One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: letsgetiton! on April 15, 2007, 11:08:48 AM

Title: campbell v sugar
Post by: letsgetiton! on April 15, 2007, 11:08:48 AM
many many ppl suporters and journos laid the boot into wayne campbell

campbo is/was 1000 times a better player leader and captain than sugar will ever be, i dont care how many premiership medals teh crows gave him.

sugar is getting it easy from many and campbo copped plenty of sh it

why cant he just stand down and give newman the gig
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: mightytiges on April 15, 2007, 04:36:06 PM
Aren't we just repeating what we did with Cambo?! Finding a single scapegoat when our mediocrity seems to be a deeper problem within the whole club or at least the footy department. If it takes the captain to play well for the rest to play well then that doesn't say much for the mentality of our players. I don't see the Carlton players chucking it in because Lance can't get a kick. Where's the pride and self-belief in your own effort and performance and wanting to do the team things?
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: letsgetiton! on April 15, 2007, 06:51:49 PM
Aren't we just repeating what we did with Cambo?! Finding a single scapegoat when our mediocrity seems to be a deeper problem within the whole club or at least the footy department. If it takes the captain to play well for the rest to play well then that doesn't say much for the mentality of our players. I don't see the Carlton players chucking it in because Lance can't get a kick. Where's the pride and self-belief in your own effort and performance and wanting to do the team things?

lance showed whuy he is captain, he worked his way out of teh cold and played hard and well yesterday

only if us tigers had a leader like him, who against the odds can bounce back

blues have heart and balls, we dont
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Fishfinger on April 15, 2007, 06:57:11 PM

lance showed whuy he is captain, he worked his way out of teh cold and played hard and well yesterday

only if us tigers had a leader like him, who against the odds can bounce back

Johnson had a poor start to 2006. By the end of the season he was B&F.
Is that the type of working out of the cold and bouncing back you mean?


Just because Campbell was unfairly treated doesn't make it ok for the same to happen to Johnson.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Life goes on on April 15, 2007, 07:07:14 PM
You cant be serious even comparing the two.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Fishfinger on April 15, 2007, 07:14:10 PM
No. I'm saying it's not ok to treat Johnson poorly on the premise that Campbell was.

(I'm assuming you were replying to me  ???)
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Life goes on on April 15, 2007, 07:24:37 PM
No. I'm saying it's not ok to treat Johnson poorly on the premise that Campbell was.

(I'm assuming you were replying to me  ???)

no, not at you at all fishy.
just think the two players are poles apart in regards to what they have done for the RFC
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: mightytiges on April 15, 2007, 09:01:08 PM
No. I'm saying it's not ok to treat Johnson poorly on the premise that Campbell was.

(I'm assuming you were replying to me  ???)

no, not at you at all fishy.
just think the two players are poles apart in regards to what they have done for the RFC
Tell that to our so called supporters who never forgave Cambo for threatening to walk to North and who would bag him ad nauseum for his short little chips and him getting the captaincy from Knighter. The same leadership question marks pointed at Sugar now were also pointed at Cambo. The captain bashing isn't poles apart.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: WilliamPowell on April 15, 2007, 10:00:26 PM
Campbell -v- Sugar (aka Johnosn)

it's like .....

beans -v- brussel sprouts

You cannot really compare because some people no matter what love beans while others no matter what love brussel sprouts

 ;)

 ;D
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: mightytiges on April 15, 2007, 11:20:39 PM
Campbell -v- Sugar (aka Johnosn)

it's like .....

beans -v- brussel sprouts

You cannot really compare because some people no matter what love beans while others no matter what love brussel sprouts

 ;)

 ;D

LOL

With that analogy no wonder they don't inspire our kids to greatness  :lol
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: tiga on April 15, 2007, 11:45:51 PM
To me its more like beans vs what happens after you eat too many of them.  :lol

Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Ox on April 16, 2007, 02:12:01 AM
At least Campbell was a great,servicable player for the club at one point of his career.even inspiring.
The Captaincy,imo,was too big a burden in light of the fact he was consumed by his ownership of the Swan Hotel
and then later another pub in Richmond.

