saintspremiers wrote:
FFS get a clue....show some respect for respected Journalists!
what a laugh....show me a journalist who is respected ffs.......no such animal....
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
saintspremiers wrote:
FFS get a clue....show some respect for respected Journalists!
Totally agree. It is amazing that people say just forget about the money he may be owed. If he is owed he should get otherwise he will not if not owed. By the way this guy was sacked. How many people on here if owed money from an employer who sacked you would not try to get the money. I have a guess and say none.stinger wrote:Bevan Shorluey wrote:Is that what you'd do if your employer shafted you and held onto your entitlements?Huzzad wrote:Read this a few minutes ago and was dissapoitned to hear that this is still not resolved. For goodness sake Thomas, you are not homeless. Sell your $1million dollar house, get one you can actually afford and stop draining money away from the club. True men cop it on the chin and move on. Things end badly, get over it. I'm sure you make enough from the media now.
exactly......bet the posters on here berating thomas would be the first ones to squeal like stuck pigs if their employer tried to shaft them......as i have said all along ..the courts will sort it out..
interesting to see that the same posters who initially were saying give him nothing..as that's what he is owed, now seem to concede that the club owes him at least 100 grand.....
Sainternist wrote:HALLELUJAH!
People are finally seeing GT for what he really is.
Perhaps he should go and sort out his financial matters with Mr Butterrs first
I really hope this pigdog never returns to the club in any shape or form
the question is do we really owe him any money ? from all reports thomas signed off that he recived his payments so unless you know the case more intimatley then there is no proof that thomas is owed anything at all .plugger66 wrote:Totally agree. It is amazing that people say just forget about the money he may be owed. If he is owed he should get otherwise he will not if not owed. By the way this guy was sacked. How many people on here if owed money from an employer who sacked you would not try to get the money. I have a guess and say none.stinger wrote:Bevan Shorluey wrote:Is that what you'd do if your employer shafted you and held onto your entitlements?Huzzad wrote:Read this a few minutes ago and was dissapoitned to hear that this is still not resolved. For goodness sake Thomas, you are not homeless. Sell your $1million dollar house, get one you can actually afford and stop draining money away from the club. True men cop it on the chin and move on. Things end badly, get over it. I'm sure you make enough from the media now.
exactly......bet the posters on here berating thomas would be the first ones to squeal like stuck pigs if their employer tried to shaft them......as i have said all along ..the courts will sort it out..
interesting to see that the same posters who initially were saying give him nothing..as that's what he is owed, now seem to concede that the club owes him at least 100 grand.....
pigdog is an expression i just came up with on the spot.stinger wrote:pigdog...???.....where did you get that one from..????
...and for your information it is
B U T T E R S S .....ffs.....he was the president long enough for you to get his name right.......
Who cares what his name was?stinger wrote:Sainternist wrote:HALLELUJAH!
People are finally seeing GT for what he really is.
Perhaps he should go and sort out his financial matters with Mr Butterrs first
I really hope this pigdog never returns to the club in any shape or form
pigdog...???.....where did you get that one from..????
...and for your information it is
B U T T E R S S .....ffs.....he was the president long enough for you to get his name right.......
that sounds correct. for an turied coach he got alot from the saints. and gradually he is losing my respect as well. he had done some good things, just like butters did. but for gawds sake he should just move on. i hope to hell we don't hear of him that much next season, but who knows he has a large foot in mouth diease which i cringed every time he opned his mouthjill wrote:I think GT did a great job when he was first appointed & while surprised when he was sacked, felt he was NOT the coach to take us to the premiership. However I have been disappointed in his comments re some of our players & now feel he really is taking the club for a ride. As a businessman he'd know to read the fine print & NOT sign off on something he disagreed with! Sadly he is now losing the respect of supporters like me who loved the way pride in the jumper and the Club were developed under his leadership. The Club IS bigger than the individual ,Grant! Many would welcome you back at the Club but NOT if you bleed us for money that is not deserved or rightfully yours. For an untried league coach think financially you got more than your due thanks to your ex-mate!
WRONGstinger wrote: interesting to see that the same posters who initially were saying give him nothing..as that's what he is owed, now seem to concede that the club owes him at least 100 grand.....
Thomas's legal contract was paid out in FULL!plugger66 wrote:
Totally agree. It is amazing that people say just forget about the money he may be owed. If he is owed he should get otherwise he will not if not owed. By the way this guy was sacked. How many people on here if owed money from an employer who sacked you would not try to get the money. I have a guess and say none.
WRONG Jeff, that is incorrect, perhaps you should stick to the factsJeffDunne wrote:The 100K I believe was for services already rendered.
The club held onto the payment pending GT keeping quiet. Quite a bizarre agreement actually. If I was GT I wouldn't be claiming just the 100K, I'd be expecting interest on it also.
It really would help Andrew if you stuck to the facts.
riccardo wrote: I'd kill to see this elusive stat dec you keep harping on about. Not doubting it exists, of course, but have you ever actually seen it?
Stephen Rielly | December 20, 2007 "The Age"
A further $167,000 is being sought for what Thomas has claimed are annual leave and public holiday entitlements, although the former coach signed a statutory declaration while he was still at the club which stated he had taken all the annual leave he was owed. Thomas has since claimed that he was pressured to sign that declaration.
Thomas said at the time of his unexpected departure almost 15 months ago that he could never hurt St Kilda .
Selective memory..................... coming from you that's a classicJeffDunne wrote:That's not what's been reported and it's not what RB has said.
RB admitted after his tantrum last year that the club still owed Thomas money.
Do I need to find the quotes Andrew to appease your selective memory?
getting warmer, jeffrey?December 20, 2007 "The Age"
The writ, which was served on the then St Kilda administration of Rod Butterss on September 5, includes a demand for $100,000 that Thomas claims was promised to him upon his sacking in 2006 on the condition that he did not criticise the club or anyone representing it. .
he's our second most successful coach..got us into the finals three years in a row......he's done nothing to you to warrant calling him such an offensive name...most saints supporters would find your comment offensive ffs....Sainternist wrote:you found that offensive?stinger wrote:just a cheap shot for your pigdog comment.....which i did find offensive......
ok, i shan't refer to GT anymore as a "pigdog".
instead he can be referred to as persona non grata.
Isn't Paul Couch Gooses uncle?SENsaintsational wrote: Not true. Goose snr and GT were and are good friends. In fact, many of GT's St Kilda staff came from his days at Warrnambool including Billy Couch (property and brother of Paul) & Sandy Morrison (runner).