Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 12:35 pm  

Smiffy27 wrote:

Can you remember any of the names of those involved in the "confrontation of Rodwell".
Do you recognise these names cropping up time & time again on this forum? Were "Karetaker", "Wires71" and the wonderfully named "Moving On" enjoying a "Sit in" ... back in the day?

It's a bit out of order to suggest those guys would be involved in harassing a player just because they are critics on here. They aren't rude or personal to other posters on this forum either.

I don't know why people get so upset about reading dissenting views. It's surely the whole thing that attracts you to read forums like this. You start with your own perspective but see counter arguments presented by others and it makes you reflect and change your mind.

I think one problem with society generally is that people are too obsessed about being 'right' and also have a tendency to 'pick a side' and then stick rigidly to it in the face of contradictory evidence. If someone changes their mind they are seen as being a 'flip flop' and seen as less credible. You see this all the time in politics on stuff like whether Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn is a good thing. People who have picked a side, will regard it as an article of faith to argue that position, and they lose their ability to make accurate judgements, and those who change their position are derided for being inconsistent.

I prefer the Bayesian approach: you start with a prior view on something, then as you get new evidence, you update it.

My current 'prior' on Price is: I don't think we're going to win a GF with him as coach so I'd be looking around at other options and if the opportuity arose to bring a really attractive name in, I would. I wouldn't sack him now or during the season.

If we lose our next 5 games I'd probably update that to....we're in such a downward spiral that urgent change is needed so we should think about parting terms and appointing a caretaker.

If we win the Challenge Cup again, I'd probably update that to...back to back Challenge Cup wins is pretty impressive, lets lock Price down for another couple of seasons and see what we can achieve.

Does that make me pro-Price or anti-Price, I don't know. It just means I'll update my position based on the new evidence and that sometimes means flip-flopping on a previous position.

In the early 2000s I always thought Briers was overrated by Wire fans when people were calling for him as saviour of GB and I used to want us to swap him for someone like Dunemann, then I switched my view and now think he's massively underrated and not given the respect he deserves considering what he achieved for us. I went the other way on Kelly Shelford who was a massive hero of mine as a teenager but with hindsight I don't think he was as good as I thought, especially at the end.

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 12:54 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

It's a bit out of order to suggest those guys would be involved in harassing a player just because they are critics on here. They aren't rude or personal to other posters on this forum either.

Not even a tiny bit serious with my comments. I thought the idea slightly amusing that the same men who were making their views felt then would be doing so now. Daft idea ... of course

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 1:14 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

It's a bit out of order to suggest those guys would be involved in harassing a player just because they are critics on here. They aren't rude or personal to other posters on this forum either.

I don't know why people get so upset about reading dissenting views. It's surely the whole thing that attracts you to read forums like this. You start with your own perspective but see counter arguments presented by others and it makes you reflect and change your mind.

I think one problem with society generally is that people are too obsessed about being 'right' and also have a tendency to 'pick a side' and then stick rigidly to it in the face of contradictory evidence. If someone changes their mind they are seen as being a 'flip flop' and seen as less credible. You see this all the time in politics on stuff like whether Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn is a good thing. People who have picked a side, will regard it as an article of faith to argue that position, and they lose their ability to make accurate judgements, and those who change their position are derided for being inconsistent.

I prefer the Bayesian approach: you start with a prior view on something, then as you get new evidence, you update it.

My current 'prior' on Price is: I don't think we're going to win a GF with him as coach so I'd be looking around at other options and if the opportuity arose to bring a really attractive name in, I would. I wouldn't sack him now or during the season.

If we lose our next 5 games I'd probably update that to....we're in such a downward spiral that urgent change is needed so we should think about parting terms and appointing a caretaker.

If we win the Challenge Cup again, I'd probably update that to...back to back Challenge Cup wins is pretty impressive, lets lock Price down for another couple of seasons and see what we can achieve.

