Opinion Mitch Brown

Remove this Banner Ad

Ha. He writes some good stuff. But he just went off the rails 1 too many times for me.
And it wasn't even at me.

Life is too short to read abuse.


prefer you keep it to yourself mate :thumbsu:
no dis-respect intended but seriously, it's a Mitch Brown thread and I, and yourself are quite simply irrelevant and am sure other posters would agree.

Rivers may be out for a few weeks, could really be the chance of his lifetime to either make it or break it, in the coming 3 or so weeks.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I read that Scott was pretty blunt and to the point about getting Brown off, is that true?
If so he might be lucky to get a game this week, but I reckon we need to see him a few more times although I'd hate us to loose to Carlton because he leaked goals.
I reckon if the coach thinks you're weak it's just about over.:(
 
I read that Scott was pretty blunt and to the point about getting Brown off, is that true?
If so he might be lucky to get a game this week, but I reckon we need to see him a few more times although I'd hate us to loose to Carlton because he leaked goals.
I reckon if the coach thinks you're weak it's just about over.:(
And where did you read that meto?
My god this forum has gone weird over the last few weeks.
 
And where did you read that meto?
My god this forum has gone weird over the last few weeks.

To be fair, it was on here, where someone seeing vision of Scott in the coaches box at the time of Brown's replacement gave their own highly critical interpretation of what Scott said after Brown was done over in a marking contest.
But actually all you can see is him saying "Mitch Brown", and I think the original poster has now agreed with that.
 
I know that fred. it was sarah 13.
Just wanted meto to admit he had no friggin idea
 
That footage was actually interesting as I reckon he was answering a question rather than asking one...
 
I think the footage made a couple of things clear:
(a) it confirmed the opinion of those who think he's never going to make it, and
(b) it confirmed the opinion of those who think he wasn't as bad as people said and he's a good prospect,
and I think if he gets a run of 3 or 4 games while Rivers is missing, then we'll all be able to get a good look at him, and
(1) those who thought (a) will know he's never going to make it, and
(2) those who thought (b) will know he's a good prospect.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think the footage made a couple of things clear:
(a) it confirmed the opinion of those who think he's never going to make it, and
(b) it confirmed the opinion of those who think he wasn't as bad as people said and he's a good prospect,
and I think if he gets a run of 3 or 4 games while Rivers is missing, then we'll all be able to get a good look at him, and
(1) those who thought (a) will know he's never going to make it, and
(2) those who thought (b) will know he's a good prospect.


So what you are alerting us to is that:

“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.”

:)
 
So what you are alerting us to is that:

“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.”

:)

Maybe I'm crazy but I've heard that saying several times before and understand it completely.
Maybe its the inner theoretical physicist in me....
 
So what you are alerting us to is that:

“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.”

:)

Maybe I'm crazy but I've heard that saying several times before and understand it completely.
Maybe its the inner theoretical physicist in me....

Don't know how you could know whether the last sentence is correct or not.:D
 
To be fair, it was on here, where someone seeing vision of Scott in the coaches box at the time of Brown's replacement gave their own highly critical interpretation of what Scott said after Brown was done over in a marking contest.
But actually all you can see is him saying "Mitch Brown", and I think the original poster has now agreed with that.

Thanks Fred, yes it was, and no thanks to that 'Vinum':mad:, it gave me the impression that was the case,.....if it's not true then great, cause I think he's got to get an opportunity while River's is injured.
Just worries me a little on the back of one excellent game in the VFL he's now got to prove himself as a backman at AFL level,....he's very inexperienced as a defender and could be a liability, just hope we don't loose games while experimenting.
I would've thought 3-4 games down back before the big time might have been a little fairer on the bloke, but I suppose we're light on for tall defenders so here's his chance.
 
Just wanted meto to admit he had no friggin idea

i think that was bluntly obvious with meto's poisonous pen toward varcoe.

I think the footage made a couple of things clear:
(a) it confirmed the opinion of those who think he's never going to make it, and
(b) it confirmed the opinion of those who think he wasn't as bad as people said and he's a good prospect,
and I think if he gets a run of 3 or 4 games while Rivers is missing, then we'll all be able to get a good look at him, and
(1) those who thought (a) will know he's never going to make it, and
(2) those who thought (b) will know he's a good prospect.

lost me after "i":D.
 
How about in philosophical terms?;)

Sorry Mitch. We'll be back to you in a sec.

Its a bit like my argument with my year 10 physics teacher when he tried to explain the "big bang".
Him: Well it started with a super dense ball.
Me: Where did the ball come from?
Him: Well it was formed by millions of particles that came together due to gravity.
Me: Ok, but where did those particles come from?
Him: From even small groups of atoms and gravity again.
Me: Right, but where did THOSE atoms come from?

etc etc

Not knowing what we dont know means we dont actually know that we dont know it, which proves the first part correct because we dont know.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Mitch Brown

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top