Is Liam Jurrah a star for the Mfc?

[Disco Demons 92]

my earlier answer to this thread were spot on....every post after it is a watste of time

[Kiss of Death 708]

This poll will be great to bump at the end of the next season after Liam's had a year to settle.

[Sir Why You Little 34,770]

You completely just missed the point didn't you

No i Just used the names as an example. I was not saying it was your opinion at all.

I mean this thread is outrageous-Darren Cuthbertson is being spoken of in hushed tones!!!!

[RudeBoy 164]

Too right he's a star. This is a kid who travelled 300 kms from the desert to get on a plane and come to Melbourne to try out in the VFL at the end of 2007. He then turned his back on Collingwood's VFL team to return home to care for his best mate who was dying of cancer. Then he puts his hand up to get drafted to a club where he knows no-one and to live in a big city completely removed from his family and friends, where he has no-one with whom he can speak his own language. Too right he's a star.

I first saw Liam play 4 yrs ago at Yuendumu and was stunned at his ability, poise and self confidence on the field. Remember, he has never completed a pre-season training regimen, so next year he'll be bigger, stronger and fitter. Naturally I'm biased, but within 2 years he'll be the biggest name in the AFL - bar none.

[Ryan Dee 140]

To early to call obviously.

At the rate in which he has started then yes he will be, just has to keep it going.

[DemonDan... 77]

Is Liam Jurrah a star of the Mfc ?

Simple question.

My answer is Yes.

Wtf?? geezus HT you're excitable or super-ultra bored!

We know he's only played 9 games, give the poor boy a break..

..or is this a 'HT gullibility test' thread?

No-one has, or will ever be a Star of the game inside a couple of seasons/50 matches as consistancy is obviously a pre-requisite of being a considered a Star.

So 'NO'. Come back in 2 years..

[DemonDan... 77]

The real question should be:

Is Liam Jurrah better than Robbie Flower in his prime?

The answer is of course "yes".

You've embarrassed yourself CB

[H_T 2,941]

...but not reflective of people's opinions

Your Poll's conclusion

"QUOTE (Clint Bizkit @ Oct 29 2009, 01:44 PM)

It simply confirms that we have a very good player on our hands, star or no star.

Indeed. I think that is what the poll has concluded too."

Is not reflective of people's opinions? RR, with over 70-odd votes, more than 70% say that he is star. I think that's conclusive enough. I already know what you think. So who cares.

It was a fruitless poll. The poll did not include any option but yes or no and did not reflect the opinions stated in the thread which was on the semantics of being a star.

Glad you're so easily chuffed.

The poll was put up as it's own thread. There was no point to prove if that is what you are referring to in relation to the review thread of liam. I thought it would be interesting to poll whether people thought liam is currently a star at Mfc. Sure, I may have used the point of reference to the debate going on in the other thread.

If the poll doesn't suit your in depth analysis, stiff sh!t.

I'm pleased you're "glad".

This has purely been a discussion of semantics. In the player review, HT you yourself asked what the criteria for a star was, therefore a poll of "yes" or "no" cannot conceivably canvass peoples opinions if there is not proper definition.

Rubbish. Some people need to relax a bit.

Yes. "Correct". I did ask what the criteria, if any, for a "star" was. So what. That doesn't mean a poll of "yes" or "no" can't canvass people's opinions on whether or not Liam is a star. I have yet to see any real concrete criteria, apart from dictionary meanings put forward by Bub.

If you're waiting on "proper definition", may I suggest you put something forward. I'm quite sure that will prevent any argument.

But yes, each to their own - however I must say I detest people who challenge others, than have their opinion challenged only to fall behind the "I'm just saying my opinion, deal with it" line

I take it this post was in response to WYL. Just to be sure, may I suggest you single the person(s) out directly, be accountable (Ie. reply to them). There is nothing more worse than someone throwing a hand grinade at a whole range of posters, intending to hit one of them, just so they can scratch their itch.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Is not reflective of people's opinions? RR, with over 70-odd votes, more than 70% say that he is star. I think that's conclusive enough. I already know what you think. So who cares.

It already been explained to you why its not representative of people's opinions. Its only reflective of the opinions of those that firstly cared to vote and secondly that the limited options provided (ie yes or no) actually represented their opinion. There seems to two key views on Jurrah...all positive... yes he is or not yet but he could be. I dont think "no" represented those views. Your poll was a self serving outcome with a leading question which is not reflective or reliable indicator of the opinions expressed and it clearly does not reflect the course of the debate which at best was semantical and a fruitless pursuit because it was never going to establish any clear outcome becauee the critieria is so subjective and undefined. ...you clearly dont understand or are easily chuffed. Clearly you do care to go through the charade. Well done.

[rusty_kingswood 0]

Not necessarily. At the stage of playing 9 games each, Jurrah and Cuthbertson had both performed at a level that had supporters thinking either was a "star".

Its just another angle on the semantics of rating players as "stars". Its a valid comparison.

RR for someone who thought this was a pointless exercise, you sure have a lot to contribute.

