''dannyboy... the "black and white" calls you live by are hilarious because there's less "grey" in your logic than a 10 year old's hair'. - lets work through it then shall though this I should ignore, it seems you have this tiresome habit of needing to be pointlessly rude to people you are about to disagree with. Oh and this from a man who has posted about Gibbs and the stupidty of not picking him and um how many times have you seen Gibbs play exactly? and Hansen? And the others? But hey I get it, its okay for Ty to project forward 'cos we know when you do and found to be wrong its not what you meant anyway or you were just having a joke or everyone else took what you said too narrowly (glass houses and all that Ty), perhaps you have taken my stuff too narrowly - But no you wouldn't do that, not Tyrant, not mister fairnes.
'Lets look at reality, as Wolfe implored us in this post.
Our current ruck stocks:
- McLaren' - about as good as Ackland in hitouts, maybe a bit better. Better defensively and nowhere near as good as Ackland around the ground.
-' Bryan' - Have no time for him.
-' DeLuca '- Think Delica is far better up forward and probably equa/betterl in the ruck contests.
-' Aisake' - Probably better already
-' Batson* (cut)'
'There's no one in there who cuts the mustard. Aisake might in a couple of years. Someone in this draft we pick (IF we pick one) might... in a couple of years'.... We must pick someone up, must pick two up in the next two years (and a rookie as well)
'Someone has to bridge the couple of year gap, right?' - Why? McLaren and Deluca with Aisake coming through plus another kid this year coming through. And a couple of years means 3 right? So 3 years paying someone/giving them a spot just so they can fill a gap while we actually get someone good. - Okay maybe that's the plan. If so I will certainly relax a bit. if we take Luey I'll actually be pumped - but then I think the idea its all about midfielders and nothing else is a crock.
'Ackland is slightly better than McLaren', (is he, as a ruckman I mean, around the ground yep, so was Prenda) 'much better than Bryan and shitloads better than DeLuca' (now I know we are allowed to hate DeLuca but he has played okay, provides a good 3rd tall, can he ruck? Na, but he'd do as a stop gap for two years while we develop a new player).. 'that doesn't have to equate to him being all that good (!!) but incrementally better than our current players'.- is he? Or is he more same old same old - and there is the crux really.. You think he is better I think he isn't. I think he is another shit, short ruckman who will always struggle against the league's best and unfortunately for him there are not many short, shit ruckmen to go against (he has to take Carlton off his list now)
'He's also, realistically, going to be the best player available in the PSD (sad though that might be)' - better than some kids that might be available? Better over the course of 3 years? And if so (as in he is all there is) must we use the PSD?.
'He's also, realistically, likely to be a better player than a mature-age recruitment from one of the other leagues.'
- but he's just a stop gap until we get someone good right? In my mind I'd think if you are going to go a stop gap at least go a @#$%&! tall stop gap. Or do you think he wil become a ripper ruckman? Someone we can build a ruck division around? You know, like St Kilda did.
I''ve never seen this Michael Griffiths so I'm guessing, but picking Ackland doesn't preclude doing this as well...' again I hope so
'So from a list point of view, picking Ackland is an incremental benefit.' You say, I say its another McLaren decision, another idea that we do not have to work for this ruckmen, just grab someone else's, even if he is short and no where near the A grader a Murph, a Tex or a Simmo must crave, but hey with Gibbs I guess we won't need ruckmen will we.
'danny's posts read as hysterical because there's no argument attached. "He's shit" is fine but McLaren et.al are shitter - the are arguments just ones you disagree with.' no to you read they read as hysterical because you disagree with them and we all know what Ty Ty wants must be whats right.
So what's the argument?
1) '3 year deal - yes, thats probably a strange decision' - strange and another player likely people like you will want to delist in a year or two but we'll have to hang on to (try to remember that Ty when you want him gone next year will you, no trantrums or dummy spits about the clkub or list mangement or development of the kiddies now, remember this so we do not get bombarded with 3,000 dummy spits again)
2) 'we should be giving our home-grown talent a go - but we don't have any that are remotely ready' (and there is the point, are we actually going to take this on baord, and you are right we might and if so I am quite happy to blow out a big sigh and relax, or is this, again, a short-cut attempt. A Mott Angwin Smith McLaren attempt?)... 'though we should be looking to ease them in with assitance from someone readier.. (like Ackland' - why not McLaren?)
3) 'We should have some homegrown talent ready - quite true, but thats not Ackland's fault' - and if you would bother to read instead of grabbing your gonads like some big would be thinker you'd actually read where at least twice I have said this has nothing to do with Ackland and everything to do with the club making this decision, but hey Ty never let the facts get in the way of a good old Mightier than thou hey?)
'4) we might now not pick some home-grown talent in the National - maybe, maybe not... but thats not Ackland's fault either' (read above, and if we do not it will be the club's fault which really is the point of those of us against this decision).
'So to me, picking Ackland brings in an incremental benefit' (which I disagree with but hey, use this term as if its fact) 'and there's no "greater" benefit size out there that we've overlooked with THAT pick' (we do not know that do we, not yet, thats to be proven in the future, you know that one Ty - what's good for the goose is good for the gander)..... 'but there are caveats on it being a clever move and they're around his transition plan out of the way for someone when they're ready' - which we have been oh so good at the last 6 or 7 years haven't we? But hey, maybe you are right, maybe we will get it right this time - shit I hope so (and you want him gone already huh?)..
'The caveats (picking a ruckman in the draft somewhere) haven't had a chance NOT to occur yet.' (see above with no better players comment of yours)
'so.... gotta say dannyboy... if you are indeed upset about something that hasn't NOT occured yet, that does seem pretty hysterical to me!' - , you run aaround like a headless chook over Gibbs not being poicked up 3 months out from the national draft, and then talk about me being hysterical, but hang on, maybe you are not so concerned as you make out, maybe you are just having fun with Gibbs and will be happy with the cluib no matter who they choose, at least you'll give that new player a chance hey?
'OR is it that you reckon DeLuca and Bryan are better players?' I think Deluca is not Bryan - like Ackland and McLaren he is too short.
'OR would you prefer to pick Aisake and develop him on the run?' (yep I would promote Aisake and give him the rucking duties in the Bullies 1's and if needs arise (injuries etc) give him a run and see, and Setanta as well for that matter)
'OR do you find Ackland indicative of a series of poor decisions' (bingo! Its a history thing, you know a this then this then this, but when will we do this kind of thing. Maybe the club will finally try drafting someone with real picks and try to develop some ruckmen to go with these midfielders we are developing - or is 'all the eggs with Aisake' as it seems at the moment fine strategically? 'in the past (again, not recognising the club's right to realise its past errors and correct them with what, for all we know, is a 3 year plan)??' So now you can relax right, if the club picks someone other than Gibbs you'll see that as oart of a 3 year plan right? I mean you will not threaten to be bored with football, or stop going to the football etc if We stick with Denis right? Cos that might be part of the 3 year plan right? And Denis might be a good stop gap right????
I''m just having trouble spotting the argument from the hysterics' - try spotting your own hypocritcal shit before worrying about mine Ty.
Login
Register
FAQ
