Toast Van Berlo's Captains Last Quarter

[Southerntakeover]

Nice try, champ. What a massive backpeddle. I ASKED you, if you thought van Berlo's comments were what he truly believes, or, in fact, if he is gravely concerned about the direction of the club. You responded that you thought his comments reflected his belief. And that this was ok with you, he was allowed to have a different opinion to you on Neil Craig and all things AFC.

Lucky he isn't a poster on this board then, isn't it? Why does VB get off the hook? Are there any posters left who actually think Craig should be reappointed, and if so, what would you say to them if their name wasn't Nathan?

Do tell.

No, theres no back peddle. My position is a consistent 'who gives a shit'.

Everything that ive heard recently leads me to believe that the players do want Neil to stay on.

That doesnt faze me, or change my opinion at all. Nor does it have any impact on van Berlo's appropriateness as a captain. Nice tangent though.

Say what? I didn't say the captain shouldnt have input into the coach, I said players shouldnt be charged with choosing the captain. God, your lack of knowledge of the game is astounding. You actually can't tell the difference between the average joe that is a listed player, and the CAPTAIN, and how they are, or should be, poles apart in their ability to recognise the direction of the team and the club. The captain is not included in such assessments of the playing group. That's why he's the captain. There really is no point going on after this, if you can't comprehend that simple concept.

You said:

You want the captain to represent the players opinions.

You want the captain to have input into the coach.

Are you really too thick to understand that this would mean the captain must represent the players opinion in the coaching dilemma? Hence giving them a say, which you insist they shouldnt have.

You should really focus on simple things, like getting the saucepan off your head, before you start attacking my comprehension.

The captain needs to be the VOICE of the players, because most footballers are as dumb as dosgshit and have very little care factor about anything other than the next contest. That's not an insult - it's the truth. Most footballers are simple individuals who need to be led. Sternly.

Yeah, there are heaps of voices floating around disconnected from the bodies out there.

Who's backpeddling now?

 

[Southerntakeover]

No more so than the unquestioning defence of him.

We should be able to debate the merit of VB as Captain from both sides; at the moment, SP seems to be the more reasonable side of the argument - the others are presenting him as flawless.

Oh drop the impartial observer act will you.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I'm starting to feel like I'm repeating myself here, but what do you describe as leadership qualities? You can question VB's on-field performance all you like (though in my opinion is hasn't been nearly as bad as some on here have said) but his leadership qualities are A) extremely difficult for us to really have a handle on from afar, and B) described as elite by every single person who knows him that has been asked to comment on him.


Seems an odd thing for you to target.

For all the chest beating noone is actually taking up the debate on van Berlo's actual leadership abilities anymore.

They retreated into blurring the line into a Craig debate more than a few pages ago.

 

[jenny61_99]

It's the misrepresentation, Allefgib. And she gets away with it, constantly.

Hatred of VB? I mean, FFS. That's about as low as it gets.

I'm sorry, but how the he'll am I supposed to interpret what you've written about VB? Perhaps you underestimate the strength of vitriol you use, but it certainly comes across as hatred to me - of both VB and Craig.

 

[Wood_Duck]

I'm sorry, but how the he'll am I supposed to interpret what you've written about VB? Perhaps you underestimate the strength of vitriol you use, but it certainly comes across as hatred to me - of both VB and Craig.

Always the drama queen jen. Vitriole? FFS.

 

[jenny61_99]

Absolutely. There are no better examples of the word vitriol than many of the "comments" about Craig and VB in this forum.

 

[taylor_walker_13]

I take it you're discounting the crucial defensive mark, and important goal, in the last quarter then?


I don't think "being more than an ordinary footballer" has that much to do with leadership, but at least it's a step in the right direction for your argument.

Terrific two good things in 15 rounds of football

 

[taylor_walker_13]

Absolutely. There are no better examples of the word vitriol than many of the "comments" about Craig and VB in this forum.

Craig has ripped and destroyed our football club, supporters actually care about our football club and the direction it is taking and want success, Craig is one man and the club and it's future is far bigger than him, supporters are angry we have a right to be angry the man has spoken crap and garbage for years and achieved nothing, his time is up, we now just await the announcement of his removal.


Van Berlo is an ordinary footballer and realistically if he wasn't captain he would be struggling to retain his spot in the side on current form, he is the worst ever captain of the AFL and the AFC.

 

[L_Maximus]

You should really focus on simple things, like getting the saucepan off your head, before you start attacking my comprehension.

Hehe, funny

 

[Southerntakeover]

I'm sorry, but how the he'll am I supposed to interpret what you've written about VB? Perhaps you underestimate the strength of vitriol you use, but it certainly comes across as hatred to me - of both VB and Craig.

Oh for gods sake.

Attack the accuracy of criticism, not the fact that its not very nice.

 

[jenny61_99]

Oh for gods sake.

Attack the accuracy of criticism, not the fact that its not very nice.

You may or may not have noticed by now ST, that my main criticism of the attacks leveled at Craig, or VB or the Club is never so much the content of criticism, because quite often I agree with some aspects of the criticism itself, but more on the way in which the criticism is often written. I could comb through the many number of anti-Craig/VB threads and show you evidence of such vitriol. I am often mortified by the often personal attacks of our Coach and/or players. To me it is nothing other than keyboard warrior bravado and a sheer lack of common decency. There is no excuse for it, IMO. Criticize by all means, but there's no need for personal attacks - mainly because those people are not here to defend themselves. I don't care if it's an internet forum, there's just no need for it.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I dont know if you've noticed or not, but it doesnt really add anything to the dicussion, and in many circumstances serves to distract from the real issues.

