No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXVIII

[Nobby]

goodsmack on sen saying he doesnt use illicit drugs

sounds totally legit and believable

Really good to see Garry challenge them, jsut not accept the message they were trying to promote.

 

[Coach_Required]

Really good to see Garry challenge them, jsut not accept the message they were trying to promote.

Good to see Lyon throw the culture question back at them but Lyon should have also asked, if the culture isn't failing like Goodwin & Pert are preaching then why are their players continually in the news for the wrong reasons?

 

[Maurice Mitchell]

Good to see Lyon throw the culture question back at them but Lyon should have also asked, if the culture isn't failing like Goodwin & Pert are preaching then why are their players continually in the news for the wrong reasons?

Only heard bits, but there were plenty of moments where he could have (of!) interrupted and held them to account.

Sounded pretty soft to me and nobody would be surprised by that. Would have preferred to hear Kane do that interview.

Obviously that was never going to happen but it tells a lot when I was trying to think of someone other than Kane and no one else came to mind.

There’s no one else who would have made Pert and Goodwin squirm. Maybe Tim Lane.

 

[Groupie_]

messi wins the 2064 ballon d'or award

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Only heard bits, but there were plenty of moments where he could have (of!) interrupted and held them to account.

Sounded pretty soft to me and nobody would be surprised by that. Would have preferred to hear Kane do that interview.

Obviously that was never going to happen but it tells a lot when I was trying to think of someone other than Kane and no one else came to mind.

There’s no one else who would have made Pert and Goodwin squirm. Maybe Tim Lane.

What hard hitting interviews has Kane Cornes ever done? He operates unaccountably. If he starts asking someone tricky questions at interview they will hold him to account. This is not his genre.

 

[Maurice Mitchell]

What hard hitting interviews has Kane Cornes ever done? He operates unaccountably, If he starts asking someone tricky questions at interview they will hold him to account. This is not his genre.

No it’s not his genre and he has built his brand on a shock jock/clickbait model but he isn’t afraid to ask tough questions; he isn’t afraid to hurt feelings or create animosity or resentment toward him.

If you heard him and Gerard Healy interviewing Ravi Shastri earlier in the year in the lead up to Tests in India you would realise he has no hesitation in asking tough questions. He suggested the wicket prepared for the match (rightly or wrongly) was cheating. Shastri was seriously pissed off with that but Kane wasn’t backing off.

Yes, he also chucks stuff out there to grab attention. It’s a style of broadcasting that is not to my taste but I’ve also heard him do some tough questioning and when in that situation he is quite well prepared and dogged.

My point mainly was that if you want the appropriate questions asked; questions that don’t allow Pert and Goodwin to not answer; to dodge; to use weasel words, then there is really nobody who covers the AFL that you would rely on to do that.

And to repeat: maybe the exception might be Tim Lane.

 

[Groupie_]

goodsmack reckons he hasnt spoken to the shemans player that got busted for coke

fmd goodsmack is full of lies

 

[tigs2010]

goodsmack reckons he hasnt spoken to the shemans player that got busted for coke

fmd goodsmack is full of lies

Hasn’t spoken to him since he sold it to him

 

[Groupie_]

Hasn’t spoken to him since he sold it to him

if any campaigner had any doubt about whether goodwins on the gear then it immediately flew out the window when he said he hasnt even spoken to the little druggie that got done

goodsmack is full of lies

 

[Meteoric Rise]

No it’s not his genre and he has built his brand on a shock jock/clickbait model but he isn’t afraid to ask tough questions; he isn’t afraid to hurt feelings or create animosity or resentment toward him.

If you heard him and Gerard Healy interviewing Ravi Shastri earlier in the year in the lead up to Tests in India you would realise he has no hesitation in asking tough questions. He suggested the wicket prepared for the match (rightly or wrongly) was cheating. Shastri was seriously pissed off with that but Kane wasn’t backing off.

Yes, he also chucks stuff out there to grab attention. It’s a style of broadcasting that is not to my taste but I’ve also heard him do some tough questioning and when in that situation he is quite well prepared and dogged.

My point mainly was that if you want the appropriate questions asked; questions that don’t allow Pert and Goodwin to not answer; to dodge; to use weasel words, then there is really nobody who covers the AFL that you would rely on to do that.

And to repeat: maybe the exception might be Tim Lane.

I was a big fan of Terry Laidler on ABC radio back in the 90's. He once interviewed Paul Keating and asked Keating some topical and confronting questions about his dealings with Indonesia. Keating's response was to not answer the questions but rather to reproach Laidler very strongly. Laidler once or twice asked a similar question in a different way and got the same sort of responses from Keating. The interview finished and Laidler's show continued. It was talkback time. Callers rang in expressing disapproval with how weak Laidler had been and asking why he let Keating get away with responding the way he did....

