List Mgmt. Jeremy Cameron traded to Geelong

[Turbocat]

He's the same height and weight as Dusty .... so probably. Hart was superb over head.

Very hard to judge champs from the past. Different game. Different training. It like Polly. The same sort of issues. To me I was not thinking Martin. He is the same size and shape as Ling. Funny sort of setshot like him, only much more athletic and spring. Gut running and speed. Not sure but he had more than enough talent to run thru the middle , and take marks against a less opponent when moved forward(like Martin)

 

[Nankervis brothers]

But it was a different sport in that day and age. You can't eliminate pioneers of their respective fields based on what their peers are doing 50+ years later.
Players like Coleman, Farmer, Hart helped to revolutionize the game we see today. They perfected their playing positions and if you were to beat them, you had to be bigger, stronger and more athletic.

We don't exclude Isaac Newton's achievements despite any 14 year old today having superior intellect.

I agree with the first paragraph, but the bolded above is such a strange thing to say. 'Any 14-year-old old today has a superior intellect to Newton?'—I don't think so.

The average 14-year-old might understand Newton's laws of motion at a practical level, but very few 14-year-olds would understand it theoretically. How many 14-year-olds understand the calculus used (and essentially invented) by Newtown in Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy that describe the laws? And the same could be said of Newton's work in physical optics. Besides, how many 14-year-olds provide new, revolutionary, and lasting insights about the nature and properties of energy, matter, light?

I think there is a tendency today to mistake information for intelligence; they are not the same thing. Today's 14-year-old has more available 'general information' than Newton in the 17th century, but that doesn't make them bright. FWIW, Newton's IQ has been estimated at around 190, which is among the highest in human history, alongside people like Albert Einstein, Srinivasa Ramanujan, and Marie Curie. I'd love to see what the world would look like if every teenager were rocking an IQ like that!

 

[Kaatman]

Possibly already mentioned but did he say post game he had his first training session last week?

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Possibly already mentioned but did he say post game he had his first training session last week?

Yup.
How good is he gunna be when he's fully fit and fully training, he and Hawkins (and Rohan.. and the rest of the forwardline) already have a good chemistry and understanding of each other, cannot wait to see how good they work together when they are able to train consistently as a group.

 

[My Tilly]

I agree with the first paragraph, but the bolded above is such a strange thing to say. 'Any 14-year-old old today has a superior intellect to Newton?'—I don't think so.

The average 14-year-old might understand Newton's laws of motion at a practical level, but very few 14-year-olds would understand it theoretically. How many 14-year-olds understand the calculus used (and essentially invented) by Newtown in Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy that describe the laws? And the same could be said of Newton's work in physical optics. Besides, how many 14-year-olds provide new, revolutionary, and lasting insights about the nature and properties of energy, matter, light?

I think there is a tendency today to mistake information for intelligence; they are not the same thing. Today's 14-year-old has more available 'general information' than Newton in the 17th century, but that doesn't make them bright. FWIW, Newton's IQ has been estimated at around 190, which is among the highest in human history, alongside people like Alfred Einstein, Srinivasa Ramanujan, and Marie Curie. I'd love to see what the world would look like if every teenager were rocking an IQ like that!

You missed my point.
I am saying if a 14 year old of today were transported to the 1600th century, they would be a genius in their own right given all they know of the world no thanks to pioneers such as Newton etc.

Just because Polly Farmer would get dominated by Mark Blicavs in ruck today, he should not be exempt from making the team of the century.

 

[David the Cat]

you disagree then make my exact point. Look at the mobility of hart vs Martin. Hart would not compete as a mid. He could barely compete as a mid in his time let alone today. And today he could not be a key position player.

and again look at that awful slow ball drop. He would be run down all the time in open play. Name a player today whose kick is that bad? I would have to go back to Andrew Dunkley from 15 years ago.

Wayne Carey said just this weekend when asked by BT who was better, Buddy or GAS.... his reply??....different eras.....worthless exercise.....

I'm glad to be on the same page as Carey on this subject...so I'll let you indulge in your worthless exercise to your hearts content, as vacuous and bereft of intellectual honesty as it may be.

 

[David the Cat]

You missed my point.
I am saying if a 14 year old of today were transported to the 1600th century, they would be a genius in their own right given all they know of the world no thanks to pioneers such as Newton etc.

Just because Polly Farmer would get dominated by Mark Blicavs in ruck today, he should not be exempt from making the team of the century.

LOL...the 14 year old would probably be burnt at the stake...

I thoroughly agree with your last sentence despite not being enamoured with multi era comparisons.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

You missed my point.
I am saying if a 14 year old of today were transported to the 1600th century, they would be a genius in their own right given all they know of the world no thanks to pioneers such as Newton etc.

Just because Polly Farmer would get dominated by Mark Blicavs in ruck today, he should not be exempt from making the team of the century.

They would be illiterate, as they would not know how to read or write in Latin.

 

[NakedDeadGuy]

As so many have said pointless comparing players from different eras. But - having a Richmond supporting father and just being old enough to have seen him, Royce Hart absolute champion of the game. Ripper bloke too, met him in about 1994 in the Tullamarine bar on our way to Tassie for a footy trip.
Could not be CHF in today’s game just through size, as per highlights posted above, well deserved legend of the game.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

LOL...the 14 year old would probably be burnt at the stake...

I thoroughly agree with your last sentence despite not being enamoured with multi era comparisons.

