Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

902 profile views

ChewyOnMyBoot's Achievements


Demon (2/10)



  1. Oh bing181. Are you popping your head back up out of the dung? As I've said before, Jack chose Port Adelaide and because of the way it was handled by the FD PA knew that they didn't have to go high to get him. FD basically shot themselves in the foot. But I don't want to damage the fragile little world that you live in so you just go on believing what you want to. And maybe you'll see Santa Claus this year fly past your window too. If you would please reply to my post on page 268 (5 posts from the bottom) i would be most grateful. I've been trying to chase you down about unsubstantiated crap you've put on this thread but you keep on running away from it. Man up I say son!!!
  2. Wow. That's cutting. I was concerned that I might have been making you look like an idiot. Now I realise you do it all by yourself anyway.
  3. So I'm Jack's uncle. How would you suggest I prove that? Why does that cause you so much concern? And why does it offend you that I would find it difficult to continue supporting the Dees given that Jack has been moved on? My post about that was honest and I thought I explained my dilemna quite well. Obviously you beg to differ. In any case I didn't think it warranted the aggressive response. Assuming that it is ok for someone on DL (an MFC member at that) to report the other side of the story, and other than what I have mentioned above, is there anything in particular that I have posted that has caused you grief? Some posters on here claim that I can't possibly be objective about what I have to say (and so obviously believe I am Jack's uncle) because of my relationship with Jack. I can understand where they're coming from but I would like to think that I have been more objective than most in what I have posted. I wonder if any posters on DL recognise that the same 'objectivity' logic that has been applied to me, also applies to themselves and the FD i.e. that their objectivity can be affected because of their "relationship". Anyone who thinks everything the FD of any AFL club puts out in the media is the truth, rather than just what they want you to hear, really does need a reality check. There are a number of posters that publish opinions or rumours on here and present them as fact. Not surprisingly, each time I have asked for them to back up their claims they either don't come back at all or what they do come back with is hardly factual . I take particular umbrage when comments are made about Jacks 'partying ways' (e.g. on the pi55 3 or 4 times a week) or the supposedly poor view in which the players and/or all the other AFL clubs view him. You will have noticed that I haven't taken issue with any posters that have stated an opinion on Jack's football skills or performance or whether he should be moved on. Because everyone's entitled to their opinion. Apologies if I haven't quite shown, at all times on this thread, the respect and good manners that I should have. Hardly an island in that respect.
  4. Wow. Talk about being pleased with ourselves. I guess you two are the posters we should all be measuring ourselves against hey?
  5. Mmmmmm. Interesting. I fear you have indeed been stretching your johnson a little too forcefully but anyway, to humour you, I'll assume that you are serious. In regard to Point 2 can you explain what information I have put on DL that you would seriously doubt. Point 3 I can understand. And if we extend the reasoning of your statement, you will obviously agree that the relationship between the club and supporters is far less likely to produce objective information, too. As for you're "It's a disgrace comment, could you please show me any of my comments that have caused a sense of 'disgrace' in you? It would be most welcome. Thank you.
  6. You've got me on this one B. Can't get my head around it. Too many brain cells lost from "late into the night" battles with Johnnie Walker I guess.
  7. Sure will. Before Jack headed overseas, he was certainly pleased the dealing was over (as you can imagine) and really positive about the future. Hopefully it works out for both sides.
  8. It's heartening that you are so concerned about some private information that I have released on this thread that may be of some 'damage' to Jack. And it's even more heartening that ProDee has liked your post giving some indication that perhaps he is the intellectual giant that he professes to be. So that I could apologise to Jack for letting out what must be some pretty damaging private information about him for you to be so concerned, would you be so kind as to let me know which of my comments in particular cause you so much concern? And perhaps at the same time, you could finally respond to some of my recent posts asking you for clarification on some of you earlier comments on this thread. Thank you. I await your considered response. I have included them here again below in their entirety to save you time: And the next one:
  9. Thanks. I have tried to be open minded about it all. Nah. It was only me. Jack doesn't know about me being on here and I'm sure he'll kill me if he finds out. And I have only recently told Jack's mum and dad. We all have the choice in what we want to believe. But I don't think that I'd be making any over-the-top statement by suggesting that not all information is made available to the public. I'm not here to brow beat people into believing me. Just to share what I know to be the facts. And I know what the level of market interest was in Jack. Believe me or not, that's fine. The real problem the FD had is in what they said to Jack and to PC about Jack's chances of remaining a Dee. From the outset, PC knew that the club couldn't/wouldn't take Jack back and so MFC had no wriggle room when it came to negotiating for higher picks. And, my opinion is, that I'd be quite certain that PA knew that too. So why would they offer anything better when they know they can get 'away' with pick 31 and MFC contributing to Jacks package. But again I'm not here to beat you into believing my stories. I wish the Dees every success but really hope the FD get their heads around some better, more respectful, player management practices.
