Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
You always get the details of the overseas training camps wrong. All camps were in part funded by the club, but in MOST part funded by the playing group and playing group fundraising.
I know this because I was involved in the fundraising.
Sure the club kicked in some.
The club also paid for two former board members, Mr R Butterss and Mr G Casey to travel to South Africa. That WASN'T funded by the playing group.
See where I am going with this?
I agree with you on many points regarding GT, but you are wrong on the details of the training camps.
Ok thanks for the clarification
BUT you said "ALL camps were in part funded by the club"
Regarding the first overseas "holiday"/training camp to London, it was reported at the time that it had cost the St.Kilda Football Club $250,000 and please correct if I'm wrong but didn't the balance sheet, show a $250,000 deficit for funds provided for this exercise? > over to you
I am given to understand that the funding arrangements changed after this first trip and that the trips to Sth.Africa were funded in part by the St.Kilda Football Club with wealthy supporter donations contributing the rest.
No, those are correct statements. It was the 'fully funded' comments in your other post that I took issue with.
You are right, part funding by club, sponsors, players and fundraising.
London, though, was definitely funded by players, who were very keen to go. Depending on their situation, I think most players kicked in at least $3,000 each. Not sure about support staff, etc.
Unfortunately, in those days, the club was unable to 'fully fund' much at all.
Poster formerly known as SENsaintsational. More wisdom. More knowledge. Less name.
Saints43 wrote:
I saw St Kilda playing exciting attacking football and make the finals three years in a row. Came very close to making a fifth GF appearance.
ah...but what may have happened if someone had been appointed with the competence to properly oversee "football services' so that we had at least an average injury rate instead of way above average?
Could have, should have ifs, buts and maybes...I know.....but if he is going to turn around now and sue the club now for "more please'...as he was "working" on his holidays should not quality of that work be under question???
I mean who is assessing this "holiday work"....who is deciding if it is of any value and deserves to be paid for????
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Will all Saints players now sue...past and present???
It is my understanding that when players go off on holiday that they are expected to maintain certain fitness levels and to do a certain amount of training??
Will they now all be putting in for back pay????
Or do they just accept that it is part of being a footballer?
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Teflon wrote:GT was and never has been a voluntary member of this site - he was pressured into it by his wife and 18 children and on that occasion didnt eat his usual "breakfast"...
Go away you fool.
I've just received a warning for the above post for insulting another poster ???? - Im having a shot at Grant Thomas (like most in this thread and rightly so) - can any mod offer any insight as to what in gods name is going on here?
I am asking GRANT THOMAS THE FOOL to go away - in the immortal words of Pauline as David Oldfield dropped his strides......"please explain"?
Well, if it was for this post then you logically ought to get another warning for repeating it. And every one who has quoted it I guess - whoever would be stupid enough to do that......
......Ahhh...... oops.......
Hird... The unflushable one is now... just a turd...
saintsRrising wrote:Maybe the club can sue GT (and RB) for $2.5 million plus interest for gaining his position by deception???
It is now public knowledge that the process used to "give" him the position was a sham.
We the members were dudded.
I wasn't dudded.
I saw St Kilda playing exciting attacking football and make the finals three years in a row. Came very close to making a fifth GF appearance.
The Saints have already been in Five Day Grand finals
1965, 1966, 1971, 1997 and the little known 1913 !!
Wikipedia describes 1913 as follows
"1913 - Playing in their first Grand Final, St Kilda struggled to boot just one goal in the first three quarters against Fitzroy. But they came charging home in the last by closing a 25-point gap to one point with a few minutes remaining. A St Kilda player marked very close to goal on an angle and made a bad mistake by following a pre-game tactic of handballing. His intended target was covered, the Saints lost the ball and Fitzroy booted two goals to seal the match."
"I think, 'You kick a footy mate, you kick a footy. It's not like you've got a cure for cancer. You kick a footy, stop thinking you are so special'." - Samantha Black
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>)
Your maths DON'T add up. If, as you say Thomas is claiming $33,600pa in holiday pay then his annual salary would have to be around $350,000pa, not the $500,000 you claim
$33,600 would be for 4 weeks salary or $8,400 per week. You also need to take into account 17% leave loading on that ammount, bringing his salary back to around $6,900 per week, multiply that by 52 and you get an anual salary of $358,800.
