Michael Jones Discussion

[kaftka]

Basically, as the system stands right now, it's only fair to vote for or against somebody if you have a decent understanding of that player. Ie. You've seen him play quite often etc.
If you have very little knowledge of a player, you shouldn't vote. Simple.

The system is changing though, so this doesn't really apply anymore. I'm just trying to get my post count up...

<_<

 

[THE CHIROPRACTOR101]

Originally posted by SaintsFan_Webby+Apr 4 2006, 01:23 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-THE CHIROPRACTOR101

@Apr 3 2006, 01:12 PM
the facts have been laid out on michael jones...and you can read sts fan webby cant you?...

You could try telling me that Lavea belongs in the Hall of Fame by writing a fantastic article on him.

Does that mean I should believe you if you do? [/b]

hahaha that not even logical u fool...

every true rugby supporter knows of michael jones feats. and accomplishments...

you can try telling me carlos spencer belongs in a st. stupid jersey...he does not..his talent is being wasted in that hole

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

I'm not going to vote yes or no, based on one article, when I've never seen him play.

You shouldn't really have voted no for Gareth Edwards if you don't have enough knowledge to do so.

And I take it that by reverting to abusing my club you concede the original argument?

 

[THE CHIROPRACTOR101]

its gud u didnt vote at all...coz u know nothing about rugby

and lavea?...he is the worst player in the world...and i cant wait till he eventually signs that contrct to play in the north where all the 'left overs' from the south go

and that list of old southern bums gets larger and he will follow the same steps as spencer and 'wow' the backward supporters into the evolution of world rugby..as led by the southerners since 'the invincible' allblacks

gud day st.scumbag

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

You seem to have totally misunderstood the point I was making.

You claimed I should vote yes on the basis of one article, saying how fantastic Jones was. I'm saying that you could substitute the name 'Lavea' in there and try to pass off that he's just as good. Should I vote yes then as well?

gud day st.scumbag [/b]

Childish, doesn't put you in the best light. Makes your argument seem desperate.

 

[THE CHIROPRACTOR101]

You seem to have totally misunderstood the point I was making.

You claimed I should vote yes on the basis of one article, saying how fantastic Jones was. I'm saying that you could substitute the name 'Lavea' in there and try to pass off that he's just as good. Should I vote yes then as well?[/b]

and i told u its not logical..coz michael jones is already famous and well accomplished and established in the rugby world..and if you have not heard of his work in the rugby world then you must not be in the rugby world or in a real rugby community...

the article was presented on behalf of celebrating michael jones merits in modern rugby..there was no intent for his position to be disputed..as he is as ive stated above and also an official irb hall of famer

why should we dispute this?...we know hes a legend,we know jonahs a legend,we know martin johnson,gareth edwards and kieth wood are legends and pioneers...do chinese eat motha f***ing rice?..then there is no need to dispute anything here coz in a real rugby community these heroes have already been justified in there positions in a real rugby world..and if this so called rugby forum is to emulate that..to emulate a rugby community..then this forum is doing a pisspoor job of it..by putting up the rugby pioneers,legends and forefathers up for an election like voting thread..when we already know they truely belong here

what tha f*** are you doing here anyway?...youre not voting yes or no,your a bench sitter...your post is nonconclusive and is a waste of time if you didnt vote

I'm not going to vote yes or no, based on one article, when I've never seen him play.
[/b]

:huh: ..and your point is pretty much nothing..as this stupidly run subforum says you vote and give an explanation...and you have not voted but you given an explanation


and what tha f*** is the lavea?...lavea will be somewhere in asia or europe making bundles of your money to play pisspoor like he does down here....(and you guys call that excitement :bravo: )

Childish, doesn't put you in the best light. Makes your argument seem desperate. [/b]

i wouldnt say desperate..and yes childish as it seems..becoz you are very misinformed on rugby legends..so it wouldnt be desperate if im talking on your level,kid

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

Originally posted by THE CHIROPRACTOR101@Apr 4 2006, 12:46 PM
why should we dispute this?...we know hes a legend,we know jonahs a legend,we know martin johnson,gareth edwards and kieth wood are legends and pioneers...do chinese eat motha f***ing rice?..then there is no need to dispute anything here coz in a real rugby community these heroes have already been justified in there positions in a real rugby world..and if this so called rugby forum is to emulate that..to emulate a rugby community..then this forum is doing a pisspoor job of it..by putting up the rugby pioneers,legends and forefathers up for an election like voting thread..when we already know they truely belong here

That's a totally ridiculous point. If we don't discuss the merits of each player, there's no point to the forum at all. We might as well just provide a link to the official Hall of Fame and leave it at that.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that I've never heard of Micheal Jones. I've never once said that, just that I haven't seen him play, so how can I possibly vote on whether he deserves a place or not?

My comment about abstaining was meant as a hint that you shouldn't really vote 'No' if you have no reason to do so.

 

[THE CHIROPRACTOR101]

then this shouldnt be called a hall of fame sub-forum then..as a rugby hall of fame is for long serving patrons of the game of rugby who excelled at the game and excelled either beyond it,outside of it with reference to the game or both

i thought the whole idea of a trf hall of fame is to induct legends and celebrate there merits in the game,with posters personal views..not to argue whether they belong here or not..
it might aswell be a generic post in the general rugby section to where we discuss his faults and 'what we havent seen'

lemme ask you..in all honestly..do you believe michael jones belongs here in a rugby hall of fame...no ifs,buts and not based on any article given???...

just yes or no....

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

Going by your logic with Gareth Edwards, then no, because I haven't seen him play.

But that makes no sense...

