2019 Season a disaster already

[asiu]

there also seems to be a fair regard held between Sydney and St Kilda

we’ve stocked their forward line
they help us out if they can

probably our best buddy in club land of any dinkumness

[asiu]

and on that other question
...that shall be left hanging

of course , he did.

[BackFromUSA]

“Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.”

Both of these statements breached the rule.

How?

He didn't say he thinks Allen is horrible, or that he thinks Finnis is a joke. He just said that it's an industry opinion.

Jaxons gets a one week ban because Herr SS ist the boss!!

It’s a total joke - agree what you’ve said RF

Firstly it is a 1 DAY ban. Perhaps you didn't read that far. PLUS I have already admitted to perhaps being blinded by personal outrage at the statements on two people who are essential for us to reach the heights we desire - given what industry knowledge that I have.

[asiu]

personal outrage against a poster
gets you a week Shirley

[asiu]

thats a joke joyce

haha

[saynta]

“Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.”

Both of these statements breached the rule.

How?

He didn't say he thinks Allen is horrible, or that he thinks Finnis is a joke. He just said that it's an industry opinion.

The way I am interpreting what is written is that these are Jaxon's opinions on how these individuals are perceived. From first hand knowledge I know that what is written about Finnis is not a reflection on how he is viewed by other AFL CEOs or AFL HQ. However like most CEOs there are some disgruntled employees for sure. This MAY have clouded my judgement as it certainly inflamed me! I have only met Matt once but i admire the way he has positioned this club for our long term future in terms of stadium deal and our heartland. I also think he has made some great and some poor appointments. Also Gubby is known by player managers to be the best recruiting results man in the business (look at the players brought in over summer to North after his year of consulting) and is very highly regarded by the player managers and he gets these results because he plays parties off against each other by putting it to the managers there is a limited pie and if they want their big slice they need to commit now before the money goes elsewhere. Has convinced more than one manager. Bottom line is that I was pissed off with the post and when the report came in (and there were some reactions that showed it inflamed others) I read the post against against the rule and felt it qualified as a breach.

The rule stated:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 WEEK BAN.

However what this shows is that there are degrees in this matter. The actual post wasn't deserving on a 1 week ban. It was minor.

So the rule has been adjusted to:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 DAY or 1 WEEK BAN depending on severity.

And Jaxons ban was reduced to 1 day.

AND as I have stated ... I may have got this wrong. Perhaps it inflamed me (and a minority) and not others.

I actually thought you were spot on. One week or one day, it's your decision.

Saynta, did you report jaxons’ post?

Read the whole thread.

[The_Dud]

I think there’s a difference between critising and insulting.

We should be able to critise players/officials if we feel it’s warranted, otherwise what’s the point?

[Myron Gaines]

“Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.”

Both of these statements breached the rule.

How?

He didn't say he thinks Allen is horrible, or that he thinks Finnis is a joke. He just said that it's an industry opinion.

The way I am interpreting what is written is that these are Jaxon's opinions on how these individuals are perceived. From first hand knowledge I know that what is written about Finnis is not a reflection on how he is viewed by other AFL CEOs or AFL HQ. However like most CEOs there are some disgruntled employees for sure. This MAY have clouded my judgement as it certainly inflamed me! I have only met Matt once but i admire the way he has positioned this club for our long term future in terms of stadium deal and our heartland. I also think he has made some great and some poor appointments. Also Gubby is known by player managers to be the best recruiting results man in the business (look at the players brought in over summer to North after his year of consulting) and is very highly regarded by the player managers and he gets these results because he plays parties off against each other by putting it to the managers there is a limited pie and if they want their big slice they need to commit now before the money goes elsewhere. Has convinced more than one manager. Bottom line is that I was pissed off with the post and when the report came in (and there were some reactions that showed it inflamed others) I read the post against against the rule and felt it qualified as a breach.

The rule stated:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 WEEK BAN.

However what this shows is that there are degrees in this matter. The actual post wasn't deserving on a 1 week ban. It was minor.

So the rule has been adjusted to:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 DAY or 1 WEEK BAN depending on severity.

And Jaxons ban was reduced to 1 day.

AND as I have stated ... I may have got this wrong. Perhaps it inflamed me (and a minority) and not others.

I actually thought you were spot on. One week or one day, it's your decision.

Saynta, did you report jaxons’ post?

Read the whole thread.

Seeing as you are avoiding the question I’ll take that as an admission. If I’m correct in my assumption why are you ashamed of reporting him? Are you remorseful?

[saynta]

I think there’s a difference between critising and insulting.

We should be able to critise players/officials if we feel it’s warranted, otherwise what’s the point?

The post under discussion was insulting and plain wrong. Sure one can be critical and many posters are but bulls*** statements should be pulled up and were by the mods. I don't have a problem with that.

[The_Dud]

I think there’s a difference between critising and insulting.

We should be able to critise players/officials if we feel it’s warranted, otherwise what’s the point?

The post under discussion was insulting and plain wrong. Sure one can be critical and many posters are but bulls*** statements should be pulled up and were by the mods. I don't have a problem with that.

