takes the prom queen.
My point is that you've read an awful lot of back story into a movie quote about winning and losing.
I personally don't like the signature but I'm not offended enough to call it out.

Again, the quote said nothing of violence or even suggested anything non-consensual. That's all on you!

I'll ask my wife tonight what she thinks of it and whether or not she's offended by it.

But really, the best person to ask is the writer of the movie. After all, it's their line.

Yadda yadda whatever....sounds like I boo him becuse he's a dirty player and not because he's black, or I was going to say yes to marriage equality but now I'm not because they've talked too much about it.

[SydneySainter]

I suppose in the end it is a small internet enclave where mostly middle aged to older white self entitled men lurk. These incredibly antiquated views are bound to be openly expressed from the safety of anonymous social media accounts as a result.

Maybe get your mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to read the above, if you're not too embarrassed to let them that is.

I have removed the signature, as I ultimately have as much attachment to it as the movie I lifted it from.

For what it’s worth, I agree with you in that the signature was inappropriate, but to suggest that I endorse what your suggesting is an unwarranted accusation.

I’ve seen enough of your posts to know that you struggle to argue the point of topic and when presented with a point of view which conflicts with yours, you resort to deflection tactics by attacking the character of the poster, either by potting the value of their supporter “loyalty” or spin-doctoring with the argument that this is your interpretation, so the poster must be a bad person.

You’re being as big a hypercrit as those so-called entitled middle-aged white men you’ve referred to on more than one occasion and as for the safety of anonymous social media accounts, you’re throwing your grenades from just that.

[freely]

I suppose in the end it is a small internet enclave where mostly middle aged to older white self entitled men lurk. These incredibly antiquated views are bound to be openly expressed from the safety of anonymous social media accounts as a result.

Maybe get your mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to read the above, if you're not too embarrassed to let them that is.

I have removed the signature, as I ultimately have as much attachment to it as the movie I lifted it from.

For what it’s worth, I agree with you in that the signature was inappropriate, but to suggest that I endorse what your suggesting is an unwarranted accusation.

I’ve seen enough of your posts to know that you struggle to argue the point of topic and when presented with a point of view which conflicts with yours, you resort to deflection tactics by attacking the character of the poster, either by potting the value of their supporter “loyalty” or spin-doctoring with the argument that this is your interpretation, so the poster must be a bad person.

You’re being as big a hypercrit as those so-called entitled middle-aged white men you’ve referred to on more than one occasion and as for the safety of anonymous social media accounts, you’re throwing your grenades from just that.

Thanks, SydneySainter, for removing the sig.

[HighettMan]

I suppose in the end it is a small internet enclave where mostly middle aged to older white self entitled men lurk. These incredibly antiquated views are bound to be openly expressed from the safety of anonymous social media accounts as a result.

Maybe get your mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to read the above, if you're not too embarrassed to let them that is.

I have removed the signature, as I ultimately have as much attachment to it as the movie I lifted it from.

For what it’s worth, I agree with you in that the signature was inappropriate, but to suggest that I endorse what your suggesting is an unwarranted accusation.

I’ve seen enough of your posts to know that you struggle to argue the point of topic and when presented with a point of view which conflicts with yours, you resort to deflection tactics by attacking the character of the poster, either by potting the value of their supporter “loyalty” or spin-doctoring with the argument that this is your interpretation, so the poster must be a bad person.

You’re being as big a hypercrit as those so-called entitled middle-aged white men you’ve referred to on more than one occasion and as for the safety of anonymous social media accounts, you’re throwing your grenades from just that.

To be fair to me I struggle to argue with points of view that can be deconstructed by a 7 year old.

Mate but seriously good on you for taking it onboard. For what it's worth from an anonymous poster, respect you taking the feedback.


Now where where we with the mindless footy stuff...oh that's right I was potting you for not agreeing with me.

This list can play finals next year if we have luck with injuries...and if Ratts or Lyon doesn't change too much. Who ever is coach just needs to be good at press conferences and be one of the boys.

[HighettMan]

I suppose in the end it is a small internet enclave where mostly middle aged to older white self entitled men lurk. These incredibly antiquated views are bound to be openly expressed from the safety of anonymous social media accounts as a result.

Maybe get your mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to read the above, if you're not too embarrassed to let them that is.

You and SydneySainter were having a good discussion about the list until the point you deflected to his sig. I would have thought if your real issue was his sig you'd report him after a PM expressing why you find it offensive and asking he remove it. Instead it was the "look at me" indignation...end of discussion.

Now we have your other faves, "white entitled men" and "safety of anonymous social media" (of which you are one, likely both). A very interesting insight. What wrong are you desperately trying to make up for? Don't answer that, I imagine it's extremely personal.

