Jack Ginnivan - Redemption arc

[BIGHAWK23]

And double standards...

Yawn

Back to the bench kid

 

[LoungeLizard]

You can't possibly quantify this and you somehow think it's not idiotic?

I would argue the embarrassment of an 80-point thumping the week before would have had a lot more to do with with improved effort than a throw-away line from big mean old Jack Ginnivan.

I would say Jacks tweet would have put every Port players mind back onto the job at hand whether you think it or not, it would have had a contributing factor.
How much, no-one could ever know.

Port won that's all you need to know, let's see if Jack ever does it again.

 

[Sixpence]

Pretty spot on:

The only way you can be critical of Kenny and defensive of all things Hawk is to run with:

Their smartarse deserved an escalated response, whereas our smartarse didn't.

Or alternatively, go with Sammy's bizarre age based reasoning where he is outraged that a 60 year old was a smartarse towards a 21 year old, but is proud of a 30 year old professional athlete for being aggressive and threatening towards an out of shape 60 year old.

What's bizarre is you thinking that a senior coach calling an opposition player a c--khead right after winning a game is simply being "a smartarse". That is ****ed up. As is claiming Sic was "threatening". How much twisting of reality do you actually want to do here?

 

[Farang83150]

Yawn

Back to the bench kid

 

[Gavin Excell]

I would say Jacks tweet would have put every Port players mind back onto the job at hand whether you think it or not, it would have had a contributing factor.
How much, no-one could ever know.

Port won that's all you need to know, let's see if Jack ever does it again.

JHF in an interview said that Ginnevans post was referenced in the week as an example of how the rest of the football world viewed Port

As opposed to the sole motivational matter

 

[sr36]

What's bizarre is you thinking that a senior coach calling an opposition player a c--khead right after winning a game is simply being "a smartarse". That is ****ed up. As is claiming Sic was "threatening". How much twisting of reality do you actually want to do here?

You guys might need to get in a huddle and decide exactly what Kenny said, as the "official" supporter accounts of his words seem to be shifting. I hope you're right though, as I'm more partial to "********" than "****wit."

If Sammy can refer to Kenny as "aggressive" in that exchange, "threatening" is an understatement for Sicily's response.

 

[Sixpence]

I would say Jacks tweet would have put every Port players mind back onto the job at hand whether you think it or not, it would have had a contributing factor.
How much, no-one could ever know.

Port won that's all you need to know, let's see if Jack ever does it again.

Would it though? How mentally weak are they that they need to use that comment to motivate themselves for a knockout final after such a heavy loss? I can pretty much guarantee their focus would be on what they did wrong the week before and how they can correct it.

They won because they brought a lot more pressure and played more like they had been playing all year.

People are acting like Ginni's comment transformed them from North Melbourne into a contending side. The finished the H&A season in 2nd.

 

[Sixpence]

You guys might need to get in a huddle and decide exactly what Kenny said, as the "official" supporter accounts of his words seem to be shifting.

If Sammy can refer to Kenny as "aggressive" in that exchange, "threatening" is an understatement for Sicily's response.

It's not that hard to understand. Sam saying "aggressive" was a polite way of saying "abusive", which again (shouldn't need to pointed out), calling someone a "c--khead" is abusive. Sic may have been angry, but he was neither aggressive in his language, nor threatening. You are really reaching with this one.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Would it though? How mentally weak are they that they need to use that comment to motivate themselves for a knockout final after such a heavy loss? I can pretty much guarantee their focus would be on what they did wrong the week before and how they can correct it.

They won because they brought a lot more pressure and played more like they had been playing all year.

People are acting like Ginni's comment transformed them from North Melbourne into a contending side. The finished the H&A season in 2nd.

Yes you're right the focus would have been on why they played crap the week before, but remember how crap they played, you can focus all you like but getting flogged like that and years gone by, that puts doubts in your head.

Jack gave them that one thing that may have taken that doubt away, just win at all costs.

 

[sr36]

It's not that hard to understand. Sam saying "aggressive" was a polite way of saying "abusive", which again (shouldn't need to pointed out), calling someone a "c--khead" is abusive. Sic may have been angry, but he was neither aggressive in his language, nor threatening. You are really reaching with this one.

Gold. I knew you'd come up with some some strange logic where my description of 'threatening' is outrageous but Sammy's "aggressive" is spot on.


Terrifying aggression really:



It's ok. You can say that Sic and Mitchell overreacted without being tried as a traitor.

 

[LoungeLizard]

JHF in an interview said that Ginnevans post was referenced in the week as an example of how the rest of the football world viewed Port

As opposed to the sole motivational matter

You don't need much to take the doubt away, we will never know, but we do know Port won after being flogged the week before and remember Hawthorn were in red hot form.

 

[Sixpence]

Gold. I knew you'd come up with some some strange logic where my description of 'threatening' is outrageous but Sammy's "aggressive" is spot on.