 

[THE CHIROPRACTOR101]

:lol: what an idiot

lemme ask you..in all honestly..do you believe michael jones belongs here in a rugby hall of fame...no ifs,buts and not based on any article given???...

just yes or no.... [/b]

going by your logic

if there is such a thing....

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

Originally posted by THE CHIROPRACTOR101@Apr 4 2006, 01:50 PM
:lol: what an idiot

:huh:

Because I actually respond to your posts in a normal way, without getting swallowed up by all the insults and crap they contain?

I think you'll find my previous post contained the word "no".

Isn't that what you were looking for?

 

[THE CHIROPRACTOR101]

poor child...as i was lookin for your honest answer

and if its based on my so called logic which is based on (and takin the mickey)what some other clowns here who have said "he doesnt belong here and i wont comment but ill add a post here anyway coz i havent seen em play footy..." then you just the very silly arent you?

..ive come to the conclusion that the idea of voting in a certified legend as opposed to inducting him automatically followed by view points from fellow posters whether negative or positive is ludicrous..cause it defeats any purpose of a 'true hall of fame' where people are inducted by there services to there sport/adminstration/work place etc....rather than being the power that makes them hall of famers eg. "im not voting coz i havent seen him play although all his work has pretty much influenced the superstar rugby players i see play today"

but

i will continue to support the logic of having a sub-forum like this..to inform the mis-informed,coz i know the whole voting is pretty much non-existant as the majority rules out and i doubt we will ever have a person where the majority rules 'no' on his induction..so this whole voting business is pretty pointless

so..next week ill gather information,pictures and my own personal view and induct sean fitzpatrick,zinzan brooke,john eales and david campese

 

[esoj]

Originally posted by SaintsFan_Webby+Apr 4 2006, 12:29 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-esoj

@Apr 3 2006, 10:19 AM
michael jones is a case in point. he is widely known as a legend in the game

That's not entirely true. He isn't widely talked about in England, hence why I've never seen enough of him, and don't feel it would be fair to vote. [/b]

you are obviously fairly young I would say. I would almost guarnteee you that if you said the name michael jones in europe people would know who you were talking about. He is a legend in the game and as such people even outside of nz would know his name. Your friends proabbly etc are around a similar age so only talk about the modern players but I bet if you talked to someone a bit older they would know who michael jones is.

I would suggest you find some older people to talk to as your mates obviously don't know much beyond the modern era either. most of us in the sh proabbly have ever seen much of a lot of the nh greats but still we understand that they were good players even without seeing them play ourselves. The history of rugby is obviously alot more talked about down in the sh than up there where it seems only the current players matter

 

[kaftka]

Originally posted by esoj+Apr 5 2006, 02:47 PM-->

Originally posted by SaintsFan_Webby@Apr 4 2006, 12:29 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-esoj

@Apr 3 2006, 10:19 AM
michael jones is a case in point. he is widely known as a legend in the game

That's not entirely true. He isn't widely talked about in England, hence why I've never seen enough of him, and don't feel it would be fair to vote.

you are obviously fairly young I would say. I would almost guarnteee you that if you said the name michael jones in europe people would know who you were talking about. He is a legend in the game and as such people even outside of nz would know his name. Your friends proabbly etc are around a similar age so only talk about the modern players but I bet if you talked to someone a bit older they would know who michael jones is.

I would suggest you find some older people to talk to as your mates obviously don't know much beyond the modern era either. most of us in the sh proabbly have ever seen much of a lot of the nh greats but still we understand that they were good players even without seeing them play ourselves. The history of rugby is obviously alot more talked about down in the sh than up there where it seems only the current players matter [/b]

Maybe he doesn't feel he should vote because he doesn't know enough about him. Oh wait, he just said that.
He doesn't need to have seen a lot of him. And he does know who he is. It's understandable that he isn't widely regarded as "One of the truly greats" in a foreign country.

It's okay that he doesn't know enough, or hasn't seen enough of him to vote decisively, and that a very fair approach to the poll. It's not offensive, so don't get patronisingly defensive.

End of Rant.


....



.

 

[esoj]

maybe but i could say the same thing. I wasn't that old when Michael jones played in the wc in 1987 but I still know what he did. my main concern is that people will only vote on players they see and for alot of members this willl bascially be only the current era late 90's onwardss.

 

[kaftka]

Originally posted by esoj@Apr 5 2006, 05:06 PM
maybe but i could say the same thing. I wasn't that old when Michael jones played in the wc in 1987 but I still know what he did. my main concern is that people will only vote on players they see and for alot of members this willl bascially be only the current era late 90's onwardss.

One reason why polls won't decide who gets inducted in the near future.

 

[esoj]

yeah i was reading about that in the other thread. good move imo.

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

Still not sure why people are getting offended by me not voting 'Yes'.

I've never said I hadn't heard of Micheal Jones, I've only said I haven't seen him play.

I wasn't even born until 1988, and he isn't exactly a player who gets widespread coverage in England, so that probably explains why.

Agree with Kaftka, patronising me is just ridiculous, I know my rugby...

 

[esoj]

well there is now a panel in place so such things as this proabbly won't happen again.

 

[Ripper]

Originally posted by SaintsFan_Webby@Apr 5 2006, 07:23 PM
Still not sure why people are getting offended by me not voting 'Yes'.

I've never said I hadn't heard of Micheal Jones, I've only said I haven't seen him play.

I wasn't even born until 1988, and he isn't exactly a player who gets widespread coverage in England, so that probably explains why.

Agree with Kaftka, patronising me is just ridiculous, I know my rugby...

As long as you didn't vote No, I don't see what the problem is either.