  10. Sadly predictable Wiseblood. Did you read any more of my post? Or was it a case of premature joculation? Perhaps if you read the rest of my post you would be able to put that statement in context. And what's with the "Jog on, pal"? Are you saying that me, as a fully paid up member of 9 years, has no right to express an opinion on here unless it correlates with your view of the world? If that upsets you then maybe you should take your own advice.
  11. Really interesting question. Of course I'll follow Jack at PA but I feel very attached to, and excited by, the playing group at MFC. I would love to see them be successful and would love to be a part of that. The young men i have met at MFC are undoubtedly ripping young blokes. And i happily admit to having a pretty severe mancrush on Petracca. He could be anything. His lower body strength reminds me of some of the absolute greats - Matthews, Ablett Snr & Jnr, Voss. His ability to keep his feet while he's ripping the ball out of the scrums our game has become infected with is unmatched by anyone in todays game. So my attachment to the team is f#*%ing hard to let go off. But there's one more bit of information that i should disclose that makes it a little difficult for me to maintain the level of support i have given over the last 9 years. You see my son, who lives with Jack, is actually Jack's cousin. And you know what that means. At the very least i will barrack for the Dees whoever they are playing (excluding PA of course). Even against 'my' club prior to my conversion to the Dees (the Saints). And when he plays against the Dees, if Viney, TMac or Jonesy happen to give Jack a good whack around the ear I'll be there cheering them on and encouraging them to do it again. Hahaha. Little 6astard deserves it every now and again.
  12. I absolutely agree with you - it is best for both parties and thats ok. And if you don't have much of an opinion of Jack's worth as a footballer, that's ok too. Everybody is entitled to an opinion. But as to "If Geelong wanted him they would have grabbed him, they didn't... Port the only ones who put a bid in?" - that's codswallop. And I suspect that like many on DL you are using that statement to somehow back up you're opinion of Jack's worth as a footballer. Geelong absolutely 100% made an offer to Jack. But as it turns out, Port Adelaide absolutely nailed their presentation to Jack and the role that they want Jack to play is completely aligned with what he believes are his strengths. Furthermore, if you want to take a guess at how many other clubs enquired of PC requesting that they be consulted should Jack's initial choice fall through I can tell you that 2 is wrong and anything below that is wronger. Hahahahaha. Them's the facts. Sorry to disappoint you.
  13. While we're at it bing181, perhaps you can provide some substantiation to the claim you make above. Quoting someone "in the know" is a pretty sly way of making a statement and purporting it to be fact. Can you add any points of detail or are you satisfied with taking a broad comment for which you sought no substantiation and sought no specific details to cast a dispersion about Jack for, seemingly, no other reason than to discredit him? And then is your claim that clearly, as this wouldn't happen without their endorsement just an an opinion of what you would expect to have happened or do you know what actually happened. Lastly, can you explain to me how any of your posts are a reflection of someone that's looking at both sides of the story. Thank you. I look forward to a response. I've put my cards on the table. How about you come to the party too.
  14. And so by extension are you saying that your commentary is based on both sides of the story?
  15. Sure. I can understand why that would be your first reaction. And it was certainly not unexpected that this would be the response. I'm absolutely comfortable in admitting that at times my commentary has been come from an emotional base.......BUT............I would hope that has only been when a post has contained information that the poster has purported to be fact (or to the reader could certainly come across as 'fact') when I know 100% that it is 100% bulltish (e.g. "he's on the p155 3 or 4 nights a week" was one statement that I lambasted another was that no other clubs were interested in him so it just goes to show how poorly they think of him). I would like to think that if you look back at my posts you will see that i have never had an issue with Jack being told to move on. In fact I think you will find that I have often supported/liked a post that has said it is probably best for the club and for Jack. Rather, my issue is how it has been handled by the club (or particular FD staff), what has been the sequence of events and what have been the statements actually made - rather that what has been presented to the media. That is something that no other posters on here know about. The truth in this regard is black and white in many instances and can't be influenced by my emotional attachment. It's basically what happened. I trust that you too are sufficiently open-minded to accept that your commentary must, by nature of you love for the club and the pain you have been through for many years and the hope of a brighter future, also have an emotional undercurrent. Otherwise you wouldn't be human. I'm sure the FD's decision was based on the hard cold facts to them and not emotion. Have no problems with that. Footy clubs have to make hard decisions and I myself can see why they are making this decision. But the discourse that have put out in the media about Jack moving on (e.g. how/who made that decision) and the seemingly purposeful attempt to discredit Jack in numerous ways is bulltish - not only from a factual perspective. But from a "management" of elite sportsperson perspective. So. To save you from having to trawl through my posts on this matter, I will repeat. I have no issue with the FD deciding that the best way forward for them is without Jack........and it is also probably the best option for him. But their handling of it and distortion of events and Jacks influence on the players in no way is supported from the commentary of players and player's parents that I have seen 1st hand. I'm not here for a fight. But I won't stand for unsubstantiated bulltish.
  • Create New...