No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXVI

[Tiger_Of_Old]

View attachment 1626435

“What the * is this?”

The summer cup.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

It’s like when your a little kid and your parents give you money to buy them a present for Christmas.

We should just bs our numbers, win it, keep the money and invest in coaching

Just get cotch to knock the living shit out of every oppo player on gf day.
Minnow clubs get whats left after cotchs fines.
Money well spent.

 

[Not Important]

There's been about half a dozen links and examples cited since you had your sook. FMD.

For the THIRD TIME I am not "unable to supply a link" I just don't give a *. It's been done to death and if you can't see it, like I already said it's not my problem. You're grasping at that like it's the centrepoint of your argument but when proof is put there, in front of you in black and white you just choose to ignore it.

That's a personality type I don't want anything to do with FFS. Whatever mate, believe what you want to believe but you're just rambling now.

you made a claim. haven't provided one link 2 support it. not one. posted a lot of drivel that wasn't relevant and was largely wrong in the process - as a distraction. now you don't give a shit. you have no credibility on this issue - in other words you made it up.

 

[domin8]

you made a claim. haven't provided one link 2 support it. not one. posted a lot of drivel that wasn't relevant and was largely wrong in the process - as a distraction. now you don't give a s**t. you have no credibility on this issue - in other words you made it up.

Mate he literally said it’s been posted multiple times, and it has. If you don’t want to believe it that’s on you. But calling him out on this is off the mark.

 

[Karp3_dm]

 

[domin8]

View attachment 1628299

Is that because he’s a stuck up campaigner. A bloody campaigner. Or only in 1 week per month

 

[RFCGloryJC]

The Aints crippled by injuries.
Maxy King, Seb Ross, Coff, Members.
2024 will be 58 years since the poor buggers tasted success.

 

[Nobby]

The Aints crippled by injuries.
Maxy King, Seb Ross, Coff, Members.
2024 will be 58 years since the poor buggers tasted success.
View attachment 1628314

But but Messiah

 

[tigerdan]

I thought the metheads from sleepy hollow hated coming to Melbourne too far or something

Too much traffic on the princes highway for them, even though it's going in the opposite direction.

That is seriously an excuse they made!

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

There's been about half a dozen links and examples cited since you had your sook. FMD.

For the THIRD TIME I am not "unable to supply a link" I just don't give a *. It's been done to death and if you can't see it, like I already said it's not my problem. You're grasping at that like it's the centrepoint of your argument but when proof is put there, in front of you in black and white you just choose to ignore it.

That's a personality type I don't want anything to do with FFS. Whatever mate, believe what you want to believe but you're just rambling now.

You got a spare link mate

 

[YeOldTiger]

You got a spare link mate

Ima all out of ****ing links lol

 

[JR82]

Vlaustin getting knocked into next week in the 2020 GF no penalty on the perp,forearm raised n all in front of the whole Country mind you and Prestia being ko'd off the ball no free kick just about says it all one would of thought,but thats just me,but what would i know ? its not whingeing,its calling out cheating,it is what it is

What shat me up the wall was the media silence, we all know what happens when certain other players do even the smallest thing they notice...

 

[captain blood 17]

The Aints crippled by injuries.
Maxy King, Seb Ross, Coff, Members.
2024 will be 58 years since the poor buggers tasted success.
View attachment 1628314

Remember when Richmonds 37 years was a big deal even though the Cats went for 44 years before 2007 and Melbourne was over 60 (same with the dogs)?

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

i see you've once again been unable to supply any link to the conspiracy theory that hocking admitted to changing the rules to specifically adversely affect us. cos it's utter bullshit. had he done so you'd have had no difficulty as it would have been all over the tissues and he'd have been sacked, probably mclaughlin too as he not only ticked it off but enthusiastically endorsed it.

the club has never made the conspiratorial claims you have. never. because i catch you out on a piece of nonsense i am a lesser supporter than you are is not only offensive but crap.

i've heard balmy laugh when the sort of stuff you posted was put to him when it was current. which is yonks ago.

i just don't like having the club referred to as whingers; placing the blame for our poorer form at the feet of a conspiracy theory; suggesting we don't have the where-with-all to cope with rule changes that don't suit us. the stand rule was a factor. but of more significance was the loss of the player who was key to our finals and his not re-capturing his form; some of our key players not being able to be as influential as before; some selection issues.

