Talking Footy

Posted: **Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:38 pm**

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:14 pm
You just don't use any grey matter when thinking .
The sport that has the second most viewers year after year ..would lose viewers if they became like the sport that wins each year .

Jesus h fuck .
The vicderpian education system needs a massive overhaul .

Yep. Absolutely. Me included. Fast and furious is the only way. Slow and repetitive has no appeal to fans of AFL. As far as footy is concerned.

Posted: **Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:57 pm**

SportCapital wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:38 pm

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:14 pm
You just don't use any grey matter when thinking .
And I'm curious.
I consider grey matter and thinking being intrinsically linked.
Do you know if a type of thinking that doesn't use grey matter?

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:59 am**

SportCapital wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:57 pm

SportCapital wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:38 pm

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:14 pm
You just don't use any grey matter when thinking .
And I'm curious.
I consider grey matter and thinking being intrinsically linked.
Do you know if a type of thinking that doesn't use grey matter?
Many AFL fans don't! they used some sort of sticky mushy substance often used as chook fertiliser.

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:28 am**

NlolRL wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:55 pm

post_hoc wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:02 pm
Like i said, you really have no idea.
You think soccer involves nearly as much contact as ARs?

You said it wasn't a contact sport,your claim was black and white, not grey. I NEVER said it had MORE or AS MUCH contact as AFL, jesus christ, you need to actually look at what you wrote. Words have meaning.

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:05 am**

post_hoc wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:28 am

NlolRL wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:55 pm

post_hoc wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:02 pm
Like i said, you really have no idea.
You think soccer involves nearly as much contact as ARs?
You said it wasn't a contact sport,your claim was black and white, not grey. I NEVER said it had MORE or AS MUCH contact as AFL, jesus christ, you need to actually look at what you wrote. Words have meaning.

if soccer is a contact sport then pretty much every team ball sport is contact, including basketball, netball, hockey etc

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:02 am**

pussycat wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:59 am

SportCapital wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:57 pm

SportCapital wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:38 pm

And I'm curious.
I consider grey matter and thinking being intrinsically linked.
Do you know of a type of thinking that doesn't use grey matter?

Many AFL fans don't! they used some sort of sticky mushy substance often used as chook fertiliser.

I think you stuffed this post up Pussycat. Don't worry i cleaned it up.
I'd prefer not to be though of as someone who referenced "chook fertilizer". What ever that is. Can you grow chooks with it?

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:26 am**

NlolRL wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:05 am

post_hoc wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:28 am

NlolRL wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:55 pm

You think soccer involves nearly as much contact as ARs?
You said it wasn't a contact sport,your claim was black and white, not grey. I NEVER said it had MORE or AS MUCH contact as AFL, jesus christ, you need to actually look at what you wrote. Words have meaning.
if soccer is a contact sport then pretty much every team ball sport is contact, including basketball, netball, hockey etc

In hockey, you are penalized for hitting another opponent with the ball, so no not contact, similar to basketball hitting the arm of another player equals a foul, if you think netball isn't contact you have never watched a game in your life.

But keep digging yourself a hole, you don't seem bright enough to know when to stop

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:36 am**

post_hoc wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:26 am

NlolRL wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:05 am

post_hoc wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:28 am

You said it wasn't a contact sport,your claim was black and white, not grey. I NEVER said it had MORE or AS MUCH contact as AFL, jesus christ, you need to actually look at what you wrote. Words have meaning.
if soccer is a contact sport then pretty much every team ball sport is contact, including basketball, netball, hockey etc
In hockey, you are penalized for hitting another opponent with the ball, so no not contact, similar to basketball hitting the arm of another player equals a foul, if you think netball isn't contact you have never watched a game in your life.

But keep digging yourself a hole, you don't seem bright enough to know when to stop

Its who who is digging a whole. All those sports allow some incidental contact between opponents but arw strict around contact when thw ball is in the actipn

Posted: **Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:42 pm**

NlolRL wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:36 am

post_hoc wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:26 am

NlolRL wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:05 am

if soccer is a contact sport then pretty much every team ball sport is contact, including basketball, netball, hockey etc
In hockey, you are penalized for hitting another opponent with the ball, so no not contact, similar to basketball hitting the arm of another player equals a foul, if you think netball isn't contact you have never watched a game in your life.

But keep digging yourself a hole, you don't seem bright enough to know when to stop
Its who who is digging a whole. All those sports allow some incidental contact between opponents but arw strict around contact when thw ball is in the actipn

Dude, beer is more than just a breakfast drink, you know that don't you?

