Page 1 of 1
"The Big Four"
Posted:
Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:13 pmby McAlmanac
Jake Niall of The Age proclaimed the return of the Big Four back in 2011. Three of them have been well knocked off by "interstate" "expansion" teams this weekend. Typically unfounded Victorian football bias.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:17 pmby The Sleeping Giant
Whats the problem? Is South Australia the only state that is allowed biased football coverage?
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:11 amby bennymacca
Well if you looked at support in Melbourne they would be the big 4 (hawthorn and geelong probably close now too)
Not sure what your point is.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:39 amby Dogwatcher
Victorian insecurity and insularity by the journalist.
South Australian insecurity and insularity by the poster.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:21 amby Wedgie
The articles more about branding and is fair enough. When was the last time Brisbane, Freo, Adelaide, Port or GWS played in front of 70,000+ in a minor round game?
That article isn't even 1% as bad as the trash we get locally and is actually a good read despite the ridiculous notion that Collingwood are a lock for a top 4 spot.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:33 amby Dogwatcher
True, that is ridiculous. We're either treading water or going backwards this season.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:44 amby The Sleeping Giant
The article is from 2011.
We are all just so insecure.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:53 amby Wedgie
The Sleeping Giant wrote:The article is from 2011.
We are all just so insecure.
He was spot on about Collingwood then, they were a lock for the top 4
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:20 amby Dogwatcher
Brilliant.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:21 pmby Rik E Boy
Wedgie wrote:The Sleeping Giant wrote:The article is from 2011.
We are all just so insecure.
He was spot on about Collingwood then, they were a lock for the top 4
No, they were a lock for the Premiership.
regards,
REB
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:10 pmby Dogwatcher
No, we weren't. No one ever is.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:44 pmby Wedgie
Dogwatcher wrote:No, we weren't. No one ever is.
I reckon if you got the next go in the GF front when you were 3 goals up (with Cloke kicking them from ridiculius spots) and Pods was down you would have been. I was there and was pretty worried at that stage!
I still think the footy you played to smash us in the prelim final the year before was the most dominant I'd seen from a side since the 07 GF.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:46 pmby Dogwatcher
I thought we were a chance, it was positive sign. But didn't think we had it in the bag, especially with Reid struggling.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:49 pmby the big bang
Dogwatcher wrote:I thought we were a chance, it was positive sign. But didn't think we had it in the bag, especially with Reid struggling.
then Tomahawk showed up.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:44 pmby Rik E Boy
Dogwatcher wrote:No, we weren't. No one ever is.
What about the Hawks this year?
regards,
REB
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:55 pmby MatteeG
Rik E Boy wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:No, we weren't. No one ever is.
What about the Hawks this year?
regards,
REB
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:57 pmby Phantom Gossiper
I dont think that article is that far off the mark.
Re: "The Big Four"
Posted:
Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:24 pmby Rik E Boy
MatteeG wrote:Rik E Boy wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:No, we weren't. No one ever is.
What about the Hawks this year?
regards,
REB
I was saying Boourns.
Regards,
REB