I just watched a replay of footy classifieds and was not happy with Garrys comment.

I get the feeling with his lack of knowledge and throw away lines, he isn't passionate about the club.

I just wonder if he is anything near Jimmys passion for the club. I wonder sometimes.

You don't have to wonder: Jimmy is more passionate about the club. He became President...

But that doesn't mean Garry Lyon doesn't love the club.

He is trying to be impartial and I think people read it, rightly or wrongly, as indifference.

I wouldn't judge anyone on their throwaway lines...

He is trying to be impartial and I think people read it, rightly or wrongly, as indifference.

Impartiality is an interesting point, although I'm not sure that it really applies that much to this comment (he could have just as easliy left it unsaid). I do think it was a fair comment to make though.

The conspicuous bias of Eddie McGuire didn't seem to damage his career.

Would people prefer Garry to be more like Eddie I wonder?

edit: P.S.

I wouldn't judge anyone on their throwaway lines...

What would you judge them on?

Impartiality is an interesting point, although I'm not sure that it really applies that much to this comment (he could have just as easliy left it unsaid). I do think it was a fair comment to make though.

The conspicuous bias of Eddie McGuire didn't seem to damage his career.

Would people prefer Garry to be more like Eddie I wonder?

It is a comment that could have applied to 'any other game' that was as poor as the game on Sunday. Any other game that didn't involve the team that he was a star player for.

I don't think Eddie is a particulary good example as he doesn't give comment on the game; he used to host a show that never got close to talking about footy and, also, Millionaire.

edit: P.S.

What would you judge them on?

I judge people on their passions, on their beliefs, on their compulsions, on who they constantly stand up for, on who they constantly defend, on who they lay blame, on who they think is blameless, etc.

I judge people on their passions, on their beliefs, on their compulsions, on who they constantly stand up for, on who they constantly defend, on who they lay blame, on who they think is blameless, etc.

And how do you judge these things? Number of games played?

And how do you judge these things? Number of games played?

If you are not in a position to know these things, or satisfactorily glean them, then you shouldn't be judging them.

You can judge Garry as a journo, Michael Newton as a footy player, Jimmy Stynes as a President, but that's it.

Unless you know them personally, then go to town.

If you are not in a position to know these things, or satisfactorily glean them, then you shouldn't be judging them.

You can judge Garry as a journo, Michael Newton as a footy player, Jimmy Stynes as a President, but that's it.

Unless you know them personally, then go to town.

Are you saying that you can only judge people "on their passions, on their beliefs, on their compulsions, on who they constantly stand up for, on who they constantly defend, on who they lay blame, on who they think is blameless" if you know them personally?

Are you saying that you can only judge people "on their passions, on their beliefs, on their compulsions, on who they constantly stand up for, on who they constantly defend, on who they lay blame, on who they think is blameless" if you know them personally?

No, but if you do, then judge away...

If you think you have satisfactorily gleaned them, then judge away...

I just don't believe many here have satisfactorily gleaned those they judge.

No, but if you do, then judge away...

If you think you have satisfactorily gleaned them, then judge away...

I just don't believe many here have satisfactorily gleaned those they judge.

Unless you know them personally, then go to town.

Seems to be a bit of a dsicrepency here mate.

Let's go back to basics - how should one glean information about someone's commitment/love for the club (passions, beleifs, compulsions etc.) without knowing these people personally?

Do you think that you have gleaned enough of this kind of information to comment?

Do you think other people on this site can glean enough of this information, without knowing these people personally, such that they are entitled to comment also?

Seems to be a bit of a dsicrepency here mate.

Let's go back to basics - how should one glean information about someone's commitment/love for the club (passions, beleifs, compulsions etc.) without knowing these people personally?

Do you think that you have gleaned enough of this kind of information to comment?

Do you think other people on this site can glean enough of this information, without knowing these people personally, such that they are entitled to comment also?

From what is written and said by the person.

I only hope that they do not read, equally, into the 'throwaway line' of Garrys' that set off this little two-and-fro between you and I.

From what is written and said by the person.

I only hope that they do not read, equally, into the 'throwaway line' of Garrys' that set off this little two-and-fro between you and I.

Well that line technically was something said by the person, but I agree with you that people shouldn't make too much of it.

What about questions 2 and 3?

Do you think that you have gleaned enough of this kind of information to comment?

Do you think other people on this site can glean enough of this information, without knowing these people personally, such that they are entitled to comment also?

