Stamp Your Authority

[Chow-Chicker]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Danzar
I don't have a problem with critical posts, I just think yours are full of rhetoric and clever terminology, with little in the way of substance.

Yes, we're entering a vulnerable phase but our position right now, or our starting point is strong.

You seem to imply a discipline problem. You tell me how, other than things like 'bad free kick counts' and 'authority stamping'?

1. Sydney play hard and physical, which results, often, in frees against. Not necessarily a lack of discipline.
2. Sydney averaged less than 90 points per game last year. We're over 100 this year.
3. We continue to use the ball efficiently, with little or no reliance on any one player, particularly when it comes to goals. Take a look at our percentage and compare it to last year.
4. Players like Goodes and Schneider are fast becoming (or already are) extremely difficult match ups for any opposition. You crow about Goodes' form. His job is to confuse and confound. He has no real position. You can't categorise or pigeon hole this guy.

The reason why I'm replacing rhetoric with stats is because you said yourself we need to want a back-to-back premiership to get it. I say to you our performance is far superior to last year, which says to me they have nothing other than a second flag in mind.

One more thing - I'd throw at least five other points forward if my post wasn't so long

Appreciate the debate though cow kicker.

We are going well, but we must maintain it, and improve a little IMO to take it out again this year. Yes, statistically we are better as you have indicated, but the likes of Adelaide are streets ahead. I'm just putting my view across on how we can improve as a team to try and match it with Adelaide and West Coast. A home final is crucial, and I hope we don't blow the chance. Just because I point out some flaws it doesn't mean that I'm bashing them for goodness sake. Constructive criticism for the sake of improvement doesn't hurt anyone. Except a few in here!

[Danzar]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
We are going well, but we must maintain it, and improve a little IMO to take it out again this year. Yes, statistically we are better as you have indicated, but the likes of Adelaide are streets ahead. I'm just putting my view across on how we can improve as a team to try and match it with Adelaide and West Coast. A home final is crucial, and I hope we don't blow the chance. Just because I point out some flaws it doesn't mean that I'm bashing them for goodness sake. Constructive criticism for the sake of improvement doesn't hurt anyone. Except a few in here!

As I said, don't have a problem at all. If I argue with you, I'm simply diisagreeing. I don't conform to the notion that the Swans are beyond criticism.

However,

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
I'm just putting my view across on how we can improve as a team to try and match it with Adelaide and West Coast

you have yet to suggest ways to improve.

I'll interpret what you've said:

We need to stay in the top four by getting our team selection right [suggest a possible formation], implementing a strong game plan [what kind of plan did you have in mind] and stamp our authority on the field [that's a given, and I think we already are...refer previous posts. How exactly does one 'stamp their authority other than through winning games]. I think we are pretty vulnerable right now [no you don't, you're just looking at the fact we are about to play some good teams, which will happen every year 'till we're all nuked by North Korea] and are displaying some pretty undisciplined football as evidenced by free kick [this is not a sure-fire measurement, do you have any more?]. Its is apparanet [how?] that some [who?] of the premiership players seem satisfied with last year's result rather than determined to go back to back [give us evidence to support this - I guarantee we can provide evidence that will blast your evidence to kingdom come]. A danger games lurks this week [every week is a danger game, according to Master Roos] and if we are not switched on we could slip a couple of rungs down the ladder [you are stating the obvious]. We need to iron out the sloppy play [what sloppy play and how do we 'iron it out'] stop skitting contests so we can stamp iour authority [you already said that].

So, if you want a constructive response to your constructive crticism, then actually make it constructive by dumping the rhetoric and putting a bit of meat on the bones of your posts.

I'm not trying to be rude to you, just honest.

[NMWBloods]

Good response Danzar.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
If you think my posts are critical then perhaps you need to pay another visit to your psychiatrist (who has their hands full by the look of things). If you cannot tell the difference between an objectionable view to straight out criticism, then you are beyond help.

