Banter Geelong V Richmond - GO!

[Wosh]

In the interests of keeping your back and forth shite fights out of match threads so normal people can talk.

Keep it clean and above the shorts
Off topic rubbish clogging up match threads will be moved here, knock yourselves out.

 

[Mr Meow]

I wish we played him more. Was a shocking finals player bar 1 season.

My grandmother could’ve done better in the 94 & 95 GFs

Can I ask how it feels to be a laughing stock?

Like is it good to at least get a bit of attention or is it a bit of a slog to get through?

You have my pity.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Can I ask how it feels to be a laughing stock?

Like is it good to at least get a bit of attention or is it a bit of a slog to get through?

You have my pity.

Cmon man hahah you should know by now it’s just banter.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

No they don’t. Hence why I think it’s just to spice it up.

Why else would they say “from the wing”? The whole point is to make it sound more impressive.

Fact is he was no different to somebody like Hawkins sitting 20m out from the goal square. It’s the exact same kick. It’s not more impressive. He moved forward mid game and kicked those goals as a FORWARD from the FORWARD LINE.

It is less impressive. He was basically a forward sitting in the hotspot without an opponent.

Cats fans think their version of Matthew Richardson is God, lol. In footy, to qualify as a god you need to deliver Premierships, not “look at me everyone” highlight reels.

Imagine being a Cats fan Cleany, Jesus Christ, unthinkable.

 

[Mr Meow]

Cmon man hahah you should know by now it’s just banter.

Okay that's good. Because my reactions are mostly just responding to statements I find ludicrous, or lately just not getting sucked in by the really weak trolling bait.

If you are having fun, it's all good. But some of these tirades and "ANSWER ME!!!!! IF YOU DON'T, THEN YOU PROVED MY POINT AND FELL INTO MY TRAP!!!" comment cycles...are just kind of childish. It's hard to tell if you're serious or not.

Things like declaring Ablett Senior as a finals fraud because he had two poor grand finals as an old man in the goal square triple teamed while playing against elite, in their prime full backs while his team are thumped. I get that there's an element of trolling but then you must sort of believe it to say it. We've seen how poor/invisible Dusty can be up forward when his side gets flogged and he's what, only 32 or 33? Or in any losing finals even before his veteran years, including the close ones.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Okay that's good. Because my reactions are mostly just responding to statements I find ludicrous, or lately just not getting sucked in by the really weak trolling bait.

If you are having fun, it's all good. But some of these tirades and "ANSWER ME!!!!! IF YOU DON'T, THEN YOU PROVED MY POINT AND FELL INTO MY TRAP!!!" comment cycles...are just kind of childish. It's hard to tell if you're serious or not.

Things like declaring Ablett Senior as a finals fraud because he had two poor grand finals as an old man in the goal square triple teamed while playing against elite, in their prime full backs while his team are thumped. I get that there's an element of trolling but then you must sort of believe it to say it. We've seen how poor/invisible Dusty can be up forward when his side gets flogged and he's what, only 32 or 33? Or in any losing finals even before his veteran years, including the close ones.

Well most is grand finals weren’t great and a few finals series were poor. Take 89 out and it’s above average finals record overall but not stellar by any means. Even you’d agree with that.

He got Coleman’s and AAs in 92,94,95 right? So is he not in his prime? If not then the comp must have not been very strong if they let an old man get those awards.

 

[Mr Meow]

Well most is grand finals weren’t great and a few finals series were poor. Take 89 out and it’s above average finals record overall but not stellar by any means. Even you’d agree with that.

He got Coleman’s and AAs in 92,94,95 right? So is he not in his prime? If not then the comp must have not been very strong if they let an old man get those awards.

Age match Ablett Seniors finals series to any forward in history and they stack up very well.

