Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
It's alright isn't it?The OtherThommo wrote:I like logic.dragit wrote:Sorry but this dwarf-Watters story doesn't stack up... As a "we hate the coach gag"
Montagna one of the supposed untouchables... CJ given a new contract as a 30 year old fringe mid.
At any rate, Watters might joke himself about bring short-statured, it is a footy club after all.
What an interesting comment Jaxons! I had not thought of it like that...stinger wrote:jaxons wrote:The moment the players organised dwarfs at Mad Monday Watters position was untenable.
For those smart enough to realize who the dwarfs were representative of shows how the coach is viewed by the playing group.
We need to bite the bullet now and change things before 2014 becomes a waste of time.
interesting........
Why? Cause some random identity on the internet said so?Buckets wrote:If the players are running the club we might as well fold now....thought we got over this crap when Thommo came in. Seems I was mistaken and we are back to the Good Ol Days
Mate, I can handle the truth and am pleased to get the info you are providing. Helps to understand the current situation a little more.jaxons wrote:What I will do in future is not share information with our loyal supporters who can't handle the truth.
The truth being that the club made a mistake 2 years ago, and it needs to be rectified before further damage is done.
It is no shame making a mistake when you are having a go.
The shame is acknowledging it is a mistake and doing nothing about it.
You guys don't even know the half of it.
Maybe Lenny was/is expecting SW to get the push and felt/feels it important to be around to provide leadership in the transition?maverick wrote:Totally agreeTeflon wrote:Frightening if sojaxons wrote:The moment the players organised dwarfs at Mad Monday Watters position was untenable.
For those smart enough to realize who the dwarfs were representative of shows how the coach is viewed by the playing group.
We need to bite the bullet now and change things before 2014 becomes a waste of time.
Sad also cause it screams "senior guys pissed off with coach so let's mock him"..... Which ain't good when you are trying to win respect of the next tier....
Broom time.
I thought I read at the time, some senior players weren't happy with the entertainment?
If they despise SW so much, why would Lenny sign up for another year?
That's the bit that doesn't sit well with me, surely he would just retire, why would he need it, he can't be one of the antagonists...
Yes it does dragit. It explains why a story came about regarding Montagna being traded elsewhere. Couple it with Pelchen and Watters not getting along and it's clear that Pelchen is desperately trying to keep the senior players onside.dragit wrote:Sorry but this dwarf-Watters story doesn't stack up... As a "we hate the coach gag"
Montagna one of the supposed untouchables... CJ given a new contract as a 30 year old fringe mid.
At any rate, Watters might joke himself about bring short-statured, it is a footy club after all.
Richter wrote: Yes it does dragit. It explains why a story came about regarding Montagna being traded elsewhere. Couple it with Pelchen and Watters not getting along and it's clear that Pelchen is desperately trying to keep the senior players onside.
Speak for yourself Cairnsman. Many are beginning to appreciate that Watters may not be what we had initially hoped he might be.Cairnsman wrote:More and more supporters seem to be coming out in support of the tail NOT wagging the dog.
How do we transcend this seemingly overwhelming consensus by the supporters; maybe an open letter to the club from the supporters/members?
How do we let the Board, Pelchin and Watters know that we do not want anything but absolute stability and unity. Basically pull your heads in, get refocussed and defy our history by committing to working through the issues.
We accept that there will be challenges in 2014 as was broadcast in Pelchin's open letter however I am sure that "challenges" does not/should not include being in the media for all the wrong reasons.
Well don't back off now person in the know, do tell us all.jaxons wrote:
I certainly won't be posting it on here for all to see.
This is not the place for details like this.
Let Cairnsman tell you what's going on, he clearly is a man in the know.
joffaboy wrote:Richter wrote: Yes it does dragit. It explains why a story came about regarding Montagna being traded elsewhere. Couple it with Pelchen and Watters not getting along and it's clear that Pelchen is desperately trying to keep the senior players onside.
Really?
Sounds like some may be believing the absolute lies being peddled as the truth.
Roo was NEVER going to be trade
Montagna was NEVER going to be traded.
Both Bains and Pelchan have publicily stated that numerous times.
A really really long bow to draw that because a dwarf was booked to provide entertainment, that Watter swould somehow try to trade him (considering the story about the trade was total hogwash).
