10,000,000 Cousins threads [Merged]

[benny_furs]

Voss, Black, Lappin, Akermanis plus a fringie like Power might beg to differ.
With four back to back grandfinals and a treble in their with an extra brownlow thrown in I think they've got yours covered.

It's a matter of opinion but I rate WC's higher.

Judd >>> Voss
Cousins = Black
Kerr >>> Lappin

Akermanis played forwardline more than a genuine midfielder from what I remember, he's probably the equal to Cousins (and better than Fletcher) so even with him included they are pretty even.

Judd back in 2004 was the best player I've ever seen, and in 2005 Kerr was ranked above Judd by some (don't let his recent drop in form fool you).

 

[TigerMasochist]

It's a matter of opinion but I rate WC's higher.

Judd >>> Voss
Cousins = Black
Kerr >>> Lappin

Akermanis played forwardline more than a genuine midfielder from what I remember, he's probably the equal to Cousins (and better than Fletcher) so even with him included they are pretty even.

Judd back in 2004 was the best player I've ever seen, and in 2005 Kerr was ranked above Judd by some (don't let his recent drop in form fool you).

Whatever. I'll rate the Lions midfield against any midfield of any era. They'd match up anyday.

 

[Juffaricho]

Re: My take on the Ben Cousins circus

My take hasn't changed on this issue in 15 months. It is fun to look back on what was my first post and the reason I joined this forum. Despite him sitting out the season there are still so many similarities that reappeared.

I am removed from the sensationalised media coverage that I'm sure is surrounding this issue due to the fact I live and work in North America. So when you look at this situation based purely on the stats, Cousins better be a full blown addict for Richmond to pass on someone who would walk in the club and be their best midfielder in a quarter of century. I'm not saying get him, I'm just saying he better be a write-off cos at 2am on Friday night when I'm watching the AFL that guy is still an absolute elite player doing it against the best taggers! As for influencing our youth, hard for me to be concerned about that if these guys truly are professionals. After all, where I am the best player in the NBA is an accused rapist, half of the MLB has been shooting any and all drugs for the last 20 years and the Captain of my NFL team was the Superbowl MVP after murdering someone (well, he got off on a technicality!).

If Richmond do have the choice and they pass,
1) He better not play elsewhere
2) Whoever we take better play 100 games of decent quality cos the odds are high Ben would give you atleast
50 phenomenal games in which time these young guys might get first hand glimpse of the onfield effort it takes to win premierships.

For those arguing 1 way or another. You could alway look at the situation in a different light. We should use the #1 pick in the best way to assist Richmond winning AFL games. If you use it on a player like Guy Richards, the reality is we probably get little (more likely zero) positive assistance to help us win any football games. You use it on Cousins, even if we never play him it positively assists us in Round 1 cos it means he wasn't playing for Carlton who would definitely pick him up.

1) I`m still stuck over here living and working in North America
2) The media coverage continues to be sensationalised and ridiculous.
3) `The accused rapist`continues to dominate the NBA
4) The `murderer`just finished a phenomenal season leading his team to an NFL conference championship game.
5) We`ll be playing Carlton again in Round 1 and I`m bloody happy he won`t be on their team.
and...
6) Guy Richards is still crap.

Hopefully we get those 50 great games out of him. It is still possible even if it is 12 months later.

 

[benny_furs]

Whatever. I'll rate the Lions midfield against any midfield of any era. They'd match up anyday.

Re-read my post, I clearly said they were very even and it was just my opinion on who was better.

You're the one who thinks one is so much better than the other. I think they are very hard to split.

 

[Rosy]

After I spoke about Benny bringing all this extra enthusiasm to the club, you replied with:

"There is enthusiasm in and around the club every pre-season benny or not."

...in context with what I was saying it came across as though you were were trying to tell me Benny hasn't given us this extra enthusiasm and we get it every year regardless.

Absolute rubbish benny.

There is no way I said Benny hasn't given any extra enthusiasm to the club. I didn't even mention degrees of enthusiasm, "extra" or not, but the fact is we are enthusiastic most pre-seasons and that has been regularly discussed on here.

The club usually put out a lot of spin, Tony Greenberg even told me it was his job to do that. We have been enthusiastic without Ben in the past, we will be enthusiastic without Ben in the future but at the moment Ben is part of the enthusiasm.

The fact is I didn't say what you claimed, thus your inabilty to provide a link when requested. Please don't make false claims about what I post in the future and if you wish to discuss what I've said please do so without fabricating things or making false statements.