Such a monumental shift that the 'stand' rule brought about in game style...during one team's playing ascendancy...and how it was brought about...and by whom it was brought about and the medja that selectively supported it...and the lack of public scrutiny beforehand, official or otherwise, as to why the game needed such a drastic rule change...Geelong ex player Hocking's involvement in introducing the stand rule while an AFL administrator then retiring to Geelong as an official agin reeks of bias...a lack of pre-season rule trial for all sides with the exception of one team, Geelong, pre-trialling the new rule pre competition and gaining an advantage...and the stand rule's sloppy adjudication in game by it's officials...the stand rule was/is not just a simple ordinary rule change that you make it out to be... It opens the AFL to demonstrating a public bias agin the most successful team and administration of/at the time.

 

[Nebular]

you made a claim. haven't provided one link 2 support it. not one. posted a lot of drivel that wasn't relevant and was largely wrong in the process - as a distraction. now you don't give a s**t. you have no credibility on this issue - in other words you made it up.

Did you miss the screenshot I posted after quoting your post?

Do a google search, it's not hard.

 

[sregit]

i see you've once again been unable to supply any link to the conspiracy theory that hocking admitted to changing the rules to specifically adversely affect us. cos it's utter bullshit. had he done so you'd have had no difficulty as it would have been all over the tissues and he'd have been sacked, probably mclaughlin too as he not only ticked it off but enthusiastically endorsed it.

the club has never made the conspiratorial claims you have. never. because i catch you out on a piece of nonsense i am a lesser supporter than you are is not only offensive but crap.

i've heard balmy laugh when the sort of stuff you posted was put to him when it was current. which is yonks ago.

i just don't like having the club referred to as whingers; placing the blame for our poorer form at the feet of a conspiracy theory; suggesting we don't have the where-with-all to cope with rule changes that don't suit us. the stand rule was a factor. but of more significance was the loss of the player who was key to our finals and his not re-capturing his form; some of our key players not being able to be as influential as before; some selection issues.

Hocking admitted on TV he devised the stand rule to cope with Richmond’s over manning of the mark. I don’t have a link but I can clearly remember it.

 

[YeOldTiger]

Did you miss the screenshot I posted after quoting your post?

Do a google search, it's not hard.

Nah you just made that up lol

 

[YeOldTiger]

Such a monumental shift that the 'stand' rule brought about in game style...during one team's playing ascendancy...and how it was brought about...and by whom it was brought about and the medja that selectively supported it...and the lack of public scrutiny beforehand, official or otherwise, as to why the game needed such a drastic rule change...Geelong ex player Hocking's involvement in introducing the stand rule while an AFL administrator then retiring to Geelong as an official agin reeks of bias...a lack of pre-season rule trial for all sides with the exception of one team, Geelong, pre-trialling the new rule pre competition and gaining an advantage...and the stand rule's sloppy adjudication in game by it's officials...the stand rule was/is not just a simple ordinary rule change that you make it out to be... It opens the AFL to demonstrating a public bias agin the most successful team and administration of/at the time.

Nah you're just making shit up out of thin air ! Lol

 

[SunshineBoy]

You got a spare link mate

Here’s one for you

View attachment 4D026F59-3C63-44E2-9A13-C2E7607FCB40.webp

 

[tora tora tora]

Hocking admitted on TV he devised the stand rule to cope with Richmond’s over manning of the mark. I don’t have a link but I can clearly remember it.

I remember the umps would call east west.. so move across but not fwd.
RFC players moved so far east they were ordering Hong Kong Chinese takeaway.

 

[Not Important]

Mate he literally said it’s been posted multiple times, and it has. If you don’t want to believe it that’s on you. But calling him out on this is off the mark.

all i want him/you to do is provide a link (one will do) where hocking said the stand rule was introduced as a means of stopping us. just one. sure he's said it's been posted but can't produce one link. he just keeps posting the same distractions. just saying there are plenty but failing to provide one doesn't cut it. it's conspiracy theory nonsense. had hocking said that, our club would have been doing handstands. it would have been front page news in all the tissues. hocking would have been sacked. maybe mclaughlin too cos he ticked it off and endorsed it. so did the commission for that matter.

being found out would normally be embarrassing. apparently not 2 him. anyway, my point was proven.

