Thomas to take Saints to court - The Age 30/1
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- Saints Premiers 2008
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4335
- Joined: Thu 27 Oct 2005 11:21pm
- Location: Brisbane
- magnifisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8095
- Joined: Sun 02 May 2004 2:52am
- Has thanked: 227 times
- Been thanked: 605 times
I think you are right.Saints Premiers 2008 wrote:so basically he is suing the club to pay butters' back...after butters' sacked him...
i used to admire gt even shortly after his sacking....even through last year during his short stint in the media...however not now...
Thomas's ego is as big as his guts!
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
A little diversion here???.rodgerfox wrote:Name one contract that Thomas drew up?saintsRrising wrote:
If his original contract was not precise...why not???? Remember that GT was the one who sad he was expert in this area. It makes one shudder now for the contracts drawn up by GT for the players under his watch.
If his own contract was poorly worded and he had "expert' Knowledge in this area surely he should bare some of the responsibility for it's shortcomings. Or is this just now the "expert" at working seeking to exploit known by him "shortcomings"?
What a stupid, stupid post.
Even for you.
It would appear that you do not acknowledge what was public knowledge...GT demanded that he oversee all contract negotiations with players including their contracts.
GT did the contracts of not just the players, but trainers etc too.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 70,00.html
Thomas had attempted to mould football - and St Kilda with it - into an utterly new shape. He would not employ a football operations manager. He would take care of those responsibilities. Included in that were player contracts.
Whether GT did or did not draw up the contracts or have someone else do the initial legwork in this area is irrelevant. He had to sign off on it and understand it.....more than understand it he had to manage it. Or are you saying Rodg that GT signed off for the club on contracts with no understanding of what he was signing or negotating, or the implications of same?
He demanded responsibility and accountability in this area...and if he was not up to the task he should not have been doing it.
If he was not capable of it, it would be a clear example of his neglience of him insisting to take resposnibility for something he should not have and in particular when the Club was seeking to make an appointment in this area.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Huh?? Diversion?? From what?saintsRrising wrote:A little diversion here???.rodgerfox wrote:Name one contract that Thomas drew up?saintsRrising wrote:
If his original contract was not precise...why not???? Remember that GT was the one who sad he was expert in this area. It makes one shudder now for the contracts drawn up by GT for the players under his watch.
If his own contract was poorly worded and he had "expert' Knowledge in this area surely he should bare some of the responsibility for it's shortcomings. Or is this just now the "expert" at working seeking to exploit known by him "shortcomings"?
What a stupid, stupid post.
Even for you.
I just noticed that as usual, you climb up on your pedestal and type a huge pile of droppings - with little fact.
If you're going to pretend to be an expert on every topic football, you have to expect to be pulled up for writing lies and rubbish.
GT did the negotiations. He didn't 'draw up' contracts. Very, very different things.saintsRrising wrote: It would appear that you do not acknowledge what was public knowledge...GT demanded that he oversee all contract negotiations with players including their contracts.
GT did the contracts of not just the players, but trainers etc too.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 70,00.html
Thomas had attempted to mould football - and St Kilda with it - into an utterly new shape. He would not employ a football operations manager. He would take care of those responsibilities. Included in that were player contracts.
All I'm saying you simpleton, is that you either lied in your post, or are ignorant on the topic. Either way, you shouldn't have opened your trap.saintsRrising wrote: Whether GT did or did not draw up the contracts or have someone else do the initial legwork in this area is irrelevant. He had to sign off on it and understand it.....more than understand it he had to manage it. Or are you saying Rodg that GT signed off for the club on contracts with no understanding of what he was signing or negotating, or the implications of same?
I demand lots of things. Whether I get them or not is a totally different thing. My kids insist on lots of things, whether they get them is a different story.saintsRrising wrote: He demanded responsibility and accountability in this area...and if he was not up to the task he should not have been doing it.
If he was not capable of it, it would be a clear example of his neglience of him insisting to take resposnibility for something he should not have and in particular when the Club was seeking to make an appointment in this area.
Who is negligent if I give my kids exactly what they wany and it doesn't work out? Them, or me?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
This sums it up I reckon. Lack of quality and clarity in the process = lack of clarity in the result. Add a twist of personal bitterness and a huge dollop of warring egos and it ends up in court.kaos theory wrote:What this proves is a complete lack of process by the previous administration. RB had an arrangement with GT full of holes, which make these sorts of situations possible.
Distracting for Westaway and the team and unfortunate for the club.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
You....and particulary if you had no basis to do so....or should have realised in advance that it would have been harmful to them.rodgerfox wrote:
Who is negligent if I give my kids exactly what they wany and it doesn't work out? Them, or me?
If however it is something that they may well have been capable of doing, but it does not work out it is not negligence.
However all parents make mistakes....all people make mistakes, all organisations make mistakes.
A good parent or organisation acts when they realise that they have made a mistake.
Sometimes a parent drags the chain and rectifies their mistake too slowly.....others just keep a blind eye turned.
