Jump to content

daisycutter

Life Member
  • Posts

    29,568
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

Posts posted by daisycutter

  1. 10 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

    We’re doing nothing for the racing club unless we pay a lease fee to them which I’m not sure we do. What we are doing can be seen as a benefit to the wider community who will have access to elite grounds every weekend of the year and at various times during the week. 

    right

    if we get access, we will just be another tenant, like the racing club

    of course, it is in our interests at the moment to foster good relations with them so as they don't lodge any objections 

    • Like 1
  2. 14 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

    According to 'the people's bible', aka wikipedia, 'Tomlinson currently studies a Bachelor of Property and Real Estate / Bachelor of Commerce at Deakin University'. I guess you could do a Masters in that? Or change it up? Quantum Physics?

    Interesting ... i didn't realise you could do a batchelors in highway robbery .. seems one can do a degree course these days in virtually anything

    • Haha 2
  3. 3 minutes ago, Deestinga2 said:

    I dont know about anyone else, but im sick to death of hearing about player signing long term deals only to decide half way through them that they want out.

    If this text message stuff is even only half right, then why play him?????

    If his form drops off and has a "Jackson like" half of the season then there is no value playing him, i did mention this in the Luke Jackson thread back then as well, we could all see he was checked out after the bye round, i wanted him dropped. If you dont want to be here and bleed red and blue like we all do, then move along and we can find others that will.

    well, there will be no problems for the first 3 rounds

    but seriously, the club need to talk to him and say he can't just send posts to opposition players or web sites saying he will be playing for freo next year, whilst he is under contract, without being disciplined.

    • Like 7
  4. 8 hours ago, Redleg said:

    Was that a personal insult?

    I am wondering whether to feel hurt and take umbrage.

    PS: Where is Uncle Bitter, haven’t seen him around here for a while?

    I hope he hasn’t fallen into the moat.

    i think he's building a big sauna. big enough for you to share with him. such a caring type of guy 😍

    • Haha 1
  5. 52 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

    Do people want to watch more live football or less? With a 19th and potentially 20th team, the scheduling is going to be nuts to watch them without overlaps.  Simply has to be more 5 and 6 day breaks if there's thursday night to sunday games, mixed with some midweeks. 

    Surely a 10 percent reduction in a game length doesnt really affect the quality of and flow of an individual game (ever cared if a quarter lasted 27 or 30 minutes?) but it would def help the players recover and sustain through a full season of 5 and 6 day breaks. Although the extra bye has helped it does kill the nomentum of a season imo 

    there will still only be 9 games a week. no change till a 20th team

    • Like 1
  6. 2 hours ago, The Jackson FIX said:

    If he does, we’ve hit the jackpot. Sam Darcy will be the best player in the game within the next 2 years. He also progressed extremely quickly for a tall. 

    well so do i wish.   but i was just talking of development trajectory, being a similar height and body profile.

    • Like 1
  7. 47 minutes ago, Ollie fan said:

    I am confident he will end up with us. However, he is a young and skinny,  and I really don't see him being a good AFL player until about 2028  - he will need to fill out, and learn the senior game. This is absolutely not a knock on him, but you can't be a ruckman or a key position player until you have some weight and strength. 

    yeah, expect he will have similar trajectory as sam darcy

    • Like 1
  8. 10 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    So the 21st century commenced on 1 Jan 2001. Can we move on now? 🤪

    yes, that is the convention

    If we had started with a proper year 0ad,  then the 21st century would have been from 01/01/200 to 31/12/2000 which would have made more sense

    look, I understand the convention, but it is an interesting fact that we skipped a year in chronology by going from -1 to +1 and that is just plain maths

    this all started by me trying to warn off demonstone by pointing out it was a hoary issue and him being disparaging to others who could see that there is a legitimate area of confusion

    now i'll go back in my shell

    • Like 2
  9. 10 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

    I'm laughing at you, not with you.  There is so much wrong with your post.

    What you call "0" is day one of year one.  (1 AD)

     

    no. time naming convention works at the end of the time interval

    how do you explain 12 o'clock is at the end of the 12th hour. is the clock label wrong?

    why is 1 second past midnight 00.00.01 when as you say it is in the first hour 01 but convention say 00

  10. 7 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

     

     

    No, the century ends at the end of xx00.  That was my point from the beginning.

    I've made my case as clearly as I can and won't clog up this thread any longer.  You do you.

     

     

    sorry, that was a typo, will try and correct

    • Like 1
  11. 7 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

    Your arithmetic is faulty.  

    When 1 BC ended, 1 AD commenced.  There is no year zero.  How could there be?

    nothing wrong with maths.   -1 + 1 year is 0. (not 1)

    When old mate jc celebrated his 1st birthday and became a 1 year old the silly calendar clicked over to 2ad at exactly the same time. How could it be 2 years anno domini (after christ)? A contradiction, right?

    normal time convention is to measure at the end of the time interval. Look at a clock the 12 is positioned at the end of the 12 hour, not the start. Same with years, hours, minutes etc.

    the proscribed century convention  (century ends on end of xx01) is at odds with normal time convention. It was just a convention to hide an anomaly caused by ignorance in the first place.

    don't blame me, you started this and i did warn you it was an old hoary chestnut

    • Haha 1
  12. 30 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

    Jesus, another one.  Google it mate.  It's a fact and not a matter of anybody's opinion.

    rather than it's a "fact" i'd prefer to call it a proscribed convention that just represents one "solution" to an accepted anomaly caused by the real fact that there is a missing year 1bc to 1 ad. i.e. -1 to +1 is 2 years not 1.

    that's the hoary bit

    • Like 1
    • Thumb Down 1
  13. 3 hours ago, Demonstone said:

    It's the truth that confused a lot of gullible people at the time.

    2000 was the 2000th year but didn't turn 2000 until the end of it.  At the completion of 2000 years, the next year/century/millennium commenced.  That was at 0:001 on 1/1/2001.

    Let's say you're 70 years old.  You've completed 70 years on the planet and are now in your 71st year.  You won't turn 71 until the end of the year, even though you're in year 71.

    It's not a difficult concept to grasp, but many still don't get it.

    edit:  Google a reputable source of your choice if you still have any doubts.

    only coz the [censored] didn't proscribe a year 0ad

    tis not that i have doubts ... as i said the old hoary chestnut

×
×
  • Create New...