Stupid Idea Mr Healy

[Chow-Chicker]

He maybe a Swans hero, but this is dumb....

Trial handball restrictions loom | Herald Sun

Why not limit the amount of goals kicked in a game? Far too many goals are being scored. Lets remove the behind posts. We don't need behinds scored in games, it's a blot. Lets put a net at the back of the goals, and a bar across the top of the posts. Lets remove the need to handle the ball at all.....

[Big Al]

It's not April 1st is it?

[TheGrimReaper]

He's been drinking again sadly.

[swantastic]

That is even more stupid than the idea of cousins coming back and playing.

[Chow-Chicker]

And you say Healy's comments are stupid...

I think my idea has more merit.

[Big Al]

"Why not limit the amount of goals kicked in a game? "

Surely only a @@@@wit would suggest this?

I'm pretty sure Chow was being facetious in response to Healy's article.

[Chow-Chicker]

"Why not limit the amount of goals kicked in a game? "

Surely only a @@@@wit would suggest this?

Only a @@@@wit would believe it. What a pity it was you.

[Chow-Chicker]

Of course he was, but it was a pretty (very) stupid analogy.

To go with Healy's stupid suggestion. Takes a while to sink in, doesn't it?

[ROK Lobster]

No - it was clear from the start, but that doesn't make it any less stupid.

You are right Doc - stupid.

[Chow-Chicker]

No - it was clear from the start, but that doesn't make it any less stupid.

Hmmmm, OK.........now I see why it upset you so. You don't like deliberate stupid suggestions highlighting deliberate stupid suggestions, because you believe suggesting something stupid is far worse than stupid suggestions actually being implemented.

[Chow-Chicker]

You are right Doc - stupid.

How are you Mr Lobster? Trolling around baiting other posters again I see. Your friend has deserted you again?

[Chow-Chicker]

Maybe your comments would be less stupid if you actually addressed Healy's (and Hopkin's) comments properly, or are you trying to say you are smarter and more knowledgeable of football than them?

The reductio ad absurdum argument is really the refuge of someone incapable of presenting a cogent rebuttal.

Ooh, you've taken offence to a veiled insult to a stupid suggestion by Mr Healy. I don't really care how it makes you feel, but I am pleased to have expressed my displeasure in the manner in which I have done.

So continue on with your pointless barage, as it really is making me laugh.

[Chow-Chicker]

Okay - if you think that your comments make sense then stick with that delusion. I'm sure you'll win lots more people to your point of view on all sorts of topics!

Good.

You see, I don't bother presenting arguments against idiots who use pointless statistical data to propose changes to a game. They do so without asking and answering the questions "why is this trend bad?" or "why is this trend occuring?" or "will this trend continue?" or "do we need to create another rule to reduce a trend that may not necessarily continue?" or "any other @@@@ing question that needs to be asked" before they actually implement a ridiculous rule. Limiting the interchange, limiting the handballs........therefore, why not limit every other damn thing?

NAB Cup is....no, sorry, has been a completely irrelevant, meaningless "spectacle" of AFL football.

[Zlatorog]

Well, if they want to reduce the number of hand balling they'll have to reduce the number of players. Sometimes it gets so overcrowded that that is the only safe way to dispose the ball. Especially in today's interpretation of the holding the ball.
Of course, there's another alternative: Soccer.

[ScottH]

Love to see how they'd enforce a handball limit during a game!!!