meher baba wrote:If true, then the silent majority (who are perhaps not accurately represented by the most prominent posters on here) would seem to have spoken against Butterss.yipper wrote:JThey have around 5000 proxys in already!!
I would imagine that there are lots of members with an average age skewed towards the older end of the spectrum who lack the wherewithal, time or inclination to use the internet to log into fan forums.
They are loyal, lifelong members who would harbour painful memories of the wilderness years of the 1970s and 1980s and who would have been far less convinced than many (perhaps, on average, younger) posters on here that there was any compelling logic to the decision by the club to sack a highly successful coach in GT and to replace him with a coach who favours a boring, "modern" style of football. And who see Butterss and his board as representing the worst sort of spin doctors and purveyors of corporatespeak.
I can tell you that there are lots of Saints members in Hobart who feel this way, but who felt powerless to do anything about it. Their chance has now come.
Good on them.
Spot on (again
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
I know many long suffering Saints fans who do not daily hang on every word written on SS, but rely on the commerical media for their information.
Many of them exhibited the feelings you outlined above MB, and most were quite happy to put their faith in Burkey on a challenging ticket.
Whether that is right or wrong is another debate.
But's it's how a lot of Saints fans feel.