 

[Wooden Robot]

all i want him/you to do is provide a link (one will do) where hocking said the stand rule was introduced as a means of stopping us. just one. sure he's said it's been posted but can't produce one link. he just keeps posting the same distractions. just saying there are plenty but failing to provide one doesn't cut it. it's conspiracy theory nonsense. had hocking said that, our club would have been doing handstands. it would have been front page news in all the tissues. hocking would have been sacked. maybe mclaughlin too cos he ticked it off and endorsed it. so did the commission for that matter.

being found out would normally be embarrassing. apparently not 2 him. anyway, my point was proven.

There isn't any link or evidence, as he never directly referenced Richmond in any of his announcement or pressers on the stand rule.
My belief is it was referenced in a 'whispers' type column by a Herald Sun journalist, albeit not a direct quote on Richmond being the catalyst.
Look. I hate Hocking as much as the next bloke - he's an a****** of the highest order, but he never directly said anything about Richmond and the stand rule.
Google it and you find nothing - and face it - Goggle anything these days and you find plenty.
We may or may not have been the catalyst, as the journo seemed to indicate in 'off-the-cuff' discussions, but anyone thinking Hocking out and out said it in a public forum is delusional.
More to the point .... who the f*** cares?? It's time supporters and the club got over it and dealt with it like 17 other clubs and came up with a plan to combat the stand rule, as some have had success with.

 

[Dr Tigris]

There isn't any link or evidence, as he never directly referenced Richmond in any of his announcement or pressers on the stand rule.
My belief is it was referenced in a 'whispers' type column by a Herald Sun journalist, albeit not a direct quote on Richmond being the catalyst.
Look. I hate Hocking as much as the next bloke - he's an a****** of the highest order, but he never directly said anything about Richmond and the stand rule.
Google it and you find nothing - and face it - Goggle anything these days and you find plenty.
We may or may not have been the catalyst, as the journo seemed to indicate in 'off-the-cuff' discussions, but anyone thinking Hocking out and out said it in a public forum is delusional.
More to the point .... who the f*** cares?? It's time supporters and the club got over it and dealt with it like 17 other clubs and came up with a plan to combat the stand rule, as some have had success with.

He definitely mentioned Cotchin as a catalyst for the stand rule. He picked the brains of an ex RFC assistant coach, which might be about us, or might just be asking an expert.

The thing he has said is that this is all to create a "better" game. He was also behind AFLX. Put the 2 together and I think that it makes a lot of sense. SHocking wanted a clean game based on kick mark and run and carry. His rule changes tend to go in that direction.

But what is it that he wanted to stop? Super high pressure (stopping kick mark), chaos ball, and anything that breaks up the 'clean' flow of the game. That is, the Tiger game plan was exactly what he wanted to stop. Does that mean he was targeting us? Or that he was targeting a game style that he hated, or at least was contradictory to what he wanted to achieve? I reckon the 2nd. He wanted AFLX, and our game style was the opposite of that.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

interestingly, unless someone else can find it, the article where the champion data senior employee said 6-6-6 was designed to bring richmond back to the pack has been scrubbed off the internet. wonder if the journo is also lying in a ditch somewhere

 

[domin8]

all i want him/you to do is provide a link (one will do) where hocking said the stand rule was introduced as a means of stopping us. just one. sure he's said it's been posted but can't produce one link. he just keeps posting the same distractions. just saying there are plenty but failing to provide one doesn't cut it. it's conspiracy theory nonsense. had hocking said that, our club would have been doing handstands. it would have been front page news in all the tissues. hocking would have been sacked. maybe mclaughlin too cos he ticked it off and endorsed it. so did the commission for that matter.

being found out would normally be embarrassing. apparently not 2 him. anyway, my point was proven.

There is a literal shit tonne of links where Hocking directly reference Richmond’s “aggressive manning of the mark” you can come down off your pedestal whenever you like and do a quick search for yourself