Try letting go of those sensitive marbles you described above and perhaps you will not have the excruciating outburst you have just displayed.

Quick definitions (critical)

adjective: marked by a tendency to find and call attention to errors and flaws (Example: "A critical attitude")
Source

Looks to me by the dictionary definition that your posts have been critical.

[Go Swannies]

I considered posting a reply but found the grammar and spelling errors too annoying to finish it. It's no good demanding perfection when you frame it with illiteracy.

[Chow-Chicker]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Danzar
As I said, don't have a problem at all. If I argue with you, I'm simply diisagreeing. I don't conform to the notion that the Swans are beyond criticism.

However,


you have yet to suggest ways to improve.

I'll interpret what you've said:

We need to stay in the top four by getting our team selection right [suggest a possible formation - (Dependant upon the opposition)], implementing a strong game plan [what kind of plan did you have in mind (Dependant upon the opposition)] and stamp our authority on the field [that's a given, and I think we already are...refer previous posts. How exactly does one 'stamp their authority other than through winning games - (By winning the important games - and give me that rubbish that they're all important)]. I think we are pretty vulnerable right now [no you don't, you're just looking at the fact we are about to play some good teams, which will happen every year 'till we're all nuked by North Korea - (so?)] and are displaying some pretty undisciplined football as evidenced by free kick [this is not a sure-fire measurement, do you have any more? (That's a good indication)]. Its is apparanet [how? - (not doing the team things)] that some [who? (Buchanan - Davis - Kennelly - Barry - Jude Bolton)] of the premiership players seem satisfied with last year's result rather than determined to go back to back [give us evidence to support this - I guarantee we can provide evidence that will blast your evidence to kingdom come - (such as?)]. A danger games lurks this week [every week is a danger game, according to Master Roos - (what's it according to you?)] and if we are not switched on we could slip a couple of rungs down the ladder [you are stating the obvious - (then you agree)]. We need to iron out the sloppy play [what sloppy play and how do we 'iron it out' - (more applied skills training)] stop skitting contests so we can stamp iour authority [you already said that - (because it is important)].

So, if you want a constructive response to your constructive crticism, then actually make it constructive by dumping the rhetoric and putting a bit of meat on the bones of your posts. (Like you have?)

I'm not trying to be rude to you, just honest. (So am I)

[robbieando]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Danzar
I'll interpret what you've said:

We need to stay in the top four by getting our team selection right [suggest a possible formation], implementing a strong game plan [what kind of plan did you have in mind] and stamp our authority on the field [that's a given, and I think we already are...refer previous posts. How exactly does one 'stamp their authority other than through winning games]. I think we are pretty vulnerable right now [no you don't, you're just looking at the fact we are about to play some good teams, which will happen every year 'till we're all nuked by North Korea] and are displaying some pretty undisciplined football as evidenced by free kick [this is not a sure-fire measurement, do you have any more?]. Its is apparanet [how?] that some [who?] of the premiership players seem satisfied with last year's result rather than determined to go back to back [give us evidence to support this - I guarantee we can provide evidence that will blast your evidence to kingdom come]. A danger games lurks this week [every week is a danger game, according to Master Roos] and if we are not switched on we could slip a couple of rungs down the ladder [you are stating the obvious]. We need to iron out the sloppy play [what sloppy play and how do we 'iron it out'] stop skitting contests so we can stamp iour authority [you already said that].

So, if you want a constructive response to your constructive crticism, then actually make it constructive by dumping the rhetoric and putting a bit of meat on the bones of your posts.

I'm not trying to be rude to you, just honest.

Quality, Danzar, just quality.

[Chow-Chicker]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by robbieando
Quality, Danzar, just quality.

Please show me the meat on his bones......

[robbieando]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
Please show me the meat on his bones......

Here is the difference, we are waiting for you to do so in regards to your wild statement. I don't have to so in agreement of another posters agruement that you are yet to give us "some meat of the bones".

[goswannie14]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
Please show me the meat on his bones......

