Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

I'm the mod now champ.

I'm happy for you to post whatever you want but if you make claims you need to back them up with proof. Otherwise............

if I post an article that agrees with my opinion
like I have
thats proof enough for me ...

end of story.

posting an opinion piece that agrees with your opinion is just reinforcing your opinion.

It's not proof, other than someone agrees with you.

You still need to show clinical evidence to back up your no strike theory, and expalin why the NRL do not release any results.

I'm not doing anything of the sort
this is a forum for expressing opinions d. ickhead .. not a court of law

you're already heading down a slippery slope
keep going at your peril .........

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

if I post an article that agrees with my opinion
like I have
thats proof enough for me ...

end of story.

posting an opinion piece that agrees with your opinion is just reinforcing your opinion.

It's not proof, other than someone agrees with you.

You still need to show clinical evidence to back up your no strike theory, and expalin why the NRL do not release any results.

I'm not doing anything of the sort
this is a forum for expressing opinions ******** .. not a court of law

you're already heading down a slippery slope
keep going at your peril .........

Express your opinion! But state it as fact with proof only

And do it by prefacing your posts with the term "in my opinion".

NSWAFL wrote:

And do it by prefacing your posts with the term "in my opinion".

Bingo!

Well said

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

posting an opinion piece that agrees with your opinion is just reinforcing your opinion.

It's not proof, other than someone agrees with you.

You still need to show clinical evidence to back up your no strike theory, and expalin why the NRL do not release any results.

I'm not doing anything of the sort
this is a forum for expressing opinions ******** .. not a court of law

you're already heading down a slippery slope
keep going at your peril .........

Express your opinion! But state it as fact with proof only

nup ... If I post an article
thats proof of a widespread opinion .. not just mine
I'll embelish it ... the proof is the article.

thats the idea of these types of forums
not to provide evidence of opinions

if that were required for every post ... you'd have no posters

If the article is opinion then it's useless as proof of fact, Dave.

All you have to do is make it clear that it's your opinion, and you're in the clear.

State something as fact and not opinion and you'll cop it.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

posting an opinion piece that agrees with your opinion is just reinforcing your opinion.

It's not proof, other than someone agrees with you.

You still need to show clinical evidence to back up your no strike theory, and expalin why the NRL do not release any results.

I'm not doing anything of the sort
this is a forum for expressing opinions ******** .. not a court of law

you're already heading down a slippery slope
keep going at your peril .........

Express your opinion! But state it as fact with proof only

nup ... If I post an article
thats proof of a widespread opinion .. not just mine
I'll embelish it ... the proof is the article.

thats the idea of these types of forums
not to provide evidence of opinions

if that were required for every post ... you'd have no posters[/quote]

AN article is proof that this columnist agrees with you, or more likely that you agree with the article. It IS NOT proof that this opinion is widespread!!

Post it to support your opinion but don't expect this to be proof of fact.

In this topic your opinion is that the AFLs 3 strike policy is inadequate. You have support from Patrick Smith, a columnist who loves controversy. Others like Jeff Kennet have also criticized. I'd actually like to see some criticism based on medical advice from an expert in this field. I can certainly show you plenty of endorsements from medical specialists! The fact that the AIS have also adopted this policy is proof it is sound.

I presented facts with proof that the NRL refuse to release their results. You are yet to comment on this.

You know what, Xman? Maybe it would be a god idea if you post some of those opinions. That will put the wind up Dave's arse.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

posting an opinion piece that agrees with your opinion is just reinforcing your opinion.

It's not proof, other than someone agrees with you.

You still need to show clinical evidence to back up your no strike theory, and expalin why the NRL do not release any results.

I'm not doing anything of the sort
this is a forum for expressing opinions ******** .. not a court of law

you're already heading down a slippery slope
keep going at your peril .........

Express your opinion! But state it as fact with proof only

nup ... If I post an article
thats proof of a widespread opinion .. not just mine
I'll embelish it ... the proof is the article.

thats the idea of these types of forums
not to provide evidence of opinions

if that were required for every post ... you'd have no posters[/quote]

AN article is proof that this columnist agrees with you, or more likely that you agree with the article. It IS NOT proof that this opinion is widespread!!

Post it to support your opinion but don't expect this to be proof of fact.

In this topic your opinion is that the AFLs 3 strike policy is inadequate. You have support from Patrick Smith, a columnist who loves controversy. Others like Jeff Kennet have also criticized. I'd actually like to see some criticism based on medical advice from an expert in this field. I can certainly show you plenty of endorsements from medical specialists! The fact that the AIS have also adopted this policy is proof it is sound.

I presented facts with proof that the NRL refuse to release their results. You are yet to comment on this.[/quote]

I don't care what you'd like to see
I have provided sufficient support of MY opinion , the Vic Govt .. the Vic Police etc ... & theres plenty more


I don't care what you've provided
the AFL policy is a joke according to the article I posted in this thread.... end of story..

So Patrick smith thinks the policy is a joke. Got it!

What about the medical experts who developed the policy and all those who endorse it based on medical evidence?

Are their opinions less relevant than P Smith a columnist? Or a politician?

I know when I finally succumb to cancer or heart disease I won't be going to Patrick smith or Jeff kennet for advice and treatment that's for sure!

Xman wrote:

So Patrick smith thinks the policy is a joke. Got it!

What about the medical experts who developed the policy and all those who endorse it based on medical evidence?

Are their opinions less relevant than P Smith a columnist? Or a politician?

I know when I finally succumb to cancer or heart disease I won't be going to Patrick smith or Jeff kennet for advice and treatment that's for sure!

don't care what so called experts in the employ of the AFL have got to say
K

Medical opinion is the final say on this subject.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

So Patrick smith thinks the policy is a joke. Got it!

What about the medical experts who developed the policy and all those who endorse it based on medical evidence?

Are their opinions less relevant than P Smith a columnist? Or a politician?

I know when I finally succumb to cancer or heart disease I won't be going to Patrick smith or Jeff kennet for advice and treatment that's for sure!

don't care what so called experts in the employ of the AFL have got to say
K

I think a panel of 40 of Australia's leading experts on drug abuse and rehab deserve a lot more respect!

Having worked with many medical experts I can honestly say they operate with professional integrity at all times. Their decisions are held accountable by their peers. They don't make policies like this without basing them on extensive research and evidence. If they didn't they would be held accountable by their professional bodies.

That's good enough for me.

It's good enough for anyone if they are interested in the truth.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

So Patrick smith thinks the policy is a joke. Got it!

What about the medical experts who developed the policy and all those who endorse it based on medical evidence?

Are their opinions less relevant than P Smith a columnist? Or a politician?

I know when I finally succumb to cancer or heart disease I won't be going to Patrick smith or Jeff kennet for advice and treatment that's for sure!

don't care what so called experts in the employ of the AFL have got to say
K

I think a panel of 40 of Australia's leading experts on drug abuse and rehab deserve a lot more respect!

Having worked with many medical experts I can honestly say they operate with professional integrity at all times. Their decisions are held accountable by their peers. They don't make policies like this without basing them on extensive research and evidence. If they didn't they would be held accountable by their professional bodies.

That's good enough for me.

thats your opinion
I don't.
experts are consistently being proved wrong .... law inforcement experts say the " medical " opinion is flawed
academics have their heads up their dates mainly & have no practical sense
if the Vic Police say its a poor policy .... thats good enough for me .. I don't care what you or your " experts " think.