Dogs tap into Fijian talent

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Because those people who questioned it were shouted down at the time and have since been proven correct.

It goes to the notion that because key people at our club make decisions we must believe it. Intellectually I can engage on the merits of a decision and that I have been both wrong and right over the journey. But there is some element of 'if you're not in the coaches box how can know what something is', or 'we have good people and we have to back them in', 'people at the club are in the best position to know', and so on. History says we make regular mistakes, sometimes stupid mistakes, and I'm being told to not have opinion or question decisions because of not sitting on the MC, or coaches box or other. It is by some people questioning decisions that change gets effected. For instance, the first bulldogs person to say Rhode was crap would have been shouted down, and over time more said it and history shows Rhode was crap. The first person to say trading for Justin Sherman was a shit trade would have been told the team know what they're doing give them time. And so on. I got smacked down earlier in this thread and still no response for no good reason... For all the posts shouting people down, I wonder how many go back to those threads when they're wrong.

[Bulldog4life]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Seriously?

Sounds like Carolyn Wilson logic- I'll throw around as many accusations as I like today, but if you bring them up tomorrow I'll tell you you're living in the past and just trying to make me look bad.

Not sure what you mean with your comment but my opinion is that it is unnecessary to bring up a thread ages ago and comment "See I was right you weren't".Imagine if we all did that. My opinion, Fine if you don't agree.

[jeemak]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Did the mods clean up this thread, or was there others in which the shouting down occurred? I wasn't on WOOF then.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Seriously?

Sounds like Carolyn Wilson logic- I'll throw around as many accusations as I like today, but if you bring them up tomorrow I'll tell you you're living in the past and just trying to make me look bad.

Exactly. There's a little moral police factor sometimes surrounding the need to blindly follow the leader because they are the leader. History says that often enough at out club, following the leader blindly was a mistake. No one is lesser or better than anyone who dare question anything. Seriously, being told that we can't intellectually discuss our tactics and match day coaching because we aren't in the coaches box is rubbish. As are simplistic 'they're in the best position to know' throw away lines. Rubbish, when god's very own James Fantasia signed Mulligan for 3 years where was the club's accountability or our supporters who rubbished critical analysis of that decision. And Ayce, and Sherman, and Vez, and Fantasia, and the Veale Deal. And allowing Rhode to kill our chances through 08-10 through disgraceful list management decisions.

[jeemak]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

The word 'some' is important in my bolded sentence, as opposed to 'all' who might disagree. Often I read a comment that says 'I'm happy to back the clubs decision' or words with the similar effect. I deduce or interpret such comments to have the effect that they are beleiving a decision's validity because the current powers that be have made it. Some others comments such 'the people at the club know more' or comments specifically about not being in the coaches box makes people's opinions to match day tactics is wrong because they don't know why a decision is made again is interpreted by me as to have the same effect of believing in decisions on the basis that the club or it's team knows more. Also my words in saying 'every now and then' is relevant in my language as it might suggest that not every time people are howled down is predicated on this reasoning.

By reading such comments my interpretation is 'some' posters accept decisions from club as being more informed or credible and may not test decisions to the degree others might. Again, the word I used is 'some' and that it was not every single time for opposing opinions or thoughts. As for interpreting my words as to have the effect or reference to conventionality is an inference you make. What is or is not 'conventional' is purely subjective, and I'm unsure why conventionality is in and of itself a bad thing. But I never used that word.

I'm not too sure how I would word it differently, I didn't use 'positive' statements and used two references to make sure I wasn't making cover all statements. As to the 'by the by' reference, yes, some people some of the time disagree with others based on proposition the club knows more. How would you suggest I articulate that some people accept the clubs decision and in so thinking, every now and then howl down (TBB's words) some that test a decision with questions or critical analysis?

It goes to the notion that because key people at our club make decisions we must believe it. Intellectually I can engage on the merits of a decision and that I have been both wrong and right over the journey. But there is some element of 'if you're not in the coaches box how can know what something is', or 'we have good people and we have to back them in', 'people at the club are in the best position to know', and so on. History says we make regular mistakes, sometimes stupid mistakes, and I'm being told to not have opinion or question decisions because of not sitting on the MC, or coaches box or other. It is by some people questioning decisions that change gets effected. For instance, the first bulldogs person to say Rhode was crap would have been shouted down, and over time more said it and history shows Rhode was crap. The first person to say trading for Justin Sherman was a shit trade would have been told the team know what they're doing give them time. And so on. I got smacked down earlier in this thread and still no response for no good reason... For all the posts shouting people down, I wonder how many go back to those threads when they're wrong.

Sorry BT, I've been in meetings all day and am now at the airport with some time to kill.

I initially read your post as inferring there's a sheep mentality among posters whereby the club is followed blindly and without question, while you and TBB are able to rise above that to a raised standard. If you're saying that's not how the post was intended to come across then I apologise for being heavy handed with my response.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Sorry BT, I've been in meetings all day and am now at the airport with some time to kill.

I initially read your post as inferring there's a sheep mentality among posters whereby the club is followed blindly and without question, while you and TBB are able to rise above that to a raised standard. If you're saying that's not how the post was intended to come across then I apologise for being heavy handed with my response.

Thanks Jeemak, I appreciate your sentiments, thank you, not all posters are so gracious. There be need for any further subject matter for this thread, but more importantly which airport are you killing time in? I have to say in terms of when waiting time seems the longest, I've gotta say sitting in a domestic terminal waiting for the boarding call seems the longest.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

The shouting down was in another thread(s). I do remember posting something about it in a training report, which is probably where that part happened.

It was an exercise that made no sense given our club's situation in all areas.

[jeemak]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Sydney domestic. 6pm back to Melbourne. Junk time.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Sydney domestic. 6pm back to Melbourne. Junk time.

Long day, I prefer Sydney to Brisbane domestic, when coming back to Melbourne. I hope you haven't seen this post, as to paraphrase Pauline Hanson "If you are viewing this message now, you are delayed".

[jeemak]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Doors are closed, spare seat next to me. Here's hoping!

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Doors are closed, spare seat next to me. Here's hoping!

I hear you brother. Nothing like scoring the extra a spare seat. One of life's little niceties.

[Topdog]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

This thread explains what happened to the project and players. Couldnt find any shouting down of any posters in WOOF after a quick 5 minute search.
\

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?8564-Bulldogs-drop-local-AFL-hopefuls

[jeemak]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Well, landed after a 40m delay. No rear disembarking. Typical Melbourne.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Well, landed after a 40m delay. No rear disembarking. Typical Melbourne.

WOOF still here though.

[GVGjr]

Re: Dogs tap into Fijian talent

Did the mods clean up this thread, or was there others in which the shouting down occurred? I wasn't on WOOF then.

Nothing deleted on the thread.