 

[Rosy]

OK. I am a little confused by the turn this thread has taken.

You're confused? How do you think I feel? :hihi

Benny posted comments and declined to elaborate on his claim when asked. Despite ignoring my questions he asked questions of me in reply. His choice of course, and fair enough, but not how I think a discussion forum should work. Each to their own though. Benny falsely claimed I'd said certain things rather than discussing what was actually said which is pretty ordinary imo.

No surprise Scoop dropped by and made a false claim/judgement that I think Ben Cousins has had no impact on anything positive at the club. He was nowhere near the mark, nothing new there though, and I doubt he could provide evidence to support his comment considering I don't feel that way at all.

No surprise either that Western chipped in to answer the question benny had chosen not to. A bit late though, as Western was probably aware, because he'd posted on the membership tally thread after I'd already updated the figures he posted. I'd asked benny my question days earlier though, well before RFC had disclosed the figures on their website. IMO Western also alluded to me thinking the figures were untruthful. I never for one second questioned the validity of them, I questioned where the figures came from. Surely it was a reasonable question in response to claims posted about the figures.

CMT dropped by for a cameo appearance on the thread. Not to join in the discussion but to make a personal comment about me.

I assume I was in blx's thoughts when he referred to benny talking to stone walls considering I was asking questions about benny furr's claims, some of which he either couldn't support, or didn't want to support.

Pretty funny all the attention I cop yet others who have lively debates on here, and others who actually question Ben are ignored. I've hardly mentioned Ben, or many other players when it comes to that, since we drafted him other than to say that to me he's one player in our team, not THE player.

I sent a message to Ben to welcome him to Tigerland. I look forward to him running out in the yellow and black as much as I do a lot of other players on our list. I appreciate his record as a player but I also look forward to our kids developing at the club to become top players too.

Amusing DDT understood where I was coming from yet he didn't cop any backlash and Baloo's reasoned comments about Benmania (my word) were largely ignored by the people above who chose to have a go at me.

Might be time to leave you to all it....just stick to the facts in future please fellas. :blah

 

[benny_furs]

Benny posted comments and declined to elaborate on his claim when asked. Despite ignoring my questions he asked questions of me in reply. His choice of course, and fair enough, but not how I think a discussion forum should work. Each to their own though. Benny falsely claimed I'd said certain things rather than discussing what was actually said which is pretty ordinary imo.

Are you aware of how you're coming across?

You're the perfect, 100% correct, researched superior who has to deal with the deliberately selective claimer of false information who struggles to follow the basic principles of posting and debate. :

Can't you see how your comment could possibly come across in a different light to how you intended? I wasn't the only one who interpreted it that way.

And when I replied - if it was so obvious you intended something else by your comments why didn't you correct my response on the spot instead of letting it drag out over 2 pages?

When you made your claim that we were only about 1000 members ahead of where we were last year (tying to prove I was making false claims, again, when I said 4,000), I didn't reply because I thought surely you, of all people, would have read one of the many articles saying "we are 4,000 members ahead of where we were last year" and therefore I would need to find official membership figures - which even YOU couldn't find.

That is why I didn't reply.

Should I have assumed you were reading articles that week? Yes, I expect you to be up to date, you usually are.

I won't rub it in, but you got it wrong - not me. I assumed you didn't think articles were sufficient evidence because I had such faith in you to have already known. Look at it from my point of view and you will see my responses in this thread have been far beyond "ordinary".

With anything, whether it be discussion or business, you should always question yourself. You seem to think you're 100% right and it's the others who are completely at fault, and fair enough if this is the case but I don't think THAT is how a discussion forum should be run.

Yes I'm not happy mam.




I think you've been wrong on the whole Ben Cousins story from the beginning, and you certainly weren't alone.

As far as I'm concerned, if Ben is a success then I was right all along, so debate ends right there.

 

[Rosy]

Are you aware of how you're coming across?

You're the perfect, 100% correct, researched superior who has to deal with the deliberately selective claimer of false information who struggles to follow the basic principles of posting and debate. :

Why make things personal benny furrs? Far better to stick to the topic but I've gotta admit I've had a chuckle at you questioning how I come across after reading your above post. The mind boggles at the ironry.

Can't you see how your comment could possibly come across in a different light to how you intended? I wasn't the only one who interpreted it that way.

And when I replied - if it was so obvious you intended something else by your comments why didn't you correct my response on the spot instead of letting it drag out over 2 pages?