Terrifying aggression really:

View attachment 2113830

You're shitting me right? You literally just ignored what I wrote.

 

[BIGHAWK23]

Gold. I knew you'd come up with some some strange logic where my description of 'threatening' is outrageous but Sammy's "aggressive" is spot on.

Terrifying aggression really:

View attachment 2113830

Come on mate

Don't be disingenuous, noone is referencing this as the "aggressive" aspect

 

[sr36]

You're shitting me right? You literally just ignored what I wrote.

No I didn't. I laughed at this bit: "aggressive" was a polite way of saying "abusive"

 

[sr36]

Come on mate

Don't be disingenuous, noone is referencing this as the "aggressive" aspect

Are you seriously jumping on board an argument that a description of Sicily as "threatening" is ridiculuos, but Kenny as "aggressive" is apt?

Can a group of Hawk fans get any more biased and defensive about this?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

The poster boys of unsociable football are preaching about how to play sociable football. If you don't get that or can't see why someone would find it funny then you really shouldn't be talking about blatant stupidity.

No, the posters boys of unsociable football were saying that they thought Ken did himself a diservice and should know better than to carry on after a game.

The melts came thick and fast, that they had this opinion, but then the AFL fined Ken for conduct unbecoming, so who was wrong?

 

[BIGHAWK23]

Are you seriously jumping on board an argument that a description of Sicily as "threatening" is ridiculuos, but Kenny as "aggressive" is fine?

Can a group of Hawk fans get any more biased and defensive about this?

Not jumping on board

Just saying we were having a reasonable discussion before

It was well intended

 

[Sixpence]

Are you seriously jumping on board an argument that a description of Sicily as "threatening" is ridiculuos, but Kenny as "aggressive" is apt?

Can a group of Hawk fans get any more biased and defensive about this?

You do realize that angry face doesn't mean threatening and non-angry face doesn't mean not aggressive, right? The respective language used is important here.

 

[sr36]

No, the posters boys of unsociable football were saying that they thought Ken did himself a diservice and should know better than to carry on after a game.

The melts came thick and fast, that they had this opinion, but then the AFL fined Ken for conduct unbecoming, so who was wrong?

Yes, the unsociable ones were preaching about how to be sociable. I don't think we're in disagreement on this. We might view it differently though.

And yes the AFL did what they do - gave out a fine for a negative news story.

Now if it was in the field of play, they would follow their usual punishment guidelines where retalition isn't an excuse and give out a fine for the escalated response as well; however, not in the field of play guidelines are a fine for a bit of outrage in the media - all clear without it.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Come on mate

Don't be disingenuous, noone is referencing this as the "aggressive" aspect

Just another bad faith argument from him.

I’m sure they’d be fine with one of the players at their local match a “little ****head” multiple times by the coach after the siren. It wouldn’t end badly at all.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Yes, the unsociable ones were preaching about how to be sociable. I don't think we're in disagreement on this. We might view it differently though.

And yes the AFL did what they do - gave out a fine for a negative news story.

Now if it was in the field of play, they would follow their usual punishment guidelines where retalition isn't an excuse and give out a fine for the escalated response as well; however, not in the field of play guidelines are a fine for a bit of outrage in the media - all clear without it.

Dig up, please.

The unsociable ones were not preaching. They were talking about sportsmanship. Something Ken failed at.

Conduct unbecoming isn’t a result of a negative news story, it’s a consequence of a senior coach yelling out to and calling an opposition player names after a game.

But of course, you just keep desperately ignoring that.

 

[sr36]

You do realize that angry face doesn't mean threatening and non-angry face doesn't mean not aggressive, right? The respective language used is important here.

I get the reflexive response from both Sicily and you in defence of your team.

But you are actually arguing that a description of Hinkley as aggressive is fine, but a description of Sicily as 'threatening' is terrible ...

I honestly don't understand how you think it wasn't aggressive and threatening body language from Sic. It even had the mates holding him back element. Or ar you just going with it in some strange loyalty pact?

 

[Sixpence]

I get the reflexive response from both Sicily and you in defence of your team.

But you are actually arguing that a description of Hinkley as aggressive is fine, but a description of Sicily as 'threatening' is terrible ...

I honestly don't understand how you think it wasn't aggressive and threatening body language from Sic. It even had the mates holding him back element. Or ar you just going with it in some strange loyalty pact?

There's clearly a lot you don't understand. Including body language.

 

[sr36]

There's clearly a lot you don't understand. Including body language.

Anyway. Storm in a teacup. Kenny did a half hearted apology and will pay his fine. Sic is proud. If you think he should be proud, that's great and pretty amusing ...

 

[Farang83150]

Anyway. Storm in a teacup, but Kenny did a half hearted apology and will pay his fine. Sic is proud. If you think he should be proud, that's great and pretty amusing ...

And rather hypocritical.