Laidler's response was short, simple and very sweet. He said it is my job to ask the questions. Keating's job to answer as he sees fit. And the listener's job to judge what they think of the guest given his responses. He added something along the lines if Keating chooses to dodge questions and answer like a bully it is no skin of his(Laidler's) nose, and if that process helps people form their view of Paul Keating with greater clarity then Laidler felt he had done his job.

I heard Laidler conduct so many informative interviews and draw great insights from guests by listening carefully to them and responding appropriately.

I want to say I think you are a good poster here so not wanting to belittle what you are saying, and I guess we all might like to know the truth of what is happening at Melbourne. But what you are talking about a Kane Cornes doing isn't going to elicit any meaningful information out of the people he is interviewing. Cornes would not truly listen to any explanation he was given and would just keep repeating meaningless words like "culture problems" etc. He would not make a specific allegation because he knows he risks defamation proceedings if he cannot prove the truth of his statement. Cornes would effectively reduce the interview to him saying Melbourne has culture problems because two players had a blue, another player tested positive to cocaine and another player had an argument with fitness staff and was seen partying on camera, over the course of 2 seasons. And the responders would say they are confident there is no cultural issue, they are just separate unrelated incidents that occur with a football club from time to time, and that it would only be a club culture issue if the club didn't address the incidents satisfactorily. If they were smart they might point out that going by what Cornes is arguing then the most successful popular music band in history had massive cultural issues, because they took illicit drugs, had arguments with each other and staff and were also seen at parties. To uncover the truth of matters such as these would require way more advanced interviewing skills than anything a Kane Cornes is capable of producing.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

we shouldve got ben mckay on 1.5 mil

seemed cheap

Ben one week
Harry the next

 

[Groupie_]

 

[Groupie_]

nice suit campaigner

 

[Maurice Mitchell]

I was a big fan of Terry Laidler on ABC radio back in the 90's. He once interviewed Paul Keating and asked Keating some topical and confronting questions about his dealings with Indonesia. Keating's response was to not answer the questions but rather to reproach Laidler very strongly. Laidler once or twice asked a similar question in a different way and got the same sort of responses from Keating. The interview finished and Laidler's show continued. It was talkback time. Callers rang in expressing disapproval with how weak Laidler had been and asking why he let Keating get away with responding the way he did....

Laidler's response was short, simple and very sweet. He said it is my job to ask the questions. Keating's job to answer as he sees fit. And the listener's job to judge what they think of the guest given his responses. He added something along the lines if Keating chooses to dodge questions and answer like a bully it is no skin of his(Laidler's) nose, and if that process helps people form their view of Paul Keating with greater clarity then Laidler felt he had done his job.

I heard Laidler conduct so many informative interviews and draw great insights from guests by listening carefully to them and responding appropriately.

I want to say I think you are a good poster here so not wanting to belittle what you are saying, and I guess we all might like to know the truth of what is happening at Melbourne. But what you are talking about a Kane Cornes doing isn't going to elicit any meaningful information out of the people he is interviewing. Cornes would not truly listen to any explanation he was given and would just keep repeating meaningless words like "culture problems" etc. He would not make a specific allegation because he knows he risks defamation proceedings if he cannot prove the truth of his statement. Cornes would effectively reduce the interview to him saying Melbourne has culture problems because two players had a blue, another player tested positive to cocaine and another player had an argument with fitness staff and was seen partying on camera, over the course of 2 seasons. And the responders would say they are confident there is no cultural issue, they are just separate unrelated incidents that occur with a football club from time to time, and that it would only be a club culture issue if the club didn't address the incidents satisfactorily. If they were smart they might point out that going by what Cornes is arguing then the most successful popular music band in history had massive cultural issues, because they took illicit drugs, had arguments with each other and staff and were also seen at parties. To uncover the truth of matters such as these would require way more advanced interviewing skills than anything a Kane Cornes is capable of producing.

I’ve heard many a great interviewer over the years and I get your point. I don’t think I’ve heard any better than Phillip Adams although there have been many good ones.

My point being: the bits I heard weren’t preventing the Melbourne guys setting the agenda. The listener wanted the truth. Melbourne wanted the issues to go away without saying much. In the end I reckon neither side got much out of it. Certainly no specifics were given, and if you wanted them Gary Lyon is not the guy who will probe away at this particular issue.

I don’t rate Cornes’s work much but I do believe he would ask hard questions and that is the problem. I can’t think of anyone else who would.

 

[Al Heimer]

nice suit campaigner

View attachment 1843138

View attachment 1843139

Coke is expensive, no money for decent threads.

