Our current top 25 in order

[Ian Dargie]

You're kidding right?

You actually think Natanui was better than Priddis last year?

I'm afraid so.

Where would you rate Naitanui last year? Among our top 10 players or outside it?

I have an idea of how you'll respond but am still happy to hear it.

 

[worstbloke]

You were fighting an uphill battle to convince anybody that Stinger's 06 was better than Cox, Kerr, Glass, Cousins and Judd, but trying to squeeze Adam Selwood and Stenglein in front of two of those guys is impossible.

Why? Kerr's form was patchy, like I said when he was on he was on.

Cox missed 5 weeks through injury. Makes perfect sense.

 

[fryzie]

Why? Kerr's form was patchy, like I said when he was on he was on.

Cox missed 5 weeks through injury. Makes perfect sense.

No. No it doesn't.

Cox missed 5 weeks but was an All Australian ruckman. That means he was one of the best ruckmen in the competition and that's not just the view of the AA selectors, that was a pretty global view at the time. There is just no way that missing 5 games through injury makes Stinger's season better than his. And definitely not A.Selwood's. And if we're going to use your "two year period" argument and overlap back to 05, that would make Cox a dual AA ruckman in those years. (He was also named the following 2 years straight but whatever).

As for Kerr's "patchy" form, I really don't think that's a plausible argument. He came third in the Brownlow, you don't do that by having anything less than a stellar season, particularly with the likes of Judd, Cousins and Cox gobbling up votes alongside you.

 

[NSLK]

Do you reckon Sheppard is best 22?

If he is in our 22 throughout the year over guys like McGinnity, ASelwood, Nicoski, Cripps I would suggest our season would be tracking a whole lot better than if not.

I'd argue he is more talented than these four, and if he was in the 22, his form would be of good quality.

Adam Selwood will most likely start in our best 22, but that's where my aspect of expected output for 2013 (despite me saying 2012 originally, that's a typo). With Naitanui and Wellingham two already likely to miss Round 1, guys outside the best 22 will get a go. Sheppard's thumb injury won't help with his early season chances.

 

[the harry]

Not sure what's sadder: Gunnar's flawed arguing style or people trying to enrage him.

efa

 

[Ian Dargie]

No. No it doesn't.

Cox missed 5 weeks but was an All Australian ruckman. That means he was one of the best ruckmen in the competition and that's not just the view of the AA selectors, that was a pretty global view at the time. There is just no way that missing 5 games through injury makes Stinger's season better than his. And definitely not A.Selwood's. And if we're going to use your "two year period" argument and overlap back to 05, that would make Cox a dual AA ruckman in those years. (He was also named the following 2 years straight but whatever).

As for Kerr's "patchy" form, I really don't think that's a plausible argument. He came third in the Brownlow, you don't do that by having anything less than a stellar season, particularly with the likes of Judd, Cousins and Cox gobbling up votes alongside you.

B&F = FACT!

 

[Ian Dargie]

If he is in our 22 throughout the year over guys like McGinnity, ASelwood, Nicoski, Cripps I would suggest our season would be tracking a whole lot better than if not.

Not sure if we can say that just yet.

I am hoping he pushes into that 22 but my default position is that he is currently outside it.

 

[worstbloke]

No. No it doesn't.

Cox missed 5 weeks but was an All Australian ruckman. That means he was one of the best ruckmen in the competition and that's not just the view of the AA selectors, that was a pretty global view at the time. There is just no way that missing 5 games through injury makes Stinger's season better than his. And definitely not A.Selwood's. And if we're going to use your "two year period" argument and overlap back to 05, that would make Cox a dual AA ruckman in those years. (He was also named the following 2 years straight but whatever).

Right, the two year period thing is irrelevant in regards to B&F placings in 2006, but you knew that.

Cox is a beast, the best ruck we've ever had, but do you think under a 1-5 system missing 5 games, he'd be in the frame? Please.

As for Kerr's "patchy" form, I really don't think that's a plausible argument. He came third in the Brownlow, you don't do that by having anything less than a stellar season, particularly with the likes of Judd, Cousins and Cox gobbling up votes alongside you.

Kerr went missing, for a month at a time, twice in 2006.

When he was on he was invariably BOG, but the gaps in the performance were pretty obvious.

Look the pair of you make a cute couple, but I enjoy a system which rewards consistency of performance, performance at a high level and executing given tasks repeatedly. That's just me.

It's a position seemingly held by the club as well, that puts the pair of you on the opposing side of the ledger, you're effectively saying Stenglien and Selwood were not deserving of their top 5 place in the club B&F in 2006 and the club has got it all wrong.

I'm done.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Right, the two year period thing is irrelevant in regards to B&F placings in 2006, but you knew that.

The point is that if you reckon Stenglein was in the top 5 based on two years of performances, then you should look at other players on the same basis.