[rusty_kingswood 0]

It already been explained to you why its not representative of people's opinions. Its only reflective of the opinions of those that firstly cared to vote and secondly that the limited options provided (ie yes or no) actually represented their opinion. There seems to two key views on Jurrah...all positive... yes he is or not yet but he could be. I dont think "no" represented those views. Your poll was a self serving outcome with a leading question which is not reflective or reliable indicator of the opinions expressed and it clearly does not reflect the course of the debate which at best was semantical and a fruitless pursuit because it was never going to establish any clear outcome becauee the critieria is so subjective and undefined. ...you clearly dont understand or are easily chuffed. Clearly you do care to go through the charade. Well done.

Haha, this is pricesless. Rhino you do you this is just a meaningless exercise on an Internet forum?

Everything on this site is subjective, that's what opinions are.

But god forbid others having differing opinions to you, that's well established isn't it.

[H_T 2,941]

I dont think "no" represented those views.

That's what forums like this are for. People have expressed their view following a "no" within the thread.

Your poll was a self serving outcome with a leading question which is not reflective or reliable indicator of the opinions expressed and it clearly does not reflect the course of the debate which at best was semantical and a fruitless pursuit because it was never going to establish any clear outcome becauee the critieria is so subjective and undefined.

"self serving" , "fruitless pursuit" - are you upset rhino ? (I had to take a deep breath somewhere in these 60 words).

I'm now amused & confused. Or you're lost....one of the two.

We've already gone over this. I'm sure the readers are fed up in reading this crap.

If in your opinion, was never going to establish a clear outcome because of it being subjective, big deal. Get over it.

...you clearly dont understand or are easily chuffed. Clearly you do care to go through the charade. Well done.

You were "glad" I was so easily chuffed. We've gone over this haven't we ?

You're the one who is on the pursuit and continuing this charade. I'm defending the right to people's opinions on Liam.

You have made your point loud an clear. Ten fold. I suggest the thread continue on it's own journey.

[Hannabal 4]

The fact that their are diverse opinions on this thread about whether Jurrah should be presently labelled a star or not is indicative in itself.

True 'stars' of the game don't have such threads as the answer is plain for all to see.

I think Jurrah will become a 'star' within 2-4 years.

[beelzebub 22,272]

Stars are Stars...its only the length of time that observers take to notice it that differs...not the talent

[45HG 1,539]

Jack Grimes, now there's a star

I'll leave it for now at: I love Jurrah and I hope/think he will become the player I think he can become - similar to a few others on our list, but he does seem to have amazing ability. Exciting times, enough bickering

[beelzebub 22,272]

Exciting times indeed :D

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

RR for someone who thought this was a pointless exercise, you sure have a lot to contribute.

The poll, Rusty, the poll...

The discussion is fine but semantical at best.

Everything on this site is subjective, that's what opinions are.

Well done Rusty. That was the point of my claim that the poll was fruitless exercise.

The fact that their are diverse opinions on this thread about whether Jurrah should be presently labelled a star or not is indicative in itself.

True 'stars' of the game don't have such threads as the answer is plain for all to see.

I think Jurrah will become a 'star' within 2-4 years.

Agreed.

....

Just proved my points and you dont get it. *Yawn*

Exciting times indeed :D

Totally agree

[Hannabal 4]

Stars are Stars...its only the length of time that observers take to notice it that differs...not the talent

You're confusing ability with talent. There have been plenty of players with tonnes of natural ability that have never made much of their career. Talented people are those that have properly harnessed and fully utilised their inherant ability.

Jurrah has the ability to be a star, but it doesn't mean he will. He needs to provide the output before he should be and will be labelled a 'star'.

[H_T 2,941]

True 'stars' of the game don't have such threads as the answer is plain for all to see.

[Nasher 33,162]

You're confusing ability with talent. There have been plenty of players with tonnes of natural ability that have never made much of their career. Talented people are those that have properly harnessed and fully utilised their inherant ability.

"Talent" is exactly what BB59 said it is. It's the inherent/natural ability you're talking about that may or may not be harnessed by the individual.

[Rogue 585]

I think the poll's largely representative of the fans RR, and who* can be too harsh on Melbourne's fans for getting excited about Jurrah?

Btw, I voted no, but I'm ready and waiting to change this in the not too distant future.

*apart from RR

[drdrake 3,048]

If we had the same poll after Aaron Davey's first year would he have the same results. Jurrah has the ability to be a star but isn't one yet. When he can kick 50+ goals in a season then we can start calling his a star.

At the moment like most our list he is full of potential, a few good games don't make you a star, 2-3 years of consistant good footy make you a star.

[Hannabal 4]

"Talent" is exactly what BB59 said it is. It's the inherent/natural ability you're talking about that may or may not be harnessed by the individual.

I prefer the way that Barassi explained it to all of his players. He saw a distinct difference between talent and ability when it came to footballers. He would tell them that natural ability would only get them so far. Talent was when they successfully coupled this ability with effort, practice, dedication, sacrifices, etc.

You won't find his distinctions in the dictionary, but I always knew what he meant and it made perfect sense to me.

It might be a tad obtuse for some.

[beelzebub 22,272]

\

-\

--\

---\

----\

-----\_____________

[Old Gregg 1]

Move on people