He had one finals series in his physical prime, '89. And could still be devastating when he was an old man, playing when most his age would've been retired a couple of years. But he could no longer turn a game when his side was being thrashed and he was isolated in the goal square (e.g those two grand finals). Fairly common sense stuff. When his side was competitive (those '94 and '95 seasons basically right up until the grand finals where they were thrashed) he could still (somehow) be elite. It required two-way integration rather than him carrying the side on his shoulders, that's all.

Find me all these 33-34 year olds who have done better. There are very few. 33 back then was more like Hawkins age now.

His finals were almost all as a veteran and he went at 4 goals a game - somehow you have classed this as weak. It's silly.

P.S '93 was his other Coleman, not '92 and Geelong didn't play finals. He was in better physical shape that season than the two that followed even though his numbers remained strong.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

No they don’t. Hence why I think it’s just to spice it up.

Why else would they say “from the wing”? The whole point is to make it sound more impressive.

Fact is he was no different to somebody like Hawkins sitting 20m out from the goal square. It’s the exact same kick. It’s not more impressive. He moved forward mid game and kicked those goals as a FORWARD from the FORWARD LINE.

Geez, you’re so worked up about this - I’m not sure how hard to press.
Have you watched that game?

 

[Cleansweep17]

Geez, you’re so worked up about this - I’m not sure how hard to press.
Have you watched that game?

Yup, I literally showed you the goals. Have you had a look or are you to scared that it will contradict your current beliefs of that game?

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Yup, I literally showed you the goals. Have you had a look or are you to scared that it will contradict your current beliefs of that game?

I asked if you’d watched the game. Have you? Or just the goals?

 

[Cleansweep17]

I asked if you’d watched the game. Have you? Or just the goals?

Nah why? I don’t find him particularly entertaining. Plus those goals are boring af, not a single cool one, when serong is kicking better goals you know that there is a problem.

But the highlights of the goals are enough. I don’t need to see him running around like a headless chook transitioning from the wing to FF

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Nah why? I don’t find him particularly entertaining.

But the highlights of the goals are enough. I don’t need to see him running around like a headless chook transitioning from the wing to FF

So when you said “yup”, you actually meant “nah”. (Post 4133).

I’m starting to develop some trust issues with you.

 

[Cleansweep17]

So when you said “yup”, you actually meant “nah”. (Post 4133).

I’m starting to develop some trust issues with you.

The goals are part of the game bro it’s literal footage. You didn’t ask me if I’ve seen the whole game.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

The goals are part of the game bro it’s literal footage. You didn’t ask me if I’ve seen the whole game.

Checkmate

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

And I asked if you’d seen “the game” (not just a short YouTube clip of the goals)

 

[Cleansweep17]

And I asked if you’d seen “the game” (not just a short YouTube clip of the goals)

Person A: “Hey did you see the game?”

Person B: “Yes, part of it”

Checkmate.

 

[Mr Meow]

Person A: “Hey did you see the game?”

Person B: “Yes, part of it”

Checkmate.

You just want to engage in pathetic gotchas and semantics arguments, then more trolling. See how you ignore the posts of substance like mine on Ablett earlier. Or you offer up something that just doesn't make sense.

 

[Cleansweep17]

You just want to engage in pathetic gotchas and semantics arguments, then more trolling. See how you ignore the posts of substance like mine on Ablett earlier. Or you offer up something that just doesn't make sense.

Oops I forgot.

His stats for a 33-34 year old are good.

If that’s not his prime then the comp was pretty weak. Like I said earlier, some old man was the best forward in the comp.

 

[Cleansweep17]

You just want to engage in pathetic gotchas and semantics arguments, then more trolling. See how you ignore the posts of substance like mine on Ablett earlier. Or you offer up something that just doesn't make sense.

Also if you want to grade his finals series excluding 1989 this is it.

Points:

Poor = 0

Below average = 1

Average = 2

Above Average = 3

Great = 4

Series graded by goal average:

1991: 0 goals (poor)

1992: 4 goals (great)

1994: 4 goals (great)

1995: 2 goals (average)

1996: 1 goal (below average)

So his average score is 2.2

This lies between average - above average. But closer to average.

