It was a coaches comparison. You'll get there eventually but I'm here to help until it clicks for you.Good point. As a player Rohan was likely more of a role model for young kids.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It was a coaches comparison. You'll get there eventually but I'm here to help until it clicks for you.Good point. As a player Rohan was likely more of a role model for young kids.
Where was it stated that it was confined to coaches? Please highlight.It was a coaches comparison. You'll get there eventually but I'm here to help until it clicks for you.
It was others who brought Scott's ethics into it. You know how to read.Where was it stated that it was confined to coaches? Please highlight.
But if you want to keep it to coaches was Dimma’s consensual relationship on Richmond’s dime better or worse than Bomber Thompson on the crack pipe on Geelong’s dime? I guess difference being Dimma might have got active in the back seat of car while Bomber “fell asleep” in one.
Personally I’d like to see an end to attacks on individuals based on their personal lives, but I won’t let it slide when some peanut thinks he’s landed a “gotcha” comment.
If you’re going to use an expression get it right. Or are you saying the proof was buried in the pudding?the proof is in the pudding
I’m not sure why people bang on about KP as home ground advantage… we find it pretty easy to play there.
Where was it stated that it was confined to coaches? Please highlight.
But if you want to keep it to coaches was Dimma’s consensual relationship on Richmond’s dime better or worse than Bomber Thompson on the crack pipe on Geelong’s dime? I guess difference being Dimma might have got active in the back seat of car while Bomber “fell asleep” in one.
Personally I’d like to see an end to attacks on individuals based on their personal lives, but I won’t let it slide when some peanut thinks he’s landed a “gotcha” comment.
If you’re going to use an expression get it right. Or are you saying the proof was buried in the pudding?
And not on a spoon?To be honest it’s hard to rort a system when it’s literally handed to you on a silver platter.
And not on a spoon?
So Dusty pledged not to fail drug tests and hang out with convicted killers but did he?
AM I doing it right?
GO Catters
What part of what I said is incorrect? None of us know if Scott was paid during that year or not. Cat fans state it as fact.
As for Dusty, can you tell me more about these pledges you say he made?
Does it pain you that Scott may not have drawn a salary during lockdown? From my perspective if the Club had knocked back Scott’s offer I think we would have heard one way or the other.What part of what I said is incorrect? None of us know if Scott was paid during that year or not. Cat fans state it as fact.
As for Dusty, can you tell me more about these pledges you say he made?
Just to be clear I think it’s disgusting that you’re using a dead child as internet point scoringIs that better or worse than Gary Rohan cheating on his wife and the memory of his dead baby on Geelong's dime? Just to b clear.
None of us know what Martin himself was paid when he took less to stay at Richmond instead of going to North Melbourne but we have to all take your word for it don’t we.
No PB none of us do know what Martin was paid but the discussion was about Chris Scott and I’m not sure why Dusty was dragged into it. And it’s not my word you have to take because I’ve never said anything about what Martin has or hasn’t been paid.
It all started because a Cat fan said Scott gave up his salary during Covid and gushed over what a good bloke he was. They posted an article that said Scott had ‘pledged’ to forgo his salary. I asked if they knew for certain if he followed through with his pledge. That’s it. I never said at any stage that he didn’t in fact give up the money.
I seem to have upset a few of you and I’m not really sure why. It’s not like I said he killed someone. If he followed through then good on him.
And why was the discussion about Chris Scott in the first place?No PB none of us do know what Martin was paid but the discussion was about Chris Scott and I’m not sure why Dusty was dragged into it. And it’s not my word you have to take because I’ve never said anything about what Martin has or hasn’t been paid.
It all started because a Cat fan said Scott gave up his salary during Covid and gushed over what a good bloke he was. They posted an article that said Scott had ‘pledged’ to forgo his salary. I asked if they knew for certain if he followed through with his pledge. That’s it. I never said at any stage that he didn’t in fact give up the money.
I seem to have upset a few of you and I’m not really sure why. It’s not like I said he killed someone. If he followed through then good on him.
And I think it’s disgusting that Dimma’s private life is also used for point-scoring. Which it clearly was. Now you might argue one is worse than the other, but guess what… you don’t decide where that line is.Just to be clear I think it’s disgusting that you’re using a dead child as internet point scoring
Putting that aside we are talking about coaches ethics because apparently Scott and the club has been lying about him forgoing his salary for the year to enable the club to keep on staff
You know instead of running around and rooting staff memebers for their own pleasure while abusing the power dynamics between the coach and staff
In other words: "Every time I see someone acting like a peanut, in a way I disagree with, I will become a peanut myself and replicate their behaviour".And I think it’s disgusting that Dimma’s private life is also used for point-scoring. Which it clearly was. Now you might argue one is worse than the other, but guess what… you don’t decide where that line is.
As I’ve stated I’d rather have personal lives left out of football discussions, but if peanuts want score cheap points they need to be ready to accept return fire. And not sook about it.
Sorry, please point out where I brought up Scott’s ethics. I think you’ll find you’ve mistaken me for someone else. Of course you could have confirmed that before posting but chose not to. I look forward to your apology and retraction. I love being “champed” as well, especially when you have your facts wrong.You were the one bringing up Scott’s ethics while ignoring the big red glowing neon signs around Dimma’s behaviour so save your faux outrage for the peanut gallery champ
Not replicating their behaviour but shining a light on other poster’s hypocrisy to hopefully make this a better site for all.In other words: "Every time I see someone acting like a peanut, in a way I disagree with, I will become a peanut myself and replicate their behaviour".
Sophisticated thinking patterns there.
You responded. Sorely lacking in any actual evidence however.I already replied mate keep up in your old age