Ablett doesn't rate until he gets the No.1 tag *MB thread*

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: Ablett doesn't rate until he gets the No.1 tag

Owning Sewell each time he's played on him rates. Top 3 in Round 17, BOG in Round 1, BOG in 08 GF, just for a start. Or is Sewell not Abletts shadow any more? Sewell, although is not in best 5 taggers anyway.


And if its been mentioned already, apologies to all, I don't bother reading more than the header with this dipsht. Seriously needs to get a life. HP is the only one on here who can be at home trolling while his team is playing only 20 minutes away. Now thats a lifeless soul.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Re: Ablett doesn't rate until he gets the No.1 tag

Another imbecilic thread, basically the OP is saying he wouldn't take G.Ablett Jnr, what a muppet
 
Re: Ablett doesn't rate until he gets the No.1 tag

Owning Sewell each time he's played on him rates. Top 3 in Round 17, BOG in Round 1, BOG in 08 GF, just for a start. Or is Sewell not Abletts shadow any more? Sewell, although is not in best 5 taggers anyway.

Sewell played on Ablett in Rd 1 2009 for the second half and beat him convincingly.

He didn't play on him in the Grand Final or Rd 17.
 
Maybe the title isn't worded correctly. What I mean is that we can't rate him until he gets the No.1 tag. Or even a recognised tagger in some games.

It's not about Rd 4 2009. I severely destroyed the assertion that Shirley was playing on him that round after said assertion was made. I guess I could do it for every single game?

In any case I looked through the season and could only find four games where he got the best tagger available.

Again, don't worry about the title of the thread. Just read the content, the OP, etc.

Another contradiction there Hodgepodge. For a player who supposedly never plays on the opposition's best tagger, you still admit he played on the opposition's best tagger 4 times this season. :eek:
 
i find arguing with this guy is a lot like arguing with an ATM that doesnt actually spit out the money requested. sure, its extremely justified, but at the same time, extremely pointless...
 
Another contradiction there Hodgepodge. For a player who supposedly never plays on the opposition's best tagger, you still admit he played on the opposition's best tagger 4 times this season. :eek:

Wow, you got me :rolleyes: Seriously though, what you described there is so erroneous it doesn't even qualify as a contradiction, and it would be impossible to overlook. How did you ever think you actually caught me out on this? :confused:

The facts I have presented from the beginning were that he doesn't get the No.1 tag week in week out like other superstar midfielders. Try and keep up, you're embarassing both of us now.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

And all of these superstar midfielders play against our #1 tagger, and a staggering amount of the time they get smashed by him. How are those superstars any better than Ablett?

If you must use only Geelong examples, then I'd say Judd had a better game against Ling than Ablett did on Joseph.

It's not rocket science. If you're going to compare two superstar players, you need to do it with a level playing field.

No use comparing Ponting and Sehwag's performances if Sehwag is playing on roads and Ponting's playing on turners.

In the same way, we can't compare Ablett's performances with other superstar players until he plays under the same attention they did.
 
If you must use only Geelong examples, then I'd say Judd had a better game against Ling than Ablett did on Joseph.

I knew you would mention that game. Well done. Do you want me to reel off the games where our #1 tagger has completely shut down the best midfielders in the competition?

It's not rocket science. If you're going to compare two superstar players, you need to do it with a level playing field.

No use comparing Ponting and Sehwag's performances if Sehwag is playing on roads and Ponting's playing on turners.

In the same way, we can't compare Ablett's performances with other superstar players until he plays under the same attention they did.

For the sake of argument, let's say Ablett has poor performances when tagged by the best, you know, just 25 touch 2 goal games.

How does this reflect poorly on him, when the other A class midfielders get shut down by our tagger?

They're in the exact same position, taking Ling, that Ablett would be in taking whoever these taggers that you deem worthy. If they also have average 25 touch 2 goal games (rarely happens against Ling) how does this reflect poorly on Ablett?

Come on podgey, use those higher reasoning faculties to consider this hypothetical. I'm even ceding to you that Ablett struggles when tagged by the best, which I do not believe to be the reality.

Ablett struggles against the best, so does every other midfielder. At worst, with the assumption I'm making, he is as good as any other midfielder going around.

Hilarious that you're pulling Judd out to back you up here, considering he's the player you like trying to slag, probably even moreso that Ablett.
 
players should be rated on the games they play, not who their opponent is.

I doubt Kangaroos supporters will rate Carey's game on Andy Gowers (a half-back flanker) as impressive as the QF he played on Chris Langford (a champion defender).

Even if he did dominate the game more in the first instance.

It's very much about your opponent.
 
Of all the fails you deliver Fatpudge this is by far the best!

You have been completely owned in this thread by all supporters and yet you still argue untill your blue in the face with made up crap and BS arguments to support a weak thread.

You really need to get out more. :eek:

By the way you only have 2 threads on the main page ATM dont you think one of your classic bumps is overdue????
 
I doubt Kangaroos supporters will rate Carey's game on Andy Gowers (a half-back flanker) as impressive as the QF he played on Chris Langford (a champion defender).

Even if he did dominate the game more in the first instance.

It's very much about your opponent.

not really. a good game is a good game. if the opposition coach is dumb enough to play a lesser player on a champ like carey or ablett jr they deserve to be cut to shreds.
 
not really. a good game is a good game. if the opposition coach is dumb enough to play a lesser player on a champ like carey or ablett jr they deserve to be cut to shreds.

Let's say they deserve it.

Does it really mean that the player is instantly a better player because he is on weaker opposition?

Ablett plays on weaker opposition more often than not. When he does get the best tag, his effectiveness is diminished.

It is this effectiveness that we should rate him on, and not the 46 disposals games where nobody is on him. (Rd 4 2009).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Ablett doesn't rate until he gets the No.1 tag *MB thread*

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top