Vogon Poetry

I don't know why I'm bothering posting in this thread and I've not read all of it, thankfully, but the thing that amazes me most is the vast majority of posters are so committed to one side of the debate or the other.

Personally, I think there are two valid points of view and I can see both arguments. It's a bold move by the footy department, it has not been well handled and it's very unfortunate for Jack who clearly wants to stay.

There can be no winner in this debate and that people put so much emotional investment into it is staggering.

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

My gut feel now:

That this is less about setting standards and more about creating an asset to use this trade period because we have talked to more people than we can pay to get with current assets...

How's that for speculation?!

I'm the opposite.  Watts goes at 80% and gets a game because he's gifted.  We can't afford to have Petracca, Hogan, Brayshaw and others who are gifted going at 80% if we are to win a flag and the club is making a very clear statement.

If he stays he can't put a foot out of line or he'll play a lot of footy at Casey.

FTR I don't think it's been very well handled by us.  I've got no idea what will happen - both parties are in a very difficult situation.  Would any other club take him now knowing he really doesn't want to be there?  We clearly don't want him.

9 hours ago, Jaded said:

You don't know what young girls are like.

 

 

If your description is right then I'm very pleased I don't.

Anyway thanks for the feedback but for me it just doesn't pass the smell test.  Maybe I need a new nose!

Yes R&Bbeard well over 21, thankfully.

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

There are lots of ways of getting someone's phone number or account names if a person really wants to.

 

Why would they want to contact Abby?  One yes, but many?  You'd think that after the first one Jake would tell the second and subsequent ones to "keep it quiet".  And wouldn't they be worried about a backlash from Jake?  I think it's pretty clear Jake, nice boy that he is, probably encouraged them to pass on the good news to Abby.

Anyway I've made my point.  Thanks for the explanation, I'm certainly not social media savvy.

6 minutes ago, ignition. said:

It may very well have been a text message. She may have got the number from his phone. But if I were a betting man, no pun intended, I would bet that it was via a social media account.

She also said

"Gilmore later called her only to discover he had been visiting"

How did she get the number? Something really stinks. 

1 minute ago, ignition. said:

No. They can be sent privately. Just like we can send private messages on demonland.

Okay. But she said this

"The text from the schoolgirl said she was having sex with Stringer"

2 minutes ago, ignition. said:

It may not have been a phone number per say. She was most likely contacted via instagram, twitter, or facebook messenger. Far easier for someone to contact an unknown that way.

Wouldn't others have seen these messages?

How can you get a number by "reasons"?

10 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

does it matter?

It's instructive if they got it from Jake. 

How did they get her number?  

6 minutes ago, binman said:

Well it appears i was wrong about the club not trading our best kick and most skillful player.

Personally on an objective level i don't agree with the decision.

 

 

6

bin, you can't possibly judge the decision until you see what we get back.

If it's a pick in the draft WE USE post 20 I'll spew but I strongly suspect it will be for something much more acceptable.

9 minutes ago, faultydet said:

The thing is Red, he is not a good player for OUR team. At least not to the level expected.

 

Well I think that is absolute rubbish.  He is a good player in our team and the reason he attracts interest from other club is exactly because he is.

We are trading him because we think what we get is going to make us better. 

It must be hell inside your head.

6 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Don't know much about Hunt - his contract was up and went back to Rugby (I think). 

Not sure if you are asking if I have joined the dots?  Yes I have...refer my last 3 or 4 posts on this subject...I'm just being careful with what I say so DL owners don't get sued and I don't get a DL holiday...

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/gold-coast-suns-divided-between-drinkers-and-god-squad/news-story/e6b3337b41003221121a697f14428c12

Start here and research further if you want.  Again I"m NOT suggesting Stringer is Hunt but just commenting on "scapegoat" references.

There is a reason Dogs have made him the scapegoat (in your words).  They didn't just pick his name out of a hat.

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Anyway, I feel a bit sorry for Stringer.  Never like to see someone made the scapegoat.  But if WB think that will solve their problems, well...its just more masking tape!

Was Hunt the scapegoat at GCS?  I'm not suggesting anything about Stringer other than to say if the club has identified him it's a big call to make him the scapegoat because he's also an incredible asset.  It would be unusual to make that sort of choice.

I'm surprised so many are struggling to join the dots.

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

Critique the erratic coaching

You've made this comment on a couple of occasions I think.  I'd be interested in your insights.

9 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Watched him closely last night and like his composure, aggression and smarts directing play in and out of back line.

Does this mean we don't need Lewis?

2 minutes ago, poita said:

 Whilst he'll never be a Dangerfield / Martin - style run & carry player,

 

I'm not so sure.  He has all the attributes except Danger's speed.  He merely needs to modify the way he plays.

The guy is freaky good.

10 hours ago, Adzman said:

The real cost is integrity and culture. Garland deserves to play out the contract he signed in good faith. Imagine if players decided mid contact they wanted more money because their value went up. It works both ways. If you are mad he is on the list then your dissatisfaction should be directed at list management and not garland.

I think people are missing the point here.  Garland would not be "unceremoniously" dumped.  The club would work with him to find a win win situation.  If one couldn't be found his contract is honoured.

Just now, beelzebub said:

That doesn't necessarily hold true. It's about perceptions and how they can cloud. Another may view something more favourably than its holder.

Too true, the one bloke out of step might be the only one who's got it right.

2 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

VP... its my opinion. Weed wont amount to much. 

You re welcome to yours.

If he won't amount to much then it's highly unlikely that we'd get a decent offer for him.  If we did get a decent offer you'd be backing your judgement against the judgement of a fully resourced and IP rich FD.

Big call and I wonder if it was you who had to pull the trigger whether you would.

1 minute ago, jackaub said:

Well it all depends on the time lines and speed of development.We cannot afgotd to wait 3 years for maturity to kick in

This club has got it wrong on many occasions

Not simply wrong just a diffefent view VP

Pick 6 would give us levetage to get ready yo go players

If the proposition is to effectively trade Weideman for a better player (your current proposition) then it's worth evaluating.  But if it's for the lure of what we might get with pick 6 this year it should be rejected out of hand. And we'd need to have that player locked in before we traded Weid.

I haven't done it but the club would have.  They'd have a timeline of when our window will be open the widest and they will be working towards that and maximising our talent at that time.

But the "Weid for a player" proposition is totally valid I agree.

Just now, DaveyDee said:

Ok so you cant provide a reason.

Clarkson ruled the Hawks out because they have no first round pick - his words not mine. He spoke very glowingly about Jake. 

But there is a reason isn't there Davey, otherwise the Dogs wouldn't be getting rid of him.

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

as would I...and roll again

Then you'd be very silly.

Just now, DaveyDee said:

So what is that reason?

Actually, it doesn't matter.  If it's good enough for Footscray to get rid of one of their "guns" and for teams like Hawks to say "no thanks" it's a good enough reason for me.

How many times has a player of Stringers talent has been so savagely dumped by his club.

There is a reason Davey and you'd do well to ponder it.