Depends. 16th century yeah probably. 1600th century really depends on how humanity plans out over the next million-ish years, but I guess probably also burnt at the stake

 

[Hamingja]

It has been an interesting start to his Geelong career. It is almost the polar opposite to his GWS career. The criticism people would level against him at GWS was that he was a bit of a flat track bully and would rack the goals up against the poor sides and go missing against the good sides. For us he has only really been fair and played his role for the majority of the time and then slotted it up a gear for devastating bursts against Richmond and Port. There is some logic in that given that he is not a great contested mark and he only really gets going when he has space to operate in and he has only really got that against the better teams as their priority isn't to flood our forward line for the whole game.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

It has been an interesting start to his Geelong career. It is almost the polar opposite to his GWS career. The criticism people would level against him at GWS was that he was a bit of a flat track bully and would rack the goals up against the poor sides and go missing against the good sides. For us he has only really been fair and played his role for the majority of the time and then slotted it up a gear for devastating bursts against Richmond and Port. There is some logic in that given that he is not a great contested mark and he only really gets going when he has space to operate in and he has only really got that against the better teams as their priority isn't to flood our forward line for the whole game.

Reckon it's mostly the result of the tactics used by sides that expect to lose versus those that expect to win. Sides outside the 8 just try to clog our backline whereas sides trying to get their own system going will leave us more space so they can attack themselves.

I think the upshot of this is that non-contenders will continue to park the bus and as a result good opposition will get very little vision on which to base a decision on what works against us when you're trying to attack.

 

[allrighty]

A real star was Royce Hart...great hands...Jeremy Cameron like mobility..real pace...a real team player with all the skills.

Inflicted some real pain on the Cats in his time.

A bit early to compare Jeremy Cameron to him......but Cameron looks special....so perhaps in good time.

Balme at 3.10

 

[allrighty]

I think there is a tendency today to mistake information for intelligence; they are not the same thing. Today's 14-year-old has more available 'general information' than Newton in the 17th century, but that doesn't make them bright. FWIW, Newton's IQ has been estimated at around 190, which is among the highest in human history, alongside people like Albert Einstein, Srinivasa Ramanujan, and Marie Curie. I'd love to see what the world would look like if every teenager were rocking an IQ like that!

Yes OT: And then there is the ability to apply theory in context correctly and make it work for you or as intended. That is where SO many fall over. I can prattle a million theories but there are about half a dozen i use at work over and over, aside from the ones that keep me upright on the ground and all that, you know, gravity.

My general conclusion is that too many people too often talk crap about stuff they have no real clue about, and at the same time are particularly averse to proper consequential thinking. Moreover there are even more people out there unable to recognise that what those others are saying is crap. Hence the shitty state of many things around us right now.

 

[allrighty]

As so many have said pointless comparing players from different eras. But - having a Richmond supporting father and just being old enough to have seen him, Royce Hart absolute champion of the game. Ripper bloke too, met him in about 1994 in the Tullamarine bar on our way to Tassie for a footy trip.
Could not be CHF in today’s game just through size, as per highlights posted above, well deserved legend of the game.

I saw an article the other day about that VFA FF legend of the 70's Jim "Frosty" Miller. I was surprised to see his height was 180cm.

 

[DanA]

Yes OT: And then there is the ability to apply theory in context correctly and make it work for you or as intended. That is where SO many fall over. I can prattle a million theories but there are about half a dozen i use at work over and over, aside from the ones that keep me upright on the ground and all that, you know, gravity.

My general conclusion is that too many people too often talk crap about stuff they have no real clue about, and at the same time are particularly averse to proper consequential thinking. Moreover there are even more people out there unable to recognise that what those others are saying is crap. Hence the shitty state of many things around us right now.

But that information allows you to create intelligence, and there are advances in learning to learn that allows you to get more from less. It’s an advantage rather than sure thing. For instance, while you might not know everything about AFL, you know enough to have an advantage. Just the idea of weight training, sleep, and good diet is taken for granted now, and having seen modern AFL tactics (even if you don’t know the details) gives you an advantage.

That’s a big leg up, you still would need to put the work in, and have some level of athleticism, but you’ve got a big advantage. It’s the same with Isaac Newton. You know the world’s round, that gravity exists, you know trigonometry, maybe calculus, and you know how to learn. It might not be enough to reach Newton level but it gives you a big advantage over what he had.

 

[MacStradbroke]

Gee wiz the Jeremy Cameron thread is a fun read.

 

[Kitcat]

Yes OT: And then there is the ability to apply theory in context correctly and make it work for you or as intended. That is where SO many fall over. I can prattle a million theories but there are about half a dozen i use at work over and over, aside from the ones that keep me upright on the ground and all that, you know, gravity.

My general conclusion is that too many people too often talk crap about stuff they have no real clue about, and at the same time are particularly averse to proper consequential thinking. Moreover there are even more people out there unable to recognise that what those others are saying is crap. Hence the shitty state of many things around us right now.

I wish we could get Isaac Newton on to the law of prior opportunity.

 

[allrighty]

I wish we could get Isaac Newton on to the law of prior opportunity.

What a ripper response. Bookmark it!

 

[Cursed Cat]

bloke has hamstrings tighter than a Nun's ... shame we lost him before half time tonight because he looked in sharp form; those finishing skills are exquisite; the one-step snap from the tightest of angles and then $$ set shots x2

 

[Tony Barber]

I don't understand what people see in him.

 

[Poetic Justice]

I don't understand what people see in him.

sorry wut?

 

[DanA]

He’s been going alright and if healthy would be in the Coleman race despite having a foil that demands a lot of targets himself in Hawkins.

It’s nice to have both of them and hopefully Cameron can get past the hamstring issues.

 

[xtatik222k]

How long is he likely out for?

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

bloke has hamstrings tighter than a Nun's ... shame we lost him before half time tonight because he looked in sharp form; those finishing skills are exquisite; the one-step snap from the tightest of angles and then $$ set shots x2

The 1 step snap answered the question about the “what if” in the Sydney game.