Offence? You really don't pay attention do you. Have you got a foam beer can you can throw at the TV by chance?

I normally don't report, I'm an advocate for forums finding their own way of moderation openly and collectively. Some background re the sig, I've previously called out that sig, just like I call out rasism. I do it openly. Just like I call out relentles agendas against individuals at the club which get mistaken for blind faith which couldn't be further from the truth. Example. Richo who? ...

[Ghost Like]

Yes you do, I've noticed that, we all have. As it should always be. What I did notice though when you opened the threads on Racism and the Goodes Doco is that you never opened with your opinion. You waited until you could target someone else's thoughts. Interesting.

Relentless agendas...seems to be a theme.

"Foam beer throw", there's a new one. Reaching deep into your bag of stereotypes now.

[HighettMan]

Yes you do, I've noticed that, we all have. As it should always be. What I did notice though when you opened the threads on Racism and the Goodes Doco is that you never opened with your opinion. You waited until you could target someone else's thoughts. Interesting.

Relentless agendas...seems to be a theme.

"Foam beer throw", there's a new one. Reaching deep into your bag of stereotypes now.

You say "we all have" like you are on some sort of committee or are you invoking Nixon's silent majority recruitment process. Funny.

You REALLY don't pay attention do you.

I reckon my sig is a fairly big opinion.

[Life Long Saint]

Yadda yadda whatever....sounds like I boo him becuse he's a dirty player and not because he's black, or I was going to say yes to marriage equality but now I'm not because they've talked too much about it.

Judgemental much?
For the record.
I did not boo Adam Goodes. I agree with his stance...question his execution at times.
Totally voted yes and have questioned friendships with those that voted no.

But go ahead and pigeon-hole me! You ignroant, judgemental keyboard warrior!

[Ghost Like]

Yes you do, I've noticed that, we all have. As it should always be. What I did notice though when you opened the threads on Racism and the Goodes Doco is that you never opened with your opinion. You waited until you could target someone else's thoughts. Interesting.

Relentless agendas...seems to be a theme.

"Foam beer throw", there's a new one. Reaching deep into your bag of stereotypes now.

You say "we all have" like you are on some sort of committee or are you invoking Nixon's silent majority recruitment process. Funny.

You REALLY don't pay attention do you.

I reckon my sig is a fairly big opinion.

You keep telling me that but that's as far as you get.

The self righteous are the self serving.

Again with the deflection, nothing of substance. Ricky Nixon, Christine Nixon...oh President Nixon. Still a touch upset the silent majority saw through Shorten?

[HighettMan]

Yadda yadda whatever....sounds like I boo him becuse he's a dirty player and not because he's black, or I was going to say yes to marriage equality but now I'm not because they've talked too much about it.

Judgemental much?
For the record.
I did not boo Adam Goodes. I agree with his stance...question his execution at times.
Totally voted yes and have questioned friendships with those that voted no.

But go ahead and pigeon-hole me! You ignroant, judgemental keyboard warrior!

I take most of that back then. My apologies. Clearly I misjudged you based on the discussion about appropriate behaviour towards women.

[HighettMan]

Yes you do, I've noticed that, we all have. As it should always be. What I did notice though when you opened the threads on Racism and the Goodes Doco is that you never opened with your opinion. You waited until you could target someone else's thoughts. Interesting.

Relentless agendas...seems to be a theme.

"Foam beer throw", there's a new one. Reaching deep into your bag of stereotypes now.

You say "we all have" like you are on some sort of committee or are you invoking Nixon's silent majority recruitment process. Funny.

You REALLY don't pay attention do you.

I reckon my sig is a fairly big opinion.

You keep telling me that but that's as far as you get.

The self righteous are the self serving.

Again with the deflection, nothing of substance. Ricky Nixon, Christine Nixon...oh President Nixon. Still a touch upset the silent majority saw through Shorten?

If it helpz do ya just wanna just keep the convo on footy stuff.

SAINTS ROCK!

[saynta]

Yadda yadda whatever....sounds like I boo him becuse he's a dirty player and not because he's black, or I was going to say yes to marriage equality but now I'm not because they've talked too much about it.

Judgemental much?
For the record.
I did not boo Adam Goodes. I agree with his stance...question his execution at times.
Totally voted yes and have questioned friendships with those that voted no.

But go ahead and pigeon-hole me! You ignroant, judgemental keyboard warrior!

I take most of that back then. My apologies. Clearly I misjudged you based on the discussion about appropriate behaviour towards women.

I never booed Goodes either, but I voted no and don'y have a problem with people who voted yes. In fact, I have never asked anyone whether they voted yes or no as it is none of my business.

Wouldn't have a clue which way the missus voted either. Marriage question or election. Don't care either.