 

[taylor_walker_13]

You may or may not have noticed by now ST, that my main criticism of the attacks leveled at Craig, or VB or the Club is never so much the content of criticism, because quite often I agree with some aspects of the criticism itself, but more on the way in which the criticism is often written. I could comb through the many number of anti-Craig/VB threads and show you evidence of such vitriol. I am often mortified by the often personal attacks of our Coach and/or players. To me it is nothing other than keyboard warrior bravado and a sheer lack of common decency. There is no excuse for it, IMO. Criticize by all means, but there's no need for personal attacks - mainly because those people are not here to defend themselves. I don't care if it's an internet forum, there's just no need for it.

I really feel internet forums arent really for you you clearly cant handle what people post, supporters of this club are angry and upset and they have every right to be, Neil Craig is the head coach he is responsible, simple as that, how people vent their frustration is up to them.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I really feel internet forums arent really for you you clearly cant handle what people post, supporters of this club are angry and upset and they have every right to be, Neil Craig is the head coach he is responsible, simple as that, how people vent their frustration is up to them.

Jenny has a point, it's irresponsible of anyone to post anything without giving that person the right to defend their actions or opinion.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Jenny has a point, it's irresponsible of anyone to post anything without giving that person the right to defend their actions or opinion.

Football would certainly be a billion dollar industry if fans were to limit their interest and discussion to times in which the players/coaches are actually there.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Football would certainly be a billion dollar industry if fans were to limit their interest and discussion to times in which the players/coaches are actually there.

I understand the practicality of it is virtually impossible to police but the moralistic part suggests people have a right to defend their actions.

It's not going to stop people and nothing will ever change but IMO Jenny does have a point.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I dont think theres a moral debate to be had at all to be honest. Once your trade is publically selling of your actions to an audience, you cannot claim that you do not encourage discussion of said actions.

Lets be real here. Football makes its profit off the interest of fans. Its in the players and coaches best interests to have discussion and interest in the product, and their roles within, whether or not the commentary is favourable of them. Theres nothing 'cowardly' about it. Thats an attack line used by those that would silence opinions they dont personally agree with. There is a line of course, but its dramatically shifted by the nature of the peoples activities. And for the record, the amount of line crossing posts on this board in particular is very very small.

Heck, Ive spent the last two pages arguing with SP, and I dont see anything wrong with what hes posted in this thread.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I dont think theres a moral debate to be had at all to be honest. Once your trade is publically selling of your actions to an audience, you cannot claim that you do not encourage discussion of said actions.

Yes, I agree. I should have been more specific with my point. Discussing the football side of things I have no problem with - good, bad or indifferent. The point I should have been more specific with was the personal attacks people make. And yes I know I can be just as bad, so I should get down of my high horse.

Lets be real here. Football makes its profit off the interest of fans. Its in the players and coaches best interests to have discussion and interest in the product, and their roles within, whether or not the commentary is favourable of them. Theres nothing 'cowardly' about it. Thats an attack line used by those that would silence opinions they dont personally agree with. There is a line of course, but its dramatically shifted by the nature of the peoples activities. And for the record, the amount of line crossing posts on this board in particular is very very small.

Heck, Ive spent the last two pages arguing with SP, and I dont see anything wrong with what hes posted in this thread.

What happens on the field, in the change rooms and on the training track, IMO is fair game. That's how the football economy is so strong at the moment. You need to have a football digest to accommodate every fraction of the fan base.

What is not, is the personal attacks that cannot be substantiated. The tabloid like comments and unknown personal comments made about issues we have no idea or understanding about. The personal attacks because someone had a perceived 'boys club' membership, or jobs for the boys and they are not up to it.

 

[cmndstab]

We wouldn't have much of a forum going if we couldn't debate the relative merits of footy identities


However, sometimes people are unnecessarily vitriolic about those players and coaches they dislike. SP has probably been so at points in the past, but not in this thread. The debate in this thread has all been well above board by my reading.

 

[Southerntakeover]

For mine, just about anything thats about football is fair game.

As long as we keep personal lives out of it, which we do, its fair game.

 

[cmndstab]

For mine, just about anything thats about football is fair game.

As long as we keep personal lives out of it, which we do, its fair game.

Agreed mate.

 

[Vader]

For mine, just about anything thats about football is fair game.

As long as we keep personal lives out of it, which we do, its fair game.

I have no problems with attacking someone's actions, skill levels etc. What I object to are comments about their character. All good in this thread though.

 

[jenny61_99]

I dont know if you've noticed or not, but it doesnt really add anything to the dicussion, and in many circumstances serves to distract from the real issues.

Yes I've noticed that personal attacks add nothing to the discussion. That's what I'm talking about.

 

[Allefgib]

Attacking skill levels is ok per vaders post.

Does that include posting skills?

 

[Southerntakeover]

Yes I've noticed that personal attacks add nothing to the discussion. That's what I'm talking about.

Except for the fact that everyone bar you is in agreement that nothing in this thread has even remotely approached such an attack, and yet here you are driving the thread off topic.

But hey, whats another thread derailed by the same old song and dance, right?