One word answers are fine.

Well that line technically was something said by the person, but I agree with you that people shouldn't make too much of it.

What about questions 2 and 3?

One word answers are fine.

If they take more note of an article or an extended passage on FC or MMM (or whatever radio station he's on now), than a 4 second statement before a segue into another topic prompted by the FC producer.

And anyone can judge him as a journo from what I mentioned above.

But, if you do not know the guy, you cannot adequately judge him. It won't stop people from doing it though.

If they take more note of an article or an extended passage on FC or MMM (or whatever radio station he's on now), than a 4 second statement before a segue into another topic prompted by the FC producer.

And anyone can judge him as a journo from what I mentioned above.

But, if you do not know the guy, you cannot adequately judge him. It won't stop people from doing it though.

Slippery one, aren't you?

Since you will not give a straight answer and since you keep contradicting yourself, I will list the possibilities:

1. Yes, you have gleaned sufficient information to judge these people on their commitment to the club.

Yes, other forum participants are capable of doing so without knowing these people personally.

Verdict: Then you have no right to make comments like this: "Unless you know them personally, then go to town." You have no reason to think that anyone else's veiws are any less valid than your own, provided that they give equally good reasons for them.

2. Yes, you have gleaned sufficient information to judge these people on their commitment to the club.

No, other forum participants are not capable of doing so without knowing these people personally.

Verdict: You are arrogant and deluded. Let's hope that you at least know these people personally yourself. Your comment that people can judge another person's commitment to the club "from what is written and said by the person", will need to be retracted.

3. No, you have not gleaned sufficient information to judge these people on their commitment to the club.

Yes, other forum participants are capable of doing so without knowing these people personally.

Verdict: Can't see this one happening actually but if this was the case, then you should not be making judgements yourself and should pay more attention to what others are writing. You should also probably enrol in some kind of confidence building activity.

4. No, you have not gleaned sufficient information to judge these people on their commitment to the club.

No, other forum participants are not capable of doing so without knowing these people personally.

Verdict: This is all a big waste of time, but at least you are being consistent. Unfortunately you will have to retract your statement that Jimmy is passionate about the club, because you will have admitted that you can't be sure about that, despite the fact that he has volunteered his time to chair it.

Thanks for playing Socratic dialogue. Your score: 0/4

I can't blame Garry for his comment. The first half of football was not fit to be worthy of a local seconds comp. I seriously considered leaving the game at half time. The only reason I didn't is because it's not what I do. I watch all Dees games (at the ground or on TV) regardless of the score because I would hate to leave/or not watch in case I missed something special and I'm a bloody tragic that thinks that there is always a chance for us regardless of the score. But I wouldn't blame anyone else that had had enough of the tripe that both teams served up.

I think Gary purposely acts a bit naive about melbourne issues so he doesnt seem like Eddie or Brayshaw who are so biased in the media. When you have a job in the media you cant be respected if you are constantly building up your favoured club. Look at how hated eddie has become.

I can't blame Garry for his comment. The first half of football was not fit to be worthy of a local seconds comp. I seriously considered leaving the game at half time. The only reason I didn't is because it's not what I do. I watch all Dees games (at the ground or on TV) regardless of the score because I would hate to leave/or not watch in case I missed something special and I'm a bloody tragic that thinks that there is always a chance for us regardless of the score. But I wouldn't blame anyone else that had had enough of the tripe that both teams served up.

Its interesting to hear how so many people couldnt stand to watch the game on sunday. I agree the skills and execution from both sides were below par, but I was more than satisfied with our endeavour and attack on the footy - in fact was quite pleased. So was the ol' man.

At least they're having a dip and putting their heads over the ball when its their time to go (sans morton). The skill level and game plan will improve in the coming years for various reasons, not least of which strauss, blease, watts etc. For now, so long as theyre competitive and have a crack, I enjoy watching them.

I'm sorry but were we the only team on the ground?

Are we the team trying to make finals?

Have we ever played that sort of uber-flooding, 18 man rolling zone crap?

Yes the game was [censored], and boring as all hell, but we did not dictate the style of play for three quarters!

you'd have thought so ... but how about this ...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04...m?section=sport

in particular i really like this:

"Melbourne like to get a lot of numbers behind the footy and push into defence which changes the game plan and the way we play a fair bit, if you look at the score," he said.

