Swans offer Kerr 5 years

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • satchmopugdog
    Bandicoots ears
    • Apr 2004
    • 3691

    #16
    Originally posted by ROK Lobster
    Get him. Then when he has a bad game I will be able to use the line "Paul's Kerr".
    Kerr and Canberra...I'm sure there is a link there somewhere.
    "The Dog days are over, The Dog days are gone" Florence and the Machine

    Comment

    • Dogzbody
      On the Rookie List
      • Jul 2008
      • 282

      #17
      the biggest thing that concerns me about that article is not the Kerr talk...more so the fact that Roos isn't sure about O'Keefe staying
      "We talked five times. I called him twice, and he called me twice." :confused: :confused: :confused: :D

      Eddie McGuire

      Comment

      • Bear
        Best and Fairest
        • Feb 2003
        • 1022

        #18
        Kerr is an absolute gun, but i can't see how we could get him without robbing Peter to pay Paul (Roos).
        "As a player he simply should not have been able to do the things he did. Leo was a 185cm, 88kg full-back and played on some of the biggest, fastest and best full-forwards of all time, and constantly beat them." Roos.
        Leo Barry? you star! We'll miss ya, ''Leapin''.

        Comment

        • ROK Lobster
          RWO Life Member
          • Aug 2004
          • 8658

          #19
          Originally posted by Dogzbody
          the biggest thing that concerns me about that article is not the Kerr talk...more so the fact that Roos isn't sure about O'Keefe staying
          Roos not knowing/seeing/hearing/caring is Roos speak for I don't want to talk about it.

          Comment

          • Bas
            Veterans List
            • Jan 2003
            • 4457

            #20
            Who do we lose? Pick 11 and O"Keefe.

            Normally that would be OK lose quality to get quality BUT it's Kerr we're talking about. He would make an enormous on field difference but off field baggage is not good.
            In memory of my little Staffy - Dicey, 17.06.2005 to 1.12.2011- I'll miss you mate.

            Comment

            • CureTheSane
              Carpe Noctem
              • Jan 2003
              • 5032

              #21
              Originally posted by Lohengrin
              What do recreational drugs have to do with sports integrity any more so than domestic violence?
              There was no need to go on with this conversation.

              You've already won this battle, presenting a definitive and conclusive example of an absolute contradiction.

              Well done
              The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

              Comment

              • connolly
                Registered User
                • Aug 2005
                • 2461

                #22
                Originally posted by reigning premier
                That's hypocrisy of the highest order. I usually let it go when you crap on about Bevan but in this case, pull your head in.

                You can't advocate one of these guys being OK and entitled to an opportunity with the Swans, and then say the other is not. There is no difference between the two as far as I can see. The only difference is that Kerr is a better, proven player.

                FWIW, I say go get Kerr!
                i'm really honoured that you have stirred to comment on my modest contribution. i can (can't -is this a rule???) make a distinction between off field violence and drug use and their relative affects on sport. The difference is not that Kerr is a better player but that drugs and sport, whether so-called recreational or performance enhancing destroy the integrity of the game. That's why there is an organization called WADA. It is such a boring old piece of rag to accuse someone of hypocracy in argument. The old ad hominem argument, doesn't prove anything. To accuse someone of hypocracy in an argument is really pretty hopeless. I think you mean inconsistent?
                Bevo bandwagon driver

                Comment

                • BSA5
                  Senior Player
                  • Feb 2008
                  • 2522

                  #23
                  Originally posted by connolly
                  i'm really honoured that you have stirred to comment on my modest contribution. i can (can't -is this a rule???) make a distinction between off field violence and drug use and their relative affects on sport. The difference is not that Kerr is a better player but that drugs and sport, whether so-called recreational or performance enhancing destroy the integrity of the game. That's why there is an organization called WADA. It is such a boring old piece of rag to accuse someone of hypocracy in argument. The old ad hominem argument, doesn't prove anything. To accuse someone of hypocracy in an argument is really pretty hopeless. I think you mean inconsistent?
                  Why? You've given no reason for that opinion.
                  Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!