What don't you understand about backing up your criticism with some facts. Danzar is obviously still waiting for you to do that, as are the rest of us.

[Chow-Chicker]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by goswannie14
What don't you understand about backing up your criticism with some facts. Danzar is obviously still waiting for you to do that, as are the rest of us.

I find it hilarious that someone can ask for some basis but doesn't offer any themselves, as I've pointed out in my reply to Danzar. I made observations based on my opinion of what I witness every week. I am asked to back these opinions with written explanation as to why I have these views. However, those who question my views and in fact try to discredit them, offer nothing themselves in their disagreements and also at some point, agrees with what I say.

I will maintain my point of view until someone can provide detailed arguments that will sway my way of thinking. Until then, the team needs to improve IMO.

[Danzar]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
I find it hilarious that someone can ask for some basis but doesn't offer any themselves, as I've pointed out in my reply to Danzar. I made observations based on my opinion of what I witness every week. I am asked to back these opinions with written explanation as to why I have these views. However, those who question my views and in fact try to discredit them, offer nothing themselves in their disagreements and also at some point, agrees with what I say.

I will maintain my point of view until someone can provide detailed arguments that will sway my way of thinking. Until then, the team needs to improve IMO.

Response pending: have a job interview (wish me luck).

In the meantime, I suggest you read my posts again, then follow that by reading your own responses.

Think about what you are saying and back it up with evidence. I also suggest you look up the definition of rhetoric, which I'm happy to supply when I return.

As I said before, don't get defensive. I'm not attacking you. I just disagree - that's what forums are for.

Peace.

[goswannie14]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stamp Your Authority

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
I find it hilarious that someone can ask for some basis but doesn't offer any themselves, as I've pointed out in my reply to Danzar. I made observations based on my opinion of what I witness every week. I am asked to back these opinions with written explanation as to why I have these views. However, those who question my views and in fact try to discredit them, offer nothing themselves in their disagreements and also at some point, agrees with what I say.

I will maintain my point of view until someone can provide detailed arguments that will sway my way of thinking. Until then, the team needs to improve IMO.

You made the criticisms, so you need to offer the basis for why you have done so, to date that has not happened despite several queries and pleadings from different posters on here.

If you are making a critical statement you need to give some basis for why you are making that statement. It is not up to soemone else to give some basis as to why they disagree with you when you have not given any reasons for your statements. If you want to argue on here at least learn how to do it properly.

Many of us got ticked off by Charlie, but at least he backed up his arguments with some basis. We will all wait and see if you can or will deliver the goods. (Pun intended)

[Danzar]

Chow Chicker,

rhetoric n.
1.
a. The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively.
b. A treatise or book discussing this art.

2.Skill in using language effectively and persuasively.

3.
a. A style of speaking or writing, especially the language of a particular subject: fiery political rhetoric.
b. Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous: His offers of compromise were mere rhetoric.

Refer points 3a & 3b.

Statements such is entering the business end, cement position, implement strong game plan, stamp authority (said twice), danger game lurks, switched on, slip a couple of rungs down, iron out sloppy play, stop skitting contests (skit n A short, usually comic dramatic performance or work; a theatrical sketch. A short humorous or satirical piece of writing.).

This is rhetoric.

When I say put ?meat on the bones? (yes, that?s rhetoric too) I mean this:

Tell us who, how, when and why and suggest ways to improve.

You made the post. The onus is on you to supply the detail, rather than expecting us to make do all the work for you.

I was courteous enough to offer you a reasonably detailed assessment of your position (refer my first post) and five short points to back it up (refer my second post).

I offer you this guarantee:

You will receive a far more hospitable reaction from us if you actually say something meaningful and constructive.

It?s a no-brainer Towel Flicker.

I am impressed by the way in which you craft your posts, but find myself decidedly unimpressed by what follows.

Don't mistake our negative responses for hostility against you, or in fact your views, just the way in which you pitch them.

DAN

[Piobaireachd]

this place is getting about as boring as bat@@@@ nowadays