"So that probably puts it down to how it was scrappy on the weekend and probably not the ideal spectacle what we're we're used to seeing"

this almost made me vomit my breakfast when i saw this on fox sports news this morning.

adelaide play an entertaining game normally??? where/when???

our fault? we play with numbers behind the ball??? where/when??? if anything we are trying to develop a back 6 that plays one on one accountable football that can stand on its own.

pretty feeble excuse from the AFC if you ask me given the abhorrent way they seem to be playing football...

Here's a link to a previous Garry discussion.

Feel free to read, bump, merge or ignore.

My views haven't changed on the matter, although another poster, Distance Demon, did just point out that:

He should be commended for that at least.

Yeah, it was a stupid argument then, and its a stupid pointless argument now.

I'm sorry but were we the only team on the ground?

Are we the team trying to make finals?

Have we ever played that sort of uber-flooding, 18 man rolling zone crap?

Yes the game was [censored], and boring as all hell, but we did not dictate the style of play for three quarters!

Jaded you have your head in the sand if you think that Melbourne's style of at least one loose man back, coupled with a 3-man forward line didn't contribute to the rubbish that we saw on Sunday.

Adelaide NEVER looked like losing the game and so they played out time by taking the minimum amount of risks both physically and in terms of losing possession. Why shouldn't they chip it around if we refuse to man them up when we're 4 goals down?

I really liked him as a player, my favourite player for about 10 of his 14 or so years as a player. He definitely wasn't soft.

He sorta lost me after that. A bit smarmy for my liking and something of a Triplechins' toady. He was very brave as a player, not sure he is so brave as a commentator/media person; he plays it very safe.

Spot on. As a member, financial contributor and supporter of MFC I will ask any question of any official, ex - player or officer of MFC. No one is above accountability to the members.

P.S. Did you lose a year of Gary's service in the quote or has the original post been edited?? <_<

What the hell is Garry Lyon accountable for when he is no longer a paid employee of the club?

What the hell is Garry Lyon accountable for when he is no longer a paid employee of the club?

As a past player who may in some role represent the Club publicly or have or has had some involvement behind the scenes in the Club I am entitled to ask any question I choose of his actions in that regard. It does not have to involve an employee/employer relationship with Club.

As a past player I am more than entitled to question claims of what he allegedly does or does not do for the Club.

As a past player who may in some role represent the Club publicly or have or has had some involvement behind the scenes in the Club I am entitled to ask any question I choose of his actions in that regard. It does not have to involve an employee/employer relationship with Club.

As a past player I am more than entitled to question claims of what he allegedly does or does not do for the Club.

What a load of carp. The fact that he is in the media doesn't mean that he represents the club publicly, and he is entitled to express his opinions of the club whether they be positive or negative.

And what exactly do you mean by "some involvement behind the scenes in the club"? Yes he does honourary work such as hosting functions, but are you suggesting that he is a powerbroker?

You are getting sucked in by Hazy's McCarthyist witchhunt of Stynes and any of his associates.

What a load of carp. The fact that he is in the media doesn't mean that he represents the club publicly, and he is entitled to express his opinions of the club whether they be positive or negative.

And what exactly do you mean by "some involvement behind the scenes in the club"? Yes he does honourary work such as hosting functions, but are you suggesting that he is a powerbroker?

You are getting sucked in by Hazy's McCarthyist witchhunt of Stynes and any of his associates.

Where did I question his right to have opinion? I did not. Never mind Mo just beat that chest.

If you think he is doing no more than clicking a butter knife against his water glass then I won't spoil your little dream.

And is Hazy "entitled to express his opinions of the club whether they be positive or negative"?

Where did I question his right to have opinion? I did not. Never mind Mo just beat that chest.

If you think he is doing no more than clicking a butter knife against his water glass then I won't spoil your little dream.

And is Hazy "entitled to express his opinions of the club whether they be positive or negative"?

Well if you are in the know as to Lyon's behind the scenes involvement within the club, why don't you share it with the rest of us? Or are you blowing hot air as usual?

I didn't watch Footy Classifieds, but did Gary say he turned off because Melbourne were playing terrible footy, or because the game itself was terrible?

The way I saw it, he said he turned off because the game was appalling to watch. I didn't read into it that it was Melbourne that was appalling. And you're right, because it takes two to tango. If we play at the level we played at on Sunday, you can bet your bottom dollar that the game doesn't play out like it did last weekend. Geelong won't be kicking it around on half-back.