On SM-A426B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[biaseddustyfan]

nice suit campaigner

View attachment 1843138

View attachment 1843139

heck that's a mint suit Jim's wearing

 

[Groupie_]

* that's a mint suit Jim's wearing

would look mint on you

 

[Downtown06]

would look mint on you

What about me

 

[Groupie_]

What about me

that goes without saying

 

[Nostradumbass]

Colliers Dawkins is playing for Williamstown lol

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Rising star Elijah Hollands faces court after being busted with cocaine at casino.

Magistrate orders him to play for Carlton.

Hollands' defence attorney to appeal and plead for downgrade to a lengthy prison sentence.

 

[JR82]

Good to see Lyon throw the culture question back at them but Lyon should have also asked, if the culture isn't failing like Goodwin & Pert are preaching then why are their players continually in the news for the wrong reasons?

Exactly, let's face facts here. 1 of their star players is a ticking time bomb & another failed a drug test on the eve of the Finals when they were right in the mix to win the whole thing. If that's not ringing alarm bells for them then nothing will.

 

[JR82]

No it’s not his genre and he has built his brand on a shock jock/clickbait model but he isn’t afraid to ask tough questions; he isn’t afraid to hurt feelings or create animosity or resentment toward him.

If you heard him and Gerard Healy interviewing Ravi Shastri earlier in the year in the lead up to Tests in India you would realise he has no hesitation in asking tough questions. He suggested the wicket prepared for the match (rightly or wrongly) was cheating. Shastri was seriously pissed off with that but Kane wasn’t backing off.

Yes, he also chucks stuff out there to grab attention. It’s a style of broadcasting that is not to my taste but I’ve also heard him do some tough questioning and when in that situation he is quite well prepared and dogged.

My point mainly was that if you want the appropriate questions asked; questions that don’t allow Pert and Goodwin to not answer; to dodge; to use weasel words, then there is really nobody who covers the AFL that you would rely on to do that.

And to repeat: maybe the exception might be Tim Lane.

This says alot about the current state of the AFL media.

 

[Chat Pile]

I reckon Melbourne is copping it a little unfairly to be honest. Fair enough Oliver is acting like a right w***er and the other one is doing coke on game day but I feel the reporting on their culture is a bit overboard. People were also cracking the sads over what May said at their bnf even though I thought it was reasonable.

It's entirely possible to have a good culture that a couple dickheads worm their way into. You don't judge a culture by the actions of a few individuals, we certainly haven't (largely) when Richmond has had our culture questioned over the years.

 

[tigerdan]

I was a big fan of Terry Laidler on ABC radio back in the 90's. He once interviewed Paul Keating and asked Keating some topical and confronting questions about his dealings with Indonesia. Keating's response was to not answer the questions but rather to reproach Laidler very strongly. Laidler once or twice asked a similar question in a different way and got the same sort of responses from Keating. The interview finished and Laidler's show continued. It was talkback time. Callers rang in expressing disapproval with how weak Laidler had been and asking why he let Keating get away with responding the way he did....

Laidler's response was short, simple and very sweet. He said it is my job to ask the questions. Keating's job to answer as he sees fit. And the listener's job to judge what they think of the guest given his responses. He added something along the lines if Keating chooses to dodge questions and answer like a bully it is no skin of his(Laidler's) nose, and if that process helps people form their view of Paul Keating with greater clarity then Laidler felt he had done his job.

I heard Laidler conduct so many informative interviews and draw great insights from guests by listening carefully to them and responding appropriately.

I want to say I think you are a good poster here so not wanting to belittle what you are saying, and I guess we all might like to know the truth of what is happening at Melbourne. But what you are talking about a Kane Cornes doing isn't going to elicit any meaningful information out of the people he is interviewing. Cornes would not truly listen to any explanation he was given and would just keep repeating meaningless words like "culture problems" etc. He would not make a specific allegation because he knows he risks defamation proceedings if he cannot prove the truth of his statement. Cornes would effectively reduce the interview to him saying Melbourne has culture problems because two players had a blue, another player tested positive to cocaine and another player had an argument with fitness staff and was seen partying on camera, over the course of 2 seasons. And the responders would say they are confident there is no cultural issue, they are just separate unrelated incidents that occur with a football club from time to time, and that it would only be a club culture issue if the club didn't address the incidents satisfactorily. If they were smart they might point out that going by what Cornes is arguing then the most successful popular music band in history had massive cultural issues, because they took illicit drugs, had arguments with each other and staff and were also seen at parties. To uncover the truth of matters such as these would require way more advanced interviewing skills than anything a Kane Cornes is capable of producing.

Getting OT here but that interview Andrew Denton (?) had with Chopper Read was unbelievable. He wasn't trying to be a campaigner but completely tied Chopper in knots and made him look like an absolutely fool.