Oh When the Saints wrote:What's the difference between this thread and spam?
It's all just repetition.
...Only a Pro GT supporter would say something like that....
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
What are you claiming means 'full responsibility'?saintsRrising wrote:No...I am factual.rodgerfox wrote:
So you admit you lied?
No elaboration, nothing to back it up.
Typical.
It was well reported at the time and well known as well that RB and GT had strong disagreements and heated words about the conditioning and fitness management of our players.
After which GT demanded from RB and the Board responsibility.
This was given....
The sting in the tale for GT was that he also had to become accountable for our injury rate.
He failed.
110% agree here, Alves I hold responsible for the 97 loss and the fallout afterwards.JeffDunne wrote:It amazes me in a thread bagging GT because of his comments on Harv's we could get a comment on Alves without a mention of his slandering of the great man.
I'm not surprised though. The same people that are GT's main critics also seem to speak glowingly of Alves. Talk about selective memory.
Alves I hold in utter contempt because of two main issues:
- his slandering of Harv's, Burke & Stewie blaming them for his sacking
- scapegoating Shanahan rather than accepting he was embarrassed by his lack of coaching nous on the biggest stage.
lol, "empower the players", yeah right.
What do you think it means Rodger if in a workplace that someone has full responsibility and accountability for something?rodgerfox wrote:
What are you claiming means 'full responsibility'?
Ok, based on your incredibly basic and half arsed explanation - how is that different to Ross Lyon getting Misson to Moorabbin?saintsRrising wrote:What do you think it means Rodger if in a workplace that someone has full responsibility and accountability for something?rodgerfox wrote:
What are you claiming means 'full responsibility'?
It is pretty clear.
And no it does not mean that GT had to give all the warm down massages himself.
What it means is that GT had to ensure that the right processes and staff were in place to achieve the desire result.
GT failed.
As nice as that would be, I highly doubt the sad and lonely folk on here who dream about the man incessantly will ever stop talking about him.maverick wrote:No he'sot but he's driving the ship so to speak.rodgerfox wrote:He's not Robinson Crusoe there.maverick wrote:
I don't hate GT, but I think he does need to move on
If he stops so do these threads
Yes sadly you probably are rightrodgerfox wrote:As nice as that would be, I highly doubt the sad and lonely folk on here who dream about the man incessantly will ever stop talking about him.maverick wrote:No he'sot but he's driving the ship so to speak.rodgerfox wrote:He's not Robinson Crusoe there.maverick wrote:
I don't hate GT, but I think he does need to move on
If he stops so do these threads
There is a major difference.rodgerfox wrote:
Ok, based on your incredibly basic and half arsed explanation - how is that different to Ross Lyon getting Misson to Moorabbin?
How is it different to Lyon declaring what he was focussing on in terms of fitness and conditioning when he took over? Areas that he was addressing as he felt they were neglected areas?
Why would he stop?maverick wrote:No he'sot but he's driving the ship so to speak.rodgerfox wrote:He's not Robinson Crusoe there.maverick wrote:
I don't hate GT, but I think he does need to move on
If he stops so do these threads
A radio station with about 2% of the audience will hardly keep his red wine fridge stocked.JeffDunne wrote:Why would he stop?maverick wrote:No he'sot but he's driving the ship so to speak.rodgerfox wrote:He's not Robinson Crusoe there.maverick wrote:
I don't hate GT, but I think he does need to move on
If he stops so do these threads
In fact, threads & issues like this are only going to increase his asking price in the market.
Rather ironic I know, but the haters are going to make him very successful in his new profession.
What do they say about who laughs last?
Spinner, you hit the nail on the head there.Spinner wrote:To those people who have changed their opinions of GT since the Harvey comment.....Stop being fools.
A lot of the comments above state that "I used to think he was a good coach..." bulls***.
Make a determination about the games he coached.....Changing your opinion of his performance because he made certain comments is quite pathetic.
His comments have nothing to de with his performance as coach of St Kilda....
...and FYI I thought he was a useless coach, I just hate these simpletons who jump ship because of an unrelated incident.
Ok, so we're slowly getting there.saintsRrising wrote:There is a major difference.rodgerfox wrote:
Ok, based on your incredibly basic and half arsed explanation - how is that different to Ross Lyon getting Misson to Moorabbin?
How is it different to Lyon declaring what he was focussing on in terms of fitness and conditioning when he took over? Areas that he was addressing as he felt they were neglected areas?
