AFL360

Bill James

Tiger Legend
May 10, 2005
6,123
34
Glen Archer three reasons to like him.

1. Only player to consistently hold Richo.
2. Doesn't play against us anymore.
3. Paid opponents wrestling fine.
 

spook

It is only the intellectually lost who ever argue.
Jun 18, 2007
10,723
400
Bill James said:
Glen Archer three reasons to like him.

1. Only player to consistently hold Richo.
Only in Richo's early days.

Tigers of Old said:
4. Made Carey crap his pants.
Arch himself has said Carey would have beaten the shizen out of him. He just caught him by surprise.

But I do have a lot of time for Archer.
 

JB11

Tiger Rookie
May 21, 2012
293
0
I admired him as a player (except when he hurt draga)

He is a good bloke off the field
I used to see him and the north players a lot at doherty's gym before they did up the facilities at Arden street
One of the few that actually lifted the weights correctly
 

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
11,402
71
Camberwell
I hated him because he used to say that he liked playing against the Tigers because we were soft and lacked consistent hardness.

He was probably right in those days however.
 

Tenacious

Tiger Champion
May 19, 2008
3,344
82
Sintiger said:
I hated him because he used to say that he liked playing against the Tigers because we were soft and lacked consistent hardness.

He was probably right in those days however.
I've never forgiven him for a cheap shot on Chris Naish (when Naish wasn't even looking) one day many many years ago right in front on me on the boundary line a the 'G
Not that I hold grudges!
 

Bill James

Tiger Legend
May 10, 2005
6,123
34
Funny to watch King question Gerard Whateley on why he thought Jobe should play against the Eagles when he admitted taking a banned substance but last week he thought Milne should not play when there had been no admission of guilt and no conviction. When King pressed him on his inconsistency he literally made no comment.
 

TigerMoz

DJ - What a Champ!
Nov 26, 2012
1,375
0
Melbourne
Bill James said:
Funny to watch King question Gerard Whateley on why he thought Jobe should play against the Eagles when he admitted taking a banned substance but last week he thought Milne should not play when there had been no admission of guilt and no conviction. When King pressed him on his inconsistency he literally made no comment.
I saw the initial one on Milne but not the more recent. Interesting...
 

MG

Tiger Rookie
Oct 8, 2004
447
0
Melbourne
Bill James said:
Funny to watch King question Gerard Whateley on why he thought Jobe should play against the Eagles when he admitted taking a banned substance but last week he thought Milne should not play when there had been no admission of guilt and no conviction. When King pressed him on his inconsistency he literally made no comment.
TigerMoz said:
I saw the initial one on Milne but not the more recent. Interesting...
IIRC Whateley's stance was Milne had been charged whereas Watson had not yet had charges brought (despite the admission). He asked King to respond to his logic and when he got the same response he simply moved on. Whateley made no further comment as he'd already stated his position.
 

Sir

Tiger Matchwinner
Apr 23, 2004
913
10
MG said:
IIRC Whateley's stance was Milne had been charged whereas Watson had not yet had charges brought (despite the admission). He asked King to respond to his logic and when he got the same response he simply moved on. Whateley made no further comment as he'd already stated his position.
Absolutely correct.

Whateley is a very considered, cautious journalist.

He gives Robbo enough rope to hang himself each week - and likewise (in this debate) King.

Whateley has expressed his view (re Milne and subsequently Watson) with incredible logic and calm - it's the others that struggle to keep up with his intelligence.

I really enjoy watching AFL 360 each night (Foxtel IQ set to record each night) - with Gerard showing himself to be one of the superior sports journalists in the country. He might not have the playing background - or the "over-hype" that some people require - but - his ability to summarise a controversial issue (racism? drugs? Milne? Watson?) is second to none.

I was watching The Couch when Jobe Watson made his admission. Healy, Sheehan and Roos barely raised an eyebrow - and then went on to fawn: "Jobe you're a fine young man etc etc". Bejezus - what an amazing lack of journalistic skills ......... none of them actually realised what he'd just admitted and they literally just continued on with the run sheet :eek:
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
22,969
363
Melbourne
Tenacious said:
I've never forgiven him for a cheap shot on Chris Naish (when Naish wasn't even looking) one day many many years ago right in front on me on the boundary line a the 'G
Not that I hold grudges!
Ha, I hated Wanganeen for exactly the same reason. Bit of a punching bag was Naish.
 

Bill James

Tiger Legend
May 10, 2005
6,123
34
MG said:
IIRC Whateley's stance was Milne had been charged whereas Watson had not yet had charges brought (despite the admission). He asked King to respond to his logic and when he got the same response he simply moved on. Whateley made no further comment as he'd already stated his position.
I understand his position so did King and basically asked him to his defend his logic that bringing charges without admission of guilt requires stronger action than admission of guilt with charges pending investigation. He chose not to defend his position suggesting to me that he couldn't.
 

Sir

Tiger Matchwinner
Apr 23, 2004
913
10
Bill James said:
I understand his position so did King and basically asked him to his defend his logic that bringing charges without admission of guilt requires stronger action than admission of guilt with charges pending investigation. He chose not to defend his position suggesting to me that he couldn't.
I'm not sure that's quite right - but I've deleted the recording.

If I recall quickly - Gerard had already clarified his stance, which includes (but is not limited to) the ideal that Milne has been formally charged whereas Watson hasn't.

Nevertheless - Gerard also admits that he continues to debate some aspects (specifically - should Watson still be playing).

What is most impressive is that Gerard "listens"

He asks a question and then allows the other person to provide a response. He doesn't normally try and enforce his view. It's an excellent character trait.