-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
Discussion on another thread got me thinking about how we rate players performances on any given week, and how one bloke might think a player was god's gift to footy while another might think the same player disgraced the jumper, song, mascot, and ancestry of all previous champion tiger teams.
It's fair enough that everyone wants to defend their favourites and slate their usual suspects, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that finds it frustrating to read some of the blinkered stuff that sometimes gets posted. It's hard to argue with a zealot. The fact is, no matter how objective we try to be, our views are coloured by how much we personally like or dislike a player and the way he goes about his footy. Sometimes, we can all be pretty irrational, and this makes our judgement questionable.
So, how can we objectively rate a player on any given weekend? Simple - use the whipping-boy test, which goes a little something like this:
If <insert favourite whipping-boy> played exactly the same game as <insert favourite golden child> last weekend, would you have been cool with it?
If the answer to the question is "no way, I would have sent the bastard straight back to Coburg", then maybe it's time we either cut the whipping-boy some slack, or started laying into the golden child a bit more.
Either way, it makes you think about the denial a lot of us (me included!) like to live in.
It's fair enough that everyone wants to defend their favourites and slate their usual suspects, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that finds it frustrating to read some of the blinkered stuff that sometimes gets posted. It's hard to argue with a zealot. The fact is, no matter how objective we try to be, our views are coloured by how much we personally like or dislike a player and the way he goes about his footy. Sometimes, we can all be pretty irrational, and this makes our judgement questionable.
So, how can we objectively rate a player on any given weekend? Simple - use the whipping-boy test, which goes a little something like this:
If <insert favourite whipping-boy> played exactly the same game as <insert favourite golden child> last weekend, would you have been cool with it?
If the answer to the question is "no way, I would have sent the bastard straight back to Coburg", then maybe it's time we either cut the whipping-boy some slack, or started laying into the golden child a bit more.
Either way, it makes you think about the denial a lot of us (me included!) like to live in.