Correct what? I just asked where you got the info. I didn't say it wasn't correct. I'm not to know how others perceived my question but a simple answer on your behalf would have informed me of what i wanted to know at the time.

When you made your claim that we were only about 1000 members ahead of where we were last year (tying to prove I was making false claims, again, when I said 4,000), I didn't reply because I thought surely you, of all people, would have read one of the many articles saying "we are 4,000 members ahead of where we were last year" and therefore I would need to find official membership figures - which even YOU couldn't find.

Huh? You are unreal. I didn't try to "prove" anything. I didn't imply the figures weren't accurate. I asked you a simple question about where you got them because I'd looked on the RFC site and they weren't there.

Should I have assumed you were reading articles that week? Yes, I expect you to be up to date, you usually are.

Why would I "of all people" know what articles say? Why do you assume I read them. I've posted many times I can't be bothered with the pre-season spin. I rarely read the articles, I've been in China for a few weeks and when i got back I was almost hospitalised I had such severe gastro for a week. I've been without the net because I had to return a faulty modem. Trying to organise player sponsorship has taken a power of my available online time. I'm flat out in negotiatiosn witha travel insurance company tryign to recoup some of the thousands of dollars lost when our trip was prematurely terminated. I have a very sick elderly mother in law to care for. I have my Dad's injuries from his fall to worry about. It's so arrogant to discuss my personal internet habits when you wouldn't have a clue about them.

I won't rub it in, but you got it wrong - not me. I assumed you didn't think articles were sufficient evidence because I had such faith in you to have already known. Look at it from my point of view and you will see my responses in this thread have been far beyond "ordinary".

I got what wrong exactly? You were the one making assumptions I'd read the articles and I didn't claim the info was incorrect anyway.

With anything, whether it be discussion or business, you should always question yourself. You seem to think you're 100% right and it's the others who are completely at fault, and fair enough if this is the case but I don't think THAT is how a discussion forum should be run.

Yes I'm not happy mam.

:rofl @ not a happy man. That's funny. Speaks volumes really about your ability to have a reasoned discussion really. Some very judgemental comments in your post above benny but I've done nothing but question your claims rather than any opinion of you personally.

I think you've been wrong on the whole Ben Cousins story from the beginning

Please justify where I've been wrong on the Ben Cousins story, with quotes rather than fairy stories please.. I've hardly mentioned Ben Cousins since we drafted him, then again as I said I've hardly mentioned any other players since then either unless I've had information to pass on. When given a choice on a poll ages before he was a twinke in our eye I voted against getting him. I did the same with terry wallace too. Once they are Tigers they have my full support and I sent both a welcome to the club.

P.S. Forget red herrings and mention of how others perceived my post. Can you admit I did not make the comments you claim in the quote below? If you can't provide a link please retract the statement. I think both know I didn't say what you claimed and your that post is false.

You were originally saying Ben Cousins hasn't brought any extra enthusiasm to the club,

Have a nice day and don't be upset about someone asking a couple of questions. Life's too short. :rubhead

 

[Redford]

Ben Cousins or Get a Room?

:hihi

Think the club, the players and Ben himself have handled things pretty well since it was announced he was going to be a Tiger.

FWIW, ran into Kelvin Moore the other day. Had a chit chat about how he was travelling blah blah.... Asked him how Cuz had settled in and all the fanfare etc.

He said he was settling in real well, that the boys were really excited to have him, and that it had added some extra energy to the playing group and the club in general.

In other words, according to Kel, all pretty good at this stage.

 

[Tigers of Old]

In other words, according to Kel, all pretty good at this stage.

Good to know. Hopefully it continues.

 

[johnson2richo2003]

FWIW, ran into Kelvin Moore the other day.

Whats was kel Doing at centrelink? Surely he wasnt lining up with you for the work for the dole scheme?

 

[jb03]

Whats was kel Doing at centrelink? Surely he wasnt lining up with you for the work for the dole scheme?

;D Incisive.

 

[johnson2richo2003]

;D Incisive.

Tanks ;D

 

[the claw]

duds duds duds. just a silly post to this thread to 200 read into it what you will.

 

[the claw]

oh drats perhaps this time. :hihi

 

[the claw]

bugger ah well it is the silly season.

 

[the claw]

one last time. if this fails shoot me.

 

[the claw]

now im getting pissed this will surely do it. :hihi

 

[Baloo]

one last time. if this fails shoot me.

bang bang

 

[the claw]

ah bugger i give up let someone else make a fool of themselves.