I also heard a whisper that he was over the way how feral our supporters can be.

Can't say i blame him for that.

Johnson is just a fairy and as i think about his service to us this far I can actually feel
my stomach knot.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: letsgetiton! on April 16, 2007, 08:51:01 AM
No. I'm saying it's not ok to treat Johnson poorly on the premise that Campbell was.

(I'm assuming you were replying to me  ???)

no, not at you at all fishy.
just think the two players are poles apart in regards to what they have done for the RFC
Tell that to our so called supporters who never forgave Cambo for threatening to walk to North and who would bag him ad nauseum for his short little chips and him getting the captaincy from Knighter. The same leadership question marks pointed at Sugar now were also pointed at Cambo. The captain bashing isn't poles apart.

mt the only reason he wanted to leave was because he was made aware of inhouse talk about trading him, he felt gutted and betrayed thus wanted to leave and rightly so! same thing happened to northey, the last half decent coach we had. thanx to mal brown he left, who the hell was mal brown, played a handful of games and thought he owned the joint.


campbell was as good a captain as can be, but copped unwarranted stuff over his leadership.

why is sugar so protected, what a joke it was to a/ reccruit him, and b/  make him captain

let see if terry has the balls to drop the captain
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Harry on April 16, 2007, 10:45:46 AM
Knights was a champion.

Campbell was a good player.

Johnson is a hack.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: letsgetiton! on April 16, 2007, 10:52:20 AM
Knights was a champion.

Campbell was a good player.

Johnson is a hack.

agree

sugar should be dropped and sent to coburg, but i bet terry is to proud to admit he stuffed up picking him as captain and now it makes it damn hard to drop him, who was the last captain dropped from a team cos of form.

terry drop sugar immediately

ps, ppl say joel never deserved his jd medals!!!! pigs a rse of course he did, its sugar who was bloody given one
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: mightytiges on April 16, 2007, 04:16:46 PM
That may be so about Cambo X but some supporters never forgave him. I can still remember a supporter in the RFC members a few years ago, after we had just kicked a goal thanks to a smart lobbed kick by Cambo to one of our leading forwards, remaining arms crossed and turning to his mate next to him saying "typical Campbell kicking short up and unders, that's why I've never liked him"  ::).

Knights was a great player (moreso before and including '95) but we never made the finals either under his captaincy.

I seriously believe we could make anyone captain and they would get bagged by our own supporters. Team depth especially quality ballwinning onballers is something we have always lacked and still do. Too much left to too few. That's not the captain's fault that's the recruiter's job. Right now our older starting midfielders are just B-graders at best and below them are our young blokes still learning the caper. One top player isn't going to solve our deficiencies. If we somehow got Judd and made him captain little would change IMO.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: JohnF on April 16, 2007, 04:32:46 PM
Even Cambo ended up being schhit as captain. The difference was though that he was shot at the time, whereas Johnson is meant to be in the prime of his career.

I thought Cambo was out best player in 2001 ( not Gaspar ), he was second in the league in clearances and was doing a lot of hard things, somewhat unsual for him. 2002 he was ok, playing injured half the year and still pulled off some inspirational performances, notably against West Coast (36 touches, 4 goals) and Melbourne (17 touches and a goal in last quarter) to win games off his own boot. In 2003 he started of great, and was miles ahead of anyone in our B&F until he did his achilles. After that he was history and we, following him, went to total scchit.

Johnson looks to be playing injured to me. He is so slow it's glaring. But I don't want to attribute everything to injury, for even when he does get the ball he makes as stupid errors as you'd see from a first gamer. IMO he never has had and never will have the footy nous of someone like cambo, both as a player and as a captain. He seems no more tactically aware than Luke McGuane.