Last edited by saintsRrising on Wed 30 Jan 2008 11:44am, edited 1 time in total.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Interesting turn of phrase Rodger.rodgerfox wrote:
All I'm saying you simpleton, is that you either lied in your post, or are ignorant on the topic. Either way, you shouldn't have opened your trap.
I did not lie and have explained what I wrote. Just because you choose to use a different definition than I, does not make me a liar.
I am more than happy to discuss an issue or debate a point, but if you just want to call "names' I fail to see the point.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
It doesn't make you a good organisation because you act when you realise you've made a mistake.saintsRrising wrote:
A good parent or organisation acts when they realise that they have made a mistake.
Sometimes a parent drags the chain and rectifies their mistake too slowly.....others just keep a blind eye turned.
What makes you a good organisation is not making mistakes in the first place, or not waiting 5 years before realising you've made a mistake.
Or, realising you've made a mistake and 'rectifying' it at a terribly bad time, for the wrong reasons.
- evertonfc
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7261
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 9:11pm
- Location: 'Quietly Confident' County
- Has thanked: 115 times
- Been thanked: 267 times
- Contact:
ROFL...RBnW wrote:Once again you are showing your complete lack of business experience.....you dont have a clue about this stuff.....sometimes you will pay to make it go away or not have more legal costs........even if you are right....evertonfc wrote:You don't just offer $100,000 for nothing.chook23 wrote:does not prove Club knows he is clearly owed.
Clearly, the club knows he's owed some money. There's just a difference over how much.
Yeah, here's $100,000, for an apparantly dubious claim: now go away.
You are pure comedy gold.
Likewise.JeffDunne wrote:He's not the first sacked coach to be in dispute with a club over money and he won't be the last.
I'm bored with the whole topic TBH
I think it's time for people to let it go at an emotional level - it's an issue between an employer and an ex-employee.
It just so happens that all of us are in the unusual position of being passionate about the employer, which is why so many are siding with their POV.
Whatever happens, I'm sure an appropriate form of justice will prevail.
Clueless and mediocre petty tyrant.
Mabye Mr Thomas has a lot of bills to pay and his diminished cash flow since his coaching contract was terminated is not enough to service these debts?
I'm tipping this may be the case. I bet there is more to it than what is in the papers.
Oh BTW that is my opinion only and I dont have any late or inside mail, adnd I wouldn't like to lay odds on my suppositions.
I'm tipping this may be the case. I bet there is more to it than what is in the papers.
Oh BTW that is my opinion only and I dont have any late or inside mail, adnd I wouldn't like to lay odds on my suppositions.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2023
- Joined: Wed 10 Aug 2005 8:01pm
- Has thanked: 75 times
- Been thanked: 19 times
if he's owed the 100g fair enough...as for the rest he's claiming GET STUFFED
coaching is a 24hr aday 7 day aweek 52weeks ayr position...every coach worth his salt would treat it as such
if we give in to that how much is harvey worth in backpay....ie training out of season,doing extra away from the club in his own time,studying opponents in own time,thinking & working on his game 24hrs a day,7 days a week,52weeks a yr for 20 yrs
with barks on this one..tell him to stick the 160 grand up his arze
coaching is a 24hr aday 7 day aweek 52weeks ayr position...every coach worth his salt would treat it as such
if we give in to that how much is harvey worth in backpay....ie training out of season,doing extra away from the club in his own time,studying opponents in own time,thinking & working on his game 24hrs a day,7 days a week,52weeks a yr for 20 yrs
with barks on this one..tell him to stick the 160 grand up his arze
Question to stinger or any others in the legal fraternity..
Has a stat dec ever been found in court to be null and void cos it was "signed under pressure"??
I thought the whole point of getting them witnessed by a JP or similar (which is a joke really cso 1/2 the time the JP or pharmacist or whoever doesnt know you from a piece of soap) is to maek them watertight.
Has a stat dec ever been found in court to be null and void cos it was "signed under pressure"??
I thought the whole point of getting them witnessed by a JP or similar (which is a joke really cso 1/2 the time the JP or pharmacist or whoever doesnt know you from a piece of soap) is to maek them watertight.
THE BUBBLE HAS BURST
2011 player sponsor
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
well said....rogerwa wrote:if he's owed the 100g fair enough...as for the rest he's claiming GET STUFFED
coaching is a 24hr aday 7 day aweek 52weeks ayr position...every coach worth his salt would treat it as such
I particularly note this claim "and public holiday entitlements"....as rogerwa basically said.....when you are at that level getting paid that much...you do not get paid extra for working on public holidays.....it is taken as a given that you will be putting in well beyond normal hours and will put in the time required.
Indeed overtime, pay for extra days worked, public holidays or not etc are normally foreign concepts for anyone on such high salaries.
GT would have had his yearly package with no doubt bonuses for achieving KPI's (was there not a huge bonus if he did win a flag etc???).
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....