I think the tin hats should be put away. I mean c'mon
Con Gorozidis wrote:I'm pretty sure the Hawks players bag Clarkson - they are always calling him an 'angry little man' on tv.
If we let players act like babies think they are running the joint the whole club needs a shake down.
We need a new leadership group for starters. Geary Roberton Jack Armo.
Here's a tip - NOT EVERYONE ON THE INTERNET IS TELLING THE TRUTH - shocking, I know.Richter wrote:Speak for yourself Cairnsman. Many are beginning to appreciate that Watters may not be what we had initially hoped he might be.Cairnsman wrote:More and more supporters seem to be coming out in support of the tail NOT wagging the dog.
How do we transcend this seemingly overwhelming consensus by the supporters; maybe an open letter to the club from the supporters/members?
How do we let the Board, Pelchin and Watters know that we do not want anything but absolute stability and unity. Basically pull your heads in, get refocussed and defy our history by committing to working through the issues.
We accept that there will be challenges in 2014 as was broadcast in Pelchin's open letter however I am sure that "challenges" does not/should not include being in the media for all the wrong reasons.
The issue is that how do we, as outsiders, know which is the tail and which is the dog?
Perhaps it is the senior playing group, supported by Chris Pelchen who is the dog and SW the tail. Perhaps it is SW who is the appendage that needs to be excised? Or not? We need to hear these points of view for ourselves and make our own decision.
I'd appreciate it if you don't presume to speak for other supporters and didn't bag jaxons personally when all he is doing is providing some insight into what he has heard. Don't like what he has to say? Put him on ignore or go elsewhere. This is a Saints forum and I for one am happy to welcome and read anyone who has potential revelations about the internal workings of the club.
Cairnsman wrote:More and more supporters seem to be coming out in support of the tail NOT wagging the dog.
How do we transcend this seemingly overwhelming consensus by the supporters; maybe an open letter to the club from the supporters/members?
How do we let the Board, Pelchin and Watters know that we do not want anything but absolute stability and unity. Basically pull your heads in, get refocussed and defy our history by committing to working through the issues.
We accept that there will be challenges in 2014 as was broadcast in Pelchin's open letter however I am sure that "challenges" does not/should not include being in the media for all the wrong reasons.
I am speaking for myself, if others agree they might say so and by gauging by a lot of posts in this thread it would appear there is some agreement. I didn't bag Jaxons, I just questioned his credibility and agenda and some some fact regarding his claim to which I note he hasn't responded to adequately as yet. Just a question, why don't you probe him in a similar way as I have? I assume you are interested in dealing with credible facts?Richter wrote:Speak for yourself Cairnsman. Many are beginning to appreciate that Watters may not be what we had initially hoped he might be.Cairnsman wrote:More and more supporters seem to be coming out in support of the tail NOT wagging the dog.
How do we transcend this seemingly overwhelming consensus by the supporters; maybe an open letter to the club from the supporters/members?
How do we let the Board, Pelchin and Watters know that we do not want anything but absolute stability and unity. Basically pull your heads in, get refocussed and defy our history by committing to working through the issues.
We accept that there will be challenges in 2014 as was broadcast in Pelchin's open letter however I am sure that "challenges" does not/should not include being in the media for all the wrong reasons.
The issue is that how do we, as outsiders, know which is the tail and which is the dog?
Perhaps it is the senior playing group, supported by Chris Pelchen who is the dog and SW the tail. Perhaps it is SW who is the appendage that needs to be excised? Or not? We need to hear these points of view for ourselves and make our own decision.
I'd appreciate it if you don't presume to speak for other supporters and didn't bag jaxons personally when all he is doing is providing some insight into what he has heard. Don't like what he has to say? Put him on ignore or go elsewhere. This is a Saints forum and I for one am happy to welcome and read anyone who has potential revelations about the internal workings of the club.
( God help me) Assuming that Caro is correct and the Board tried to poach Nisbett then I think this might be a positive. Does it show that the Board has identified the need to get the very best there is to fill the CEO position?SainterK wrote:Ross didn't like Michael, now Scott doesn't like Michael.
Is he not very likeable?
Is this just a smokescreen to hide the fact he is leaving, and won't be missed?
Hope he hasn't been making waves to make it "look" like the club will fall apart without him.
