St Kilda?
Board challenge?
Huh?
Footy what ..?
Greg Westa-who ..?
Unless the story has "Judd" in it, no-one gives a fat rat's anymore.
Suck shite Caro, bet you thought this story had legs
What's the Big Deal?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
Riewoldting
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2883
- Joined: Thu 05 May 2005 1:34am
- Location: Perth WA
Wha ..?
St Kilda?
Board challenge?
Huh?
Footy what ..?
Greg Westa-who ..?
Unless the story has "Judd" in it, no-one gives a fat rat's anymore.
Suck shite Caro, bet you thought this story had legs
St Kilda?
Board challenge?
Huh?
Footy what ..?
Greg Westa-who ..?
Unless the story has "Judd" in it, no-one gives a fat rat's anymore.
Suck shite Caro, bet you thought this story had legs
"To be or not to be" - William Shakespeare
"To be is to do" - Immanuel Kant
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra
-
saintwill66
- Club Player
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Sun 03 Oct 2004 3:05pm
- Location: Brisbane
A flawless situation report RF, couldn't agree more, the SFF challenge is both appropriate and most certainly legitimate.
I still find it staggering that none of the leading media commentators who are sticking up for Butterss can continue to overlook the biggest blunder of his Presidency, which is the complete conflict of interest he had in lending one million dollars to the man who occupied the most important position in the football dept, the senior coach. The Board should have forced the compromised Butterss to stand down when this deal was formalised, yet to this day they have sat on their hands and done nothing. No wonder the Board failed to sack Thomas after season 2005 (as reportedly was being considered at that time), Butterss was still waiting repayment of the Thomas loan!
I still find it staggering that none of the leading media commentators who are sticking up for Butterss can continue to overlook the biggest blunder of his Presidency, which is the complete conflict of interest he had in lending one million dollars to the man who occupied the most important position in the football dept, the senior coach. The Board should have forced the compromised Butterss to stand down when this deal was formalised, yet to this day they have sat on their hands and done nothing. No wonder the Board failed to sack Thomas after season 2005 (as reportedly was being considered at that time), Butterss was still waiting repayment of the Thomas loan!