Does that make me pro-Price or anti-Price, I don't know. It just means I'll update my position based on the new evidence and that sometimes means flip-flopping on a previous position.

In the early 2000s I always thought Briers was overrated by Wire fans when people were calling for him as saviour of GB and I used to want us to swap him for someone like Dunemann, then I switched my view and now think he's massively underrated and not given the respect he deserves considering what he achieved for us. I went the other way on Kelly Shelford who was a massive hero of mine as a teenager but with hindsight I don't think he was as good as I thought, especially at the end.

Every fan should read this. Brilliant post!

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 1:36 pm  

Getting bitchy on here.

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 1:57 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

It's a bit out of order to suggest those guys would be involved in harassing a player just because they are critics on here. They aren't rude or personal to other posters on this forum either.

I don't know why people get so upset about reading dissenting views. It's surely the whole thing that attracts you to read forums like this. You start with your own perspective but see counter arguments presented by others and it makes you reflect and change your mind.

I think one problem with society generally is that people are too obsessed about being 'right' and also have a tendency to 'pick a side' and then stick rigidly to it in the face of contradictory evidence. If someone changes their mind they are seen as being a 'flip flop' and seen as less credible. You see this all the time in politics on stuff like whether Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn is a good thing. People who have picked a side, will regard it as an article of faith to argue that position, and they lose their ability to make accurate judgements, and those who change their position are derided for being inconsistent.

I prefer the Bayesian approach: you start with a prior view on something, then as you get new evidence, you update it.

My current 'prior' on Price is: I don't think we're going to win a GF with him as coach so I'd be looking around at other options and if the opportuity arose to bring a really attractive name in, I would. I wouldn't sack him now or during the season.

If we lose our next 5 games I'd probably update that to....we're in such a downward spiral that urgent change is needed so we should think about parting terms and appointing a caretaker.

If we win the Challenge Cup again, I'd probably update that to...back to back Challenge Cup wins is pretty impressive, lets lock Price down for another couple of seasons and see what we can achieve.

Does that make me pro-Price or anti-Price, I don't know. It just means I'll update my position based on the new evidence and that sometimes means flip-flopping on a previous position.

In the early 2000s I always thought Briers was overrated by Wire fans when people were calling for him as saviour of GB and I used to want us to swap him for someone like Dunemann, then I switched my view and now think he's massively underrated and not given the respect he deserves considering what he achieved for us. I went the other way on Kelly Shelford who was a massive hero of mine as a teenager but with hindsight I don't think he was as good as I thought, especially at the end.

Excellent post, I'll be happy for Steve price to prove me wrong, but I've been waiting some time for the evidence to suggest that!

[Uncle Rico]

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 1:58 pm  

rubber duckie wrote:

Getting bitchy on here.

That's correct and there's no real need for it.

ALL views are welcome within the AUP and we can do without calling each other out on a message board. There is an ignore function if anyone is fed up with reading what they consider to be the same old/same old opposite POV.

Let's smarten it up please

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:31 pm  

In conclusion (for now ),

“Ask not what the coach can do for the players; .....and species “

“Ask what the players can do for the coach; .......and species”.

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:40 pm  

Uncle Rico wrote:

That's correct and there's no real need for it.

ALL views are welcome within the AUP and we can do without calling each other out on a message board. There is an ignore function if anyone is fed up with reading what they consider to be the same old/same old opposite POV.

Let's smarten it up please

Just to confirm my thoughts. I am truly sorry if any individual took offence at my comments re. the Sit In
Lesson learnt. Trying to write something (even mildly amusing & ludicrous) via the written word can be hazardous. I'm sure if we met up we'd get on beautifully.

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:55 pm  

I'm not agreeing with anyone who starts dissing Kelly shelford!!

Re: Price. : Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:03 pm  

....as a thought I'm trying to imagine our team now if we had Kelly Shelford and Sandow at half backs...and Richard Henari on the wing while I'm at it.