GT demanded full responsibility and hence accountability for it...
Whereas Ross knew enough to know that the Saints were not up to scratch and demanded that the Board do something about it.
Comment: Ross also had the sense to know that he is the coach.....and that others need to worry about the conditioning side.
Ross also did not resist the appointment of Drain.
At least we agree on something......that you are slowly getting there.rodgerfox wrote:
Ok, so we're slowly getting there.
.
Nice attempt at changing topic.saintsRrising wrote:At least we agree on something......that you are slowly getting there.rodgerfox wrote:
Ok, so we're slowly getting there.
.
But you are way way to slow for me......
By the way...with Misson...you said "poaching".
Misson was moving to Melbourne...so he was not poached. The only question was which sporting club he would join.
Also.......even though you should know this...the changes are not just Misson..there are a swag of others including a new club Doctor.
But anyway...please continue on with your interesting view of the world.
Our opinions are vastly different on GT.
I rate him as incompetent...you I presume believe him to be competent.
That you choose to attack RL is your right. Go for it. Not his fault at all that Gt was exited out.
To me RL seems to be pretty switched on.
I highly doubt you have any idea of my opinion of GT.saintsRrising wrote:
Our opinions are vastly different on GT.
I rate him as incompetent...you I presume believe him to be competent.
Oh When the Saints wrote:
Thomas denies as much and believes he is paying the price for honesty, but the truth is that while Chris Connolly might have broken the AFL coaches' code of conduct this week by attacking Terry Wallace, the Saints coach has broken a more subtle code by indulging in the blame game.
Thomas has now questioned the performance of his 'training services' team three times during the first seven weeks of the 2005 season.
He said he also felt Dermotts comments "were about right" in reference to Harvey and in essence agreed with Dermuts views. What more would/could you require to understand than that?JeffDunne wrote:Thanks JB, but I'm still in the dark on what he actually said that was so bad.
I heard the grab of Dermie's rant replayed on SEN. Typical *sniff* Dermie *sniff*.
I expect irrational comments from him and is comments were embarrassing. I also heard GT on SEN after the event, including yesterday, but for the life of me I'm struggling to see why people are outraged or even surprised on his view.
Interestingly, GT yesterday talked up the influence of Gardiner & King in the ruck even though he's the first to admit he wouldn't have drafted them.
GT has theories on list management that are well known, he also has theories on team reliance on individuals. It was why he took the captaincy off Harv's in the first place. He would point to the example of Collingwood on Buckley's retirement as evidence of his theory. There's validity to some of his arguments but I also disagree on others.
Clearly GT thinks Harv's has played one season too many. I disagree but it really doesn't surprise me. It also doesn't change my view on GT. I knew his views on this years ago.
Having said all that though, I'd still like to know what exactly he said other than he saw signs of him losing his touch late last year.
That buys you a free beer.rodgerfox wrote:I find it really sad watching Harves play.
It's sad that one day, we won't get the pleasure of witnessing what the guy does every week, and has done every week for the past 20 years.
Deadset legend.
Anyone who passes judgement on a player after a praccy match is a deadset scrotum, simpleton and a moron all rolled into one.
Mods, do I get 3 warnings for that? Is it just counted as 1?
Send him a google map.Teflon wrote:He said he also felt Dermotts comments "were about right" in reference to Harvey and in essence agreed with Dermuts views. What more would/could you require to understand than that?JeffDunne wrote:Thanks JB, but I'm still in the dark on what he actually said that was so bad.
I heard the grab of Dermie's rant replayed on SEN. Typical *sniff* Dermie *sniff*.
I expect irrational comments from him and is comments were embarrassing. I also heard GT on SEN after the event, including yesterday, but for the life of me I'm struggling to see why people are outraged or even surprised on his view.
Interestingly, GT yesterday talked up the influence of Gardiner & King in the ruck even though he's the first to admit he wouldn't have drafted them.
GT has theories on list management that are well known, he also has theories on team reliance on individuals. It was why he took the captaincy off Harv's in the first place. He would point to the example of Collingwood on Buckley's retirement as evidence of his theory. There's validity to some of his arguments but I also disagree on others.
Clearly GT thinks Harv's has played one season too many. I disagree but it really doesn't surprise me. It also doesn't change my view on GT. I knew his views on this years ago.
Having said all that though, I'd still like to know what exactly he said other than he saw signs of him losing his touch late last year.
I