   
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Harry on April 16, 2007, 04:57:34 PM
That may be so about Cambo X but some supporters never forgave him. I can still remember a supporter in the RFC members a few years ago, after we had just kicked a goal thanks to a smart lobbed kick by Cambo to one of our leading forwards, remaining arms crossed and turning to his mate next to him saying "typical Campbell kicking short up and unders, that's why I've never liked him"  ::).

Knights was a great player (moreso before and including '95) but we never made the finals either under his captaincy.

I seriously believe we could make anyone captain and they would get bagged by our own supporters. Team depth especially quality ballwinning onballers is something we have always lacked and still do. Too much left to too few. That's not the captain's fault that's the recruiter's job. Right now our older starting midfielders are just B-graders at best and below them are our young blokes still learning the caper. One top player isn't going to solve our deficiencies. If we somehow got Judd and made him captain little would change IMO.

I understand what you are saying MT, but I'm comenting on his playing ability.  Had he'd not been captain I'd still say he's a hack and be calling for his axing.  He's basically a blonde version of Mathew Rogers (geez I couldn't stand him).  He has little awareness, vision, and footy smarts.  He's a first otion type player and if the first option isn't glaringly obvious he'll take the easy option and blaze away anywhere.  IMO he is one of the most overrated players in the league.

You cannot compare him to Campbell because, even though Campbells kicking let him down alot, he was still smart enough to find the hard and loose ball and he was great in getting his teamates into the game by hand.  Wasn't the biggest fan of Campbell but had respect for him as a player. 
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: JohnF on April 16, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
ROFLAMOOOO@Rogers. Trust Harry to bring old hand grenade back to discussion. Funny carrnt.You're right though, Johnson is turning into Rogers mach II. Rogers could still be playing today given the standard we are setting.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: DallasCrane on April 16, 2007, 06:04:04 PM
Knights was a champion.

Campbell was a good player.

Johnson is a hack.

I don't know about a hack.
I think my non tiger friend sums him up perfectly- 'he was good for Adelaide, has only been OK for Richmond'

In an ideal world, your captain wouldn't be OK. He'd be a gun!
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Ox on April 16, 2007, 06:40:40 PM
Rogers was better than Johnson at Richmond.

LMAO@ Rogers being our captain
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: julzqld on April 16, 2007, 11:00:28 PM
Took your time to get back here John.

WP - I'd rather beans than brussell sprouts  :chuck
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: WilliamPowell on April 17, 2007, 09:08:32 AM
WP - I'd rather beans than brussell sprouts  :chuck

 ;D :thumbsup

Personally I prefer peas  ;)
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: julzqld on April 17, 2007, 10:32:28 AM
Yeah me too - especially mint peas.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Fishfinger on April 17, 2007, 10:41:17 AM
Took your time to get back here John.

On Skippy they whistle with a gumleaf.
On OER they whistle with a Campbell.
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: mightytiges on April 17, 2007, 12:59:29 PM
Took your time to get back here John.

On Skippy they whistle with a gumleaf.
On OER they whistle with a Campbell.

:lol

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: What's that Cambo?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: There's a problem at Punt Rd?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: They're talking about you on OER?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: I'll be right there
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: julzqld on April 17, 2007, 02:10:05 PM
LOL
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Stephanie on April 17, 2007, 03:13:47 PM
Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: What's that Cambo?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: There's a problem at Punt Rd?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: They're talking about you on OER?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: I'll be right there

Lol, that's gold. :ROTFL
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: JohnF on April 17, 2007, 04:00:21 PM
Took your time to get back here John.

On Skippy they whistle with a gumleaf.
On OER they whistle with a Campbell.

:lol

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: What's that Cambo?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: There's a problem at Punt Rd?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: They're talking about you on OER?

Cambo: tsk tsk tsk

JohnF: I'll be right there


ROFLAMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooo  :bow
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Moi on April 17, 2007, 04:15:45 PM
 :bow MT  :bow
Title: Re: campbell v sugar
Post by: Ox on April 17, 2007, 05:27:01 PM
LSHICAB ! :rollin :rollin :rollin

(LAUGHING SO HARD i'VE CRACKED A BARNY)