Cox, from 2005-06, was a two-time AA. Kerr, in 2005-06, finished second in the Brownlow and then third. And you're saying Stenglein edged both of them?

Kerr went missing, for a month at a time, twice in 2006.

When he was on he was invariably BOG, but the gaps in the performance were pretty obvious.

Look the pair of you make a cute couple, but I enjoy a system which rewards consistency of performance, performance at a high level and executing given tasks repeatedly. That's just me.

It's a position seemingly held by the club as well, that puts the pair of you on the opposing side of the ledger.

Stenglein and Selwood >> Cox and Kerr in 2006. Because the B&F says so.

It's a terrible argument.

Cox and Kerr were stars that year and you're just clinging to this bullshit line that they were too inconsistent to be considered better than Selwood and Stenglein. It's absolute claptrap.

You're effectively saying Stenglien and Selwood were not deserving of their top 5 place in the club B&F in 2006 and the club has got it all wrong.

It's more a case of saying that B&F results aren't a perfect measure of which players had the best year.

I'm done.

Indeed. That was true a while back.

You've done a terrible job here. Better luck next time.

 

[tesseract]

Not sure what's sadder: Gunnar's flawed arguing style or people trying to engage with him.

Arguing style? I'd call it browbeating.

 

[worstbloke]

I lol every time I see an edit, just that extra piece of bile for me is significant, small little man behind that keyboard.

 

[Ian Dargie]

I lol every time I see an edit, just that extra piece of bile for me is significant, small little man behind that keyboard.

Like clockwork, the beaten man abandons any pretense of trying to make an argument.

If you look through my posts, there's actually more contempt than bile.

 

[worstbloke]

Like clockwork, the beaten man abandons any pretense of trying to make an argument.

Lol. Righto Napoleon

 

[Ian Dargie]

Lol. Righto Napoleon

Are you trying to prove my point?

 

[worstbloke]

Are you trying to prove my point?

Yes that's exactly what I'm doing big boi.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Yes that's exactly what I'm doing big boi.

Well, that's the first time you've succeeded in proving anything in this thread. Well done!

 

[worstbloke]

Zing...

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Stenglein in 06 was definitely a first 10 player picked each week. Not only was he great at tagging but he would win the ball, lay blocks and added great leadership to the team. Since he finished in the top 5 of the BnF I'd say that he probably was in our best 5 players for the year.

 

[fryzie]

Kerr went missing, for a month at a time, twice in 2006.

When he was on he was invariably BOG, but the gaps in the performance were pretty obvious.

In which games did he go missing for a month at a time?

If Kerr had put together 2 more good games he would have won the Brownlow. While it is not the intention of you're argument, you're effectively saying that the only way Kerr could have had a better season than Stenglein would have been if he won the Brownlow.

Further, I just had a look over his 2006 stats and of the four games you can really say he he went "missing" in (e.g. under 18 disposals) we lost three. I think that further highlights how important he was to our side.

Look the pair of you make a cute couple, but I enjoy a system which rewards consistency of performance, performance at a high level and executing given tasks repeatedly. That's just me.

It's a position seemingly held by the club as well, that puts the pair of you on the opposing side of the ledger, you're effectively saying Stenglien and Selwood were not deserving of their top 5 place in the club B&F in 2006 and the club has got it all wrong.

I'm done.

You seem to be missing the point entirely. I think the Best and Fairest is a great award that rewards those who play well over the whole year and truly contribute to the club. What I disagree with is it being an accurate measure of who was most important to the club's success, or had the better year performance-wise in that season.

Stenglein was undoubtedly very important to our 2006 Premiership. So was Ash Hansen.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Stenglein in 06 was definitely a first 10 player picked each week. Not only was he great at tagging but he would win the ball, lay blocks and added great leadership to the team. Since he finished in the top 5 of the BnF I'd say that he probably was in our best 5 players for the year.

Stenglein finished top 5 that year? Why didn't somebody say so?

Ok. You convinced me.

 

[Goldfish]

 

[no1bankteller]

Am I the only one that smells Pav's return on our board in another of his many usernames?

 

[royalsfan]

"worstbloke" is very pushy for a newbie. Most newbies tend to sit back and observe for a while, so you could be right no1.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Stenglein finished top 5 that year? Why didn't somebody say so?

Ok. You convinced me.

your welcome

 

[sydney eagle]

lecras has proven himself over an extended period as one of our top few elite performers.

kennedy, albeit to a lesser extent, has shown that when fit he is one of the top key forwards in the comp.

i think they are both comfortably in our top half dozen players.

I wasn't questioning the ability of these two players but, particularly in the case of Le Cras, coming back from such a severe injury might mean that he never attains the level that he reached before the injury. We should wait and see how these players who have been out of action for a fair while perform before we start rating them.