No Ludwig, it's not a great article. It's a skilful polemic: emotive, insulting and one-sided. It adds nothing to the debate.Originally Posted by Ludwig
No Ludwig, it's not a great article. It's a skilful polemic: emotive, insulting and one-sided. It adds nothing to the debate.
A gormless AFL Commission that takes Eddie's partisan word as gospel? Sounds pretty right to me. Where's the problem with that exactly?
My opinion is objective truth in its purest form
It's written exactly as you say, but that doesn't mean Caroline is wrong or has written a poor article. The debate is about a one-sided individual - Eddie - sprouting his one-sided view, so you're going to get these op-eds that either take his side or don't. If Eddie was articulating a well thought out analysis of the pros and cons of the academy system (which he isn't), he would probably receive a more balanced analysis of his comments.
Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sector
Spot on. When you are as biased and inaccurate as the Sphere of Influence then inevitably commentary about you will be polarised. Doesn't mean the commentary is wrong. In fact, when the Sphere talks as much demonstrably incorrect crap as he does, it is probably a sign that Rebecca's commentary is correct.
My opinion is objective truth in its purest form
No it adds nothing but it does add a different voice with a discerning view to Eddie's at the very least.
Today's a draft of your epitaph
Very few in the Melbourne media stand up to this man because they all belong to the same clique. They don't dare endanger their AFL accreditation. Remember that poor bugger from Channel 7 who reported of the medical records of AFL players found in a street outside a medical clinic, with the support of Channel 7 I might add, who was summarily sent to Siberia, never to be heard of again.
Hear hear. She's a poor journalist. I recall her being emphatic that Buddy was the destroying the culture of the club.
Yes, Ludwig, I thought that it was interesting that she more or less describes the reasons why he may be suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, without actually explicitly stating that she thinks that he's a full on narcissist. And of course, for Eddie, and many other high profile, opinion forming media types, the diagnosis of NPD is probably on the money. That is, he displays the typical narcissistic traits of an inflated view of one's own self and the descent into paranoia if things if things don't go to plan.
With Eddie, this is probably the most evident when seen in the light of Collingwood's continual mediocrity. That is, the Collingwood football club, is possibly the thing that Eddie cares for most and a thing that he's put a huge amount of effort into over the years. And with the narcissist's excessive self regard, the last person that they blame if things don't go to plan, is themselves. So it's highly unlikely, that Eddie will be thinking that maybe there's something wrong with his management style. He probably is not thinking, that maybe he has given a long term contract to a crap coach. Nor would he be thinking that there might be something a bit wrong with his beloved Collingwood's culture. Instead, he will be looking for the unfair reasons why Collingwood are not in their rightful place at the top of the premiership tree.
So, ignoring all the advantages that both he and Collingwood have been given, he is now voicing his paranoia from his privileged media positions. We're not to blame; it's the fault of the northern academies, it's the fault of COLA payments, it's the fault of the draft system, etc, etc, etc.
And of course, during this process, he is also displaying another tell tale sign of the narcissist; that is, he has almost no sensitivity when it comes to how his comments may affect others, but a sense of outraged persecution when others reply to his comments.
NPD has been removed from the latest DSM because so many narcissists are high-functioning. True story.
Rebecca could have made an even stronger case if she had included the damage done to Brisbane by an Eddie-launched campaign.
And Richard Hines picks up a significant factor in the argument:
No Cookies | Daily Telegraph
He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)
Already paying Rupert to watch the footy. No way am I paying to read that disgraceful rag.
I see what you mean, and I agree. I ran a headline from the article on Google and read it from there.
He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)
Bookmarks