That’s even a little bit worse than I thought earlier.

Now let’s do GFs

1992: 3 goals (above average)

1994: 1 goal (below average)

1995: 0 goals (poor)

Average score of 1.33 which is below average - average. But closer to below average.

So essentially what you get with GAS if you take out the 1989 series is an average finals player and below average GF player. It’s not a troll that’s what it is.

Maybe cats supporters “memories” arent that reliable to how good a finals player he really was. Exactly the same problem with the 14 goals from the wing BS.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Also if you want to grade his finals series excluding 1989 this is it.

Points:

Poor = 0

Below average = 1

Average = 2

Above Average = 3

Great = 4

Series graded by goal average:

1991: 0 goals (poor)

1992: 4 goals (great)

1994: 4 goals (great)

1995: 2 goals (average)

1996: 1 goal (below average)

So his average score is 2.2

This lies between average - above average. But closer to average.

That’s even a little bit worse than I thought earlier.

Now let’s do GFs

1992: 3 goals (above average)

1994: 1 goal (below average)

1995: 0 goals (poor)

Average score of 1.33 which is below average - average. But closer to below average.

So essentially what you get with GAS if you take out the 1989 series is an average finals player and below average GF player. It’s not a troll that’s what it is.

Maybe cats supporters “memories” arent that reliable to how good a finals player he really was. Exactly the same problem with the 14 goals from the wing BS.

Checkmate

 

[Cleansweep17]

Checkmate

Checkchamp

 

[Mr Meow]

Also if you want to grade his finals series excluding 1989 this is it.

Points:

Poor = 0

Below average = 1

Average = 2

Above Average = 3

Great = 4

Series graded by goal average:

1991: 0 goals (poor)

1992: 4 goals (great)

1994: 4 goals (great)

1995: 2 goals (average)

1996: 1 goal (below average)

So his average score is 2.2

This lies between average - above average. But closer to average.

That’s even a little bit worse than I thought earlier.

Now let’s do GFs

1992: 3 goals (above average)

1994: 1 goal (below average)

1995: 0 goals (poor)

Average score of 1.33 which is below average - average. But closer to below average.

So essentially what you get with GAS if you take out the 1989 series is an average finals player and below average GF player. It’s not a troll that’s what it is.

Maybe cats supporters “memories” arent that reliable to how good a finals player he really was. Exactly the same problem with the 14 goals from the wing BS.

Or...4 goals per finals game for his career is "elite".

He had two poor grand finals playing out of the goal square when his side was destroyed. That's about the best you can get on him.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Or...4 goals per finals game for his career is "elite".

He had two poor grand finals playing out of the goal square when his side was destroyed. That's about the best you can get on him.

That average including 1989?

His median would probably be less due to averages being susceptible to being distorted by big outlier figures. Which would be 1989 in this case.

Eg. If bill gates walked into a room of 20 people on the doll. The average per person in that room would be considered a millionaire. But they aren’t.

So GAS finals record is not as impressive as you think. Most series were average/poor. Same goes for the GFs.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

That average including 1989?

His median would probably be less due to averages being susceptible to being distorted by big outlier figures. Which would be 1989 in this case.

Eg. If bill gates walked into a room of 20 people on the doll. The average per person in that room would be considered a millionaire. But they aren’t.

So GAS finals record is not as impressive as you think. Most series were average/poor. Same goes for the GFs.

Thanks for mansplaining (or cut/paste from Google). I’m sure nobody knew the difference between average and mean.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Thanks for mansplaining (or cut/paste from Google). I’m sure nobody knew the difference between average and mean.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Do you mean mean average and median average when you say nobody knows the difference between average and mean?

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Do you mean mean average and median average when you say nobody knows the difference between average and mean?

Ha ha. That’s actually a very good gotcha. Well done


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app