Re: Nathan Foley
Disco08 said:
YFK. Don't you think Williams could see as well as the rest of us that Foley was the one turning the game in our favour as soon as he was on the ball? Don't you think he'd have used what he thought was his best option the try and stop him? Kornes, Salopek, Thomson, Burgonye and Surjan have been very good in the last 6 weeks and Foley was a big part of making them look pretty useless.
Is there a point to the above? Because I sure can't see it.
Disco08 said:
Foley is in the his 4th year at the club. 21 is not exactly young for a 177cm player. Alot of people will tell you he's entering his prime.
He's in his first full season of AFL football - that is the only relevant fact. Smaller players who are genuinely 'entering their prime' at 21 are in their 2nd/3rd AFL seasons. Foley will be the same and his work over the next 2 seasons will see him
genuinely peaking late 2008 into 2009 barring injury interruption.
Disco08 said:
You might want to apologize to claw for branding him stupid when he didn't say anything like what you've attributed to him.
You might like to look up 'fair' in the dictionary Disco and quit jumping in at every opportunity trying to hold me to standards you apparently hold nobody else to. Claw called me stupid in his own post for failing to recognise Foley's 'pedigree and fortitude', when I've done nothing of the sort, merely explained that 1st full season players can't and won't be expected to spend a full game on the ball (which he still hasn't gone anywhere near having). I used the word 'stupid' as a direct quote from what claw had written.
Claw has repeatedly whinged about senior players getting onball time or getting a game at all, repeatedly whinged about how Wallace has it wrong by not making our midfield and entire side revolve around unseasoned 1st and 2nd season players, and he's wrong on both counts as results are clearly showing; despite our injuries, due to good player management we've finally been competitive beyond the first half of the year. Rather than acknowledge these plain and simple facts and admit Wallace has it right and he's been wrong, he decides to go completely off tangent into the realm of invention and say I'm 'stupid' because I've failed to recognise Foley's 'pedigree and fortitude.'
One poster throws the first insult (not that I give a rat's you know what about it), and uses things I've never said (beyond the stamina question which is obvious) to back up his comment, yet you presume to take me to task for using his insult in quotes and attributing things he's said a hundred times as the basis for turning his own 'stupid' insult back on him?
Nice work...really. :spin
the claw said:
no need to defend me disco. i find it quite amusing watching fools dig themselves into holes they cant get out of.
You can't defend yourself, which is why you're not. The thing you won't escape from so easily, is watching Wallace's expert handling of both our senior and young talent keep us competitive to the end of the season and hopefully beyond.
Then you can presume to call him a 'stupid fool'...or more than likely pretend you've seen eye to eye all along. :rofl
I can pull up the endless quotes if you really want me to...be damn boring, but it would certainly prove my point as you well know.