                  Comment

                  • Bas
                    Veterans List
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 4457

                    #24
                    If we're going for Kerr, we might as well make a place for Cousens. Don't want either of them to get lonely. After all I'm sure they have contacts in Sydney.

                    We don't have to give anybody up for Benny boy.
                    In memory of my little Staffy - Dicey, 17.06.2005 to 1.12.2011- I'll miss you mate.

                    Comment

                    • ROK Lobster
                      RWO Life Member
                      • Aug 2004
                      • 8658

                      #25
                      Originally posted by satchmopugdog
                      Kerr and Canberra...I'm sure there is a link there somewhere.
                      Given the power of the leadership group I guess he really will be "Kirk's Kerr".

                      Comment

                      • laughingnome
                        Amateur Statsman
                        • Jul 2006
                        • 1624

                        #26
                        Originally posted by Bas
                        If we're going for Kerr, we might as well make a place for Cousens. Don't want either of them to get lonely. After all I'm sure they have contacts in Sydney.

                        We don't have to give anybody up for Benny boy.
                        Not sure if this is tongue in cheek or not, but it does pose the question - Why pay dearly for Kerr when we could grab Cousins for a song?
                        10100111001 ;-)

                        Comment

                        • connolly
                          Registered User
                          • Aug 2005
                          • 2461

                          #27
                          Originally posted by Lohengrin
                          What do recreational drugs have to do with sports integrity any more so than domestic violence?
                          There is critical difference. Having a conversation with a suspected drug dealer talking about trying out Ketamine is part of the difference. Ketamine is not an innocuous "recreational" drug. Ketamine is a powerful drug commonly misused by weightlifters and bodybuilders. Ketamine is also a notorious "date rape drug. It is also commonly used by ecstacy users to help them sleep. It was first used as a "recreational"drug by US soldiers in the Vietnam war. Dosages at relatively low levels lead to energy rushes and euphoria. Ketamine is a stimulant at a low dose and therefore can improve sports performance. This is an insidious form of cheating. And therefore destroys the integrity of sport. And of course it has also been shown to cause permanent changes in the brain of rats.
                          Last edited by connolly; 25 September 2008, 10:52 PM.
                          Bevo bandwagon driver

                          Comment

                          • connolly
                            Registered User
                            • Aug 2005
                            • 2461

                            #28
                            Originally posted by BSA5
                            Why? You've given no reason for that opinion.
                            It is so obvious it hardly needs repeating. Drug use (whether so-called "recreational" or performance enhancing) is a serious type of cheating in sport. Thats why athletes are subjected to drug testing but not asked "when did you stop beating your wife".
                            Bevo bandwagon driver

                            Comment

                            • ROK Lobster
                              RWO Life Member
                              • Aug 2004
                              • 8658

                              #29
                              Originally posted by connolly
                              Ketamine is also a notorious "date rape drugs." [...] Dosages at relatively low levels lead to energy rushes and euphoria. Ketamine is a stimulant at a low dose and therefore can improve sports performance.
                              So does the rapist take it himself?

                              Comment

                              • BSA5
                                Senior Player
                                • Feb 2008
                                • 2522

                                #30
                                Originally posted by connolly
                                It is so obvious it hardly needs repeating. Drug use (whether so-called "recreational" or performance enhancing) is a serious type of cheating in sport. Thats why athletes are subjected to drug testing but not asked "when did you stop beating your wife".
                                Recreational drug use rarely aids performance. With performance enhancing drugs, yes, it is a corruption of the very sport itself, and as such is in a different category (not worse, just different) than spousal abuse, which is a private issue. Recreational drugs are just that: recreational. They have no more of a bearing on the players' professional lives than spousal abuse. That isn't to say it has nil impact, but neither does spousal abuse. Private issues will always manifest themselves in some way on the field. The impact is just far less great and far less direct than performance enhancing drugs. The impact will also almost certainly be negative, in terms of on-field results.

                                And I know you're going to argue that recreational drugs ARE often performance enhancing. Can't be bothered having that argument. I'm pretty sure we've had it before anyway.
                                Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!

                                Comment

                                Working...