rpfc

Really interesting thread. Enjoyed the thinking it gave. I went positive with a CArlton win that led to the end of the Etihad hoodoo... I know... Anyway, if we are to do that, I believe that Moloney, Jamar, Rivers, and Sylvia will play some tough consistent footy over the month. The others will prattle on and do little, but play well in patches when we are dominating...(apologies to MacDonald who will find himself in the middle of that)

Pretty much where I am at.

Any new news? I mean, do I really have to post a rebuttal to a poster who has purely synthesized his own facts? I don't? Oh. Sweet. See you in the funny pages...

I thought that was why the rule was brought in...

Keep this nonsense off the footy board.

I'm the son of two former journos who maintain a number od relationships in their world. There are some very unimpressive people in this world. As in any profession. As BB59 would say - I wouldn't be putting all your eggs in the 'journo basket' - I would diversify your basket...

Jeez, your argument is simply all about what journalist infer from their 'inside words' isn't it? You trust them implicitly. Good for you. I don't trust them, because I know how journos operate and I know how sources can be nuclear. I am trusting the actual words of Tom Scully. You are trusting those that whisper quietly into the ears of hungry journalists that realise there are no repercussions to their stories being bullsh!t. Look at Hutchy people, the guy gets so much wrong, is constantly demeaned for being wrong, yet he owns his own media company, hosts a footy show, and is constantly 'making' the news. If Tom is lying, he will live a professional 'half-life' (to steal a quote from Harry Potter) and be maligned and quite toxic for some time. If Barrett/Schwarz are not right (if his sources are lying) they can hide behind those sources.

You can't call a kid a liar and then clap him 3 years later. I don't think he has lied, and, assuming he signs for us in September, I expect great things from him at the Dees. The end.

Coming back to rose tinted glasses?! Are you joking? lol You think the kid is lying. You won't even admit that is what you think. Your argument is as slippery as Gubby Allan's flesh. And who are you to accuse Tom Scully that his values are not of "truth, honesty, and integrity?"

A kid is being pilloried. And accused of being a liar. If I am to wish he stands up for my club in the future when we need him to, to win a flag, then I will stand up for him now. And, yes RR, you are digging... You constantly mention the Schwarz tweet and give nothing more than 'why would he tweet it/say it if he wasn't sure? I am trusting Tom Scully. You are trusting whoever is whispering into Schwarz's ear.

You are obsessed with Schwarz and Schwab... Why bother attacking? The ordeal will be over in a couple months and 'fighting back' as you say, will only make the situation worse, unless you mean he should 'sign' now. That will end the story but that isn't 'fighting back' that is acquiescence to the situation the attackers have caused.

I do. There is a chance he won't, I have always maintained that. I don't think he is liar and I am adamant that he has a decision to make in September. I am confident that not only will he sign for the Dees, but that the club will give him a good contract that allows us to still do what we want to do.

And libel. Doesn't mean that him not doing anything litigious is him tacitly saying he is lying. Going to court as the palntiff is a choice, a hard one, and one that a 19 year old who only has to put up with the crap for 2 more months obviously thinks isn't worth it.

I respect your position more than RR's because you are forthright in your opinion and are willing to take the rational step that your argument demands - that Tom Scully lied at his press conference. Well done. If you believe he is already gone, you believe he is a liar. There are no equivocations. I don't think Tom is a liar.

It's a very trite view to say that 'if you are not happy with something that is said about you, then take them to court.' Having watched someone take another party to court for something similar it is not a fun process - it is draining, and that person wouldn't do it again. Just because someone isn't litigious, doesn't mean they are tacitly saying they are liars.

I cannot believe you are sticking with such a specious argument. 'He is lying because if he wasn't he would take those journos to court.' Range Rover is a 4-foot midget transvestite with athlete's foot. If you don't take me to court we will all know something we didn't want to know about RR...

I apologise, I thought this was an admission that you realised what your position was implying about the truthfulness of Tom Scully. I apologise for stating that you took this rational step.

Do you know the definition of a 'one-club player?' This is what he said - "I'd love to end my career and say I was a one-club player and I anticipate that will be the case," I don't think he is a liar, but no-one has to agree. I am glad that RR has come to the realisation that he thinks Tom is a liar. He's being honest about that at last...

He is a journo. His 'definitive statement' is no such thing. He is relaying the words of his sources. He doesn't 'know' anything, he is trusting others who he 'believes' know, and that is far from definitive. So you can keep repeating that twit (or tweet...) but know that when people continually see you repeating it they see the lack of 'evidence' you are basing your belief that Tom lied on.

Yeah, Tom is going to make this situation go away by taking it to the courts... That will really help him and the club, concentrate on 2011. Your reasoning is specious and unfair. If a tree falls in the forest and no-one sues the tree - did it really fall? I know of many people who could sue for libel and don't because it is a painful, stressful, and, on many occassions, fruitless exercise.

I don't think it does. I really don't. It's easier to ready yourself and believe he is gone - become an optimistic pessimist (expect the worst so that whatever happens it's a good outcome). I just don't see how rumour and innuendo can outweigh the word of a kid who may be naive (I would say he is), but just wants to win footy games and get the most out of himself.

Very philosophical. I could give the same 'truism' about Schwarz or Stevens. Or their sources. It cuts both ways. I trust the parties involved who are on record. And I will until given evidence to the contrary. Conspiracies and conjecture are just that.

Nothing can force someone to lie. I would be staggered if he is lying. But I guess that is the crux of the issue.

So it is all about the media focus... How small are we? Can't take a bit of attention? Leave the big boy pants at home, we will be [censored] forever if that's your attitude - with good players comes their being targetted - with that comes media attention. Deal with it.

We only care because we hope others don't follow your lead. And the difference is media pressure? So Tom has to change his position because Jon Ralph cannot find anything else to write about? What kind of advice is that to a kid? "Listen, son. Do what you think is right, for you will be damned if you do, and damned if you don't. But if there is a lot of media interest - all bets are off!! Hurry the frack up!"