Where do you get this $500,000 figure from? Also, have you seen or do you have a copy of this stat dec you have been going on about for 2 years now, as I would suspect that such documents would be "Commercial in Confidence"
As for the real story. That is for the lawyers to work out and take their cut from
Teflon wrote:GT was and never has been a voluntary member of this site - he was pressured into it by his wife and 18 children and on that occasion didnt eat his usual "breakfast"...
Go away you fool.
i presume this comment is made in response to my post above...which was...
".by the way mods...thomas is a member of this forum.....i thought calling forum members was against the rules....do something about it....."
....new rules..????....
You presume incorrect.
Got nothging to do with you, had nothing to do with you so best you stay clear of what you clearly dont understand huh?
oh ..i think i understand all right.......you might fool the mods .....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
Teflon wrote:GT was and never has been a voluntary member of this site - he was pressured into it by his wife and 18 children and on that occasion didnt eat his usual "breakfast"...
Go away you fool.
i presume this comment is made in response to my post above...which was...
".by the way mods...thomas is a member of this forum.....i thought calling forum members was against the rules....do something about it....."
....new rules..????....
You presume incorrect.
Got nothging to do with you, had nothing to do with you so best you stay clear of what you clearly dont understand huh?
oh ..i think i understand all right.......you might fool the mods .....
Look we've got new Board rules which we should all simply respect whether we agree with them or not which is why I do not understand why your continuing to try and engage me in conversation?? - I have neither the time nor inclination nor the patience to reciprocate so I would simply ask you to desist.
Teflon wrote:GT was and never has been a voluntary member of this site - he was pressured into it by his wife and 18 children and on that occasion didnt eat his usual "breakfast"...
Go away you fool.
i presume this comment is made in response to my post above...which was...
".by the way mods...thomas is a member of this forum.....i thought calling forum members was against the rules....do something about it....."
....new rules..????....
You presume incorrect.
Got nothging to do with you, had nothing to do with you so best you stay clear of what you clearly dont understand huh?
oh ..i think i understand all right.......you might fool the mods .....
Look we've got new Board rules which we should all simply respect whether we agree with them or not which is why I do not understand why your continuing to try and engage me in conversation?? - I have neither the time nor inclination nor the patience to reciprocate so I would simply ask you to desist.
don't kid yourself...and don't call me a fool......simple....you engaged me...not vice versa....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
Teflon wrote:GT was and never has been a voluntary member of this site - he was pressured into it by his wife and 18 children and on that occasion didnt eat his usual "breakfast"...
Go away you fool.
i presume this comment is made in response to my post above...which was...
".by the way mods...thomas is a member of this forum.....i thought calling forum members was against the rules....do something about it....."
....new rules..????....
You presume incorrect.
Got nothging to do with you, had nothing to do with you so best you stay clear of what you clearly dont understand huh?
oh ..i think i understand all right.......you might fool the mods .....
Look we've got new Board rules which we should all simply respect whether we agree with them or not which is why I do not understand why your continuing to try and engage me in conversation?? - I have neither the time nor inclination nor the patience to reciprocate so I would simply ask you to desist.
don't kid yourself...and don't call me a fool......simple....
I'll leave that to the mods to decide - best leave well enough alone is my professional advice to you. Do with it what you will.
Someone wouldn't be trying to start a flame war would they?
Oh no wait, you'd already done that once in this thread.
Sorry Teffers, I keep forgetting that quoting you is a sure fire recipe for abuse. Apparantly even acknowledging the humour in a joke is too much for you to handle without resorting to the usual childish insults. My mistake.
JeffDunne wrote:Someone wouldn't be trying to start a flame war would they?
Oh no wait, you'd already done that once in this thread.
Sorry Teffers, I keep forgetting that quoting you is a sure fire recipe for abuse. Apparantly even acknowledging the humour in a joke is too much for you to handle without resorting to the usual childish insults. My mistake.
My apologies Jeff - I misunderstood you enjoying my humour. That wont happen again.
???? - Im having a shot at Grant Thomas (like most in this thread and rightly so) - can any mod offer any insight as to what in gods name is going on here?