Posted: **Tue Dec 19, 2017 6:56 am**

Allllllrighty then!

come hither mah members and guests, the time is nigh to gather round and listen to your thread leader, your King-Eliagh

So. It's only just been a week since this magical thread was started and it seems an opportune time to take stock, review, and address the week that's been in this thread.

Firstly, we've hit a whopping 175 posts, almost 13 pages in just 7 days. We've had commentary from NRL, soccer and AFL perspectives, I'd like to take this time to acknowledge all of your input, even you AFL fans

and the thread has gone thusly...

The thread started out as a comment on Eddie McGuire's suggestion that 90 interchanges ... down from 120

would open the doors for players to need to use drugs and a King-Eliagh prophecy that perhaps collingwood are already on the dopamine and Eddie is making premature excuses. But the thread took an abrupt swing of direction as NRL and soccer fans alike saw 90 interchanges as hilarious, laughable, un-athlete like and, well, downright shameful in Australian sporting contexts. Immediately the AFL fans came to the defence of their beloved code and argued that AFL players need their resty time so they can run faster. Unfortunately, the more they argued, the more evidence came forth that AFL players are in fact not supreme endurance athletes, they simply get way way way too much rest time. In fact per game the AFL players get a total of:

--- Avg 120 minutes per game with 40minutes stoppage time per game!!!

---32 minutes of rest during half, quarter and three quarter time!!!

---And....90 interchanges, down from 120!!!

There's simply no denying it, any athlete that gets, and as our AFL simpletons would argue "need" THAT MUCH REST is not a supreme endurance athlete

im sorry it's just not endurance when you stop and rest all the time

So in conclusion, AFL athletes are not elite endurance athletes. Again mah members and guests thank you, thank you all for contributing to what may well have been the fastest ever thread to reach 12 pages!

Your King-Eliagh

Posted: **Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:41 am**

Posted: **Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:00 am**

That's a funny way of saying
too much truth I wanted to bury my head in the sand .

Posted: **Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:40 am**

AFLcrap1 wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:00 am
That's a funny way of saying
too much truth I wanted to bury my head in the sand .

no, its a way of saying KE's senseless rambling isnt worth reading given most of it is usually self adulation. If he summarises his points and cuts the wanking out I'll read it

Posted: **Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:01 pm**

NlolRL wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:41 am
tldr

I'm not surprised you didn't manage to swallow the whole piece. It actually wasn't very large at all for anyone who's succeeded past year 3 schooling

but, as with the rest of this thread, it didn't really provide much for the poor AFL lads to cheer about

But don't worry nlol, if I get a chance I'll go back and make the important parts really big and bold so it's easy for you to read

Your King-Eliagh

Posted: **Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:14 pm**

Allllllrighty then!

come hither mah members and guests, the time is nigh to gather round and listen to your thread leader, your King-Eliagh

So. It's only just been a week since this magical thread was started and it seems an opportune time to take stock, review, and address the week that's been in this thread.

Firstly, we've hit a whopping 175 posts, almost 13 pages in just 7 days. We've had commentary from NRL, soccer and AFL perspectives, I'd like to take this time to acknowledge all of your input, even you AFL fans

and the thread has gone thusly...

The thread started out as a comment on Eddie McGuire's suggestion that 90 interchanges ... down from 120

would open the doors for players to need to use drugs and a King-Eliagh prophecy that perhaps collingwood are already on the dopamine and Eddie is making premature excuses. But the thread took an abrupt swing of direction as NRL and soccer fans alike saw 90 interchanges as hilarious, laughable, un-athlete like and, well, downright shameful in Australian sporting contexts. Immediately the AFL fans came to the defence of their beloved code and argued that AFL players need their resty time so they can run faster. Unfortunately, the more they argued, the more evidence came forth that AFL players are in fact not supreme endurance athletes, they simply get way way way too much rest time. In fact per game the AFL players get a total of:

--- Avg 120 minutes per game with 40minutes stoppage time per game!!!

---32 minutes of rest during half, quarter and three quarter time!!!

---And....90 interchanges, down from 120!!!

There's simply no denying it, any athlete that gets, and as our AFL simpletons would argue "need" THAT MUCH REST is not a supreme endurance athlete

im sorry it's just not endurance when you stop and rest all the time

So in conclusion, AFL athletes are not elite endurance athletes. Again mah members and guests thank you, thank you all for contributing to what may well have been the fastest ever thread to reach 12 pages!

Your King-Eliagh

Talking Footy

Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us collingwood are one of the many...

Re: Is Eddie telling us collingwood are one of the many...

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us collingwood are one of the many...

Re: Is Eddie telling us collingwood are one of the many...

Re: Is Eddie telling us collingwood are one of the many...

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL

Re: Is Eddie telling us its...90 down from 120? LOL