He didn’t insult them personally, just said they were bad at their jobs. People might disagree and present a counter argument, but flat out banning for that seems a bit heavy handed.

[saynta]

I think there’s a difference between critising and insulting.

We should be able to critise players/officials if we feel it’s warranted, otherwise what’s the point?

The post under discussion was insulting and plain wrong. Sure one can be critical and many posters are but bulls*** statements should be pulled up and were by the mods. I don't have a problem with that.

He didn’t insult them personally, just said they were bad at their jobs. People might disagree and present a counter argument, but flat out banning for that seems a bit heavy handed.

Which as BFUSA said was completely wrong and infuriating to him. hence the one day ban.

Also, I believe that the comments were meant to be personally insulting but each to their own view.

[saynta]

“Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.”

Both of these statements breached the rule.

How?

He didn't say he thinks Allen is horrible, or that he thinks Finnis is a joke. He just said that it's an industry opinion.

The way I am interpreting what is written is that these are Jaxon's opinions on how these individuals are perceived. From first hand knowledge I know that what is written about Finnis is not a reflection on how he is viewed by other AFL CEOs or AFL HQ. However like most CEOs there are some disgruntled employees for sure. This MAY have clouded my judgement as it certainly inflamed me! I have only met Matt once but i admire the way he has positioned this club for our long term future in terms of stadium deal and our heartland. I also think he has made some great and some poor appointments. Also Gubby is known by player managers to be the best recruiting results man in the business (look at the players brought in over summer to North after his year of consulting) and is very highly regarded by the player managers and he gets these results because he plays parties off against each other by putting it to the managers there is a limited pie and if they want their big slice they need to commit now before the money goes elsewhere. Has convinced more than one manager. Bottom line is that I was pissed off with the post and when the report came in (and there were some reactions that showed it inflamed others) I read the post against against the rule and felt it qualified as a breach.

The rule stated:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 WEEK BAN.

However what this shows is that there are degrees in this matter. The actual post wasn't deserving on a 1 week ban. It was minor.

So the rule has been adjusted to:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 DAY or 1 WEEK BAN depending on severity.

And Jaxons ban was reduced to 1 day.

AND as I have stated ... I may have got this wrong. Perhaps it inflamed me (and a minority) and not others.

I actually thought you were spot on. One week or one day, it's your decision.

Saynta, did you report jaxons’ post?

Read the whole thread.

Seeing as you are avoiding the question I’ll take that as an admission. If I’m correct in my assumption why are you ashamed of reporting him? Are you remorseful?

You are way of track with your post. Also you are commenting on a poster which breaches the new rules,

For the record, who reports who is a matter between the reporter and the mods IMHFO.

I think most of us at one time or other report posts. I certainly have and have never been ashamed or remorseful. What a ridiculous comment.

[Myron Gaines]

Stay away from the report button....slowly move away from the report button...

[Myron Gaines]

“Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.”

Both of these statements breached the rule.

How?

He didn't say he thinks Allen is horrible, or that he thinks Finnis is a joke. He just said that it's an industry opinion.

The way I am interpreting what is written is that these are Jaxon's opinions on how these individuals are perceived. From first hand knowledge I know that what is written about Finnis is not a reflection on how he is viewed by other AFL CEOs or AFL HQ. However like most CEOs there are some disgruntled employees for sure. This MAY have clouded my judgement as it certainly inflamed me! I have only met Matt once but i admire the way he has positioned this club for our long term future in terms of stadium deal and our heartland. I also think he has made some great and some poor appointments. Also Gubby is known by player managers to be the best recruiting results man in the business (look at the players brought in over summer to North after his year of consulting) and is very highly regarded by the player managers and he gets these results because he plays parties off against each other by putting it to the managers there is a limited pie and if they want their big slice they need to commit now before the money goes elsewhere. Has convinced more than one manager. Bottom line is that I was pissed off with the post and when the report came in (and there were some reactions that showed it inflamed others) I read the post against against the rule and felt it qualified as a breach.

The rule stated:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 WEEK BAN.

However what this shows is that there are degrees in this matter. The actual post wasn't deserving on a 1 week ban. It was minor.

So the rule has been adjusted to:

In cases where posters abuse or demean a Saints player / official / or their family, OR casts aspersions on their character and it is deemed by the moderators to be offensive and inflammatory, then the moderators will issue a 1 DAY or 1 WEEK BAN depending on severity.

And Jaxons ban was reduced to 1 day.

AND as I have stated ... I may have got this wrong. Perhaps it inflamed me (and a minority) and not others.

I actually thought you were spot on. One week or one day, it's your decision.

Saynta, did you report jaxons’ post?

Read the whole thread.

Seeing as you are avoiding the question I’ll take that as an admission. If I’m correct in my assumption why are you ashamed of reporting him? Are you remorseful?

You are way of track with your post. Also you are commenting on a poster which breaches the new rules,

For the record, who reports who is a matter between the reporter and the mods IMHFO.

I think most of us at one time or other report posts. I certainly have and have never been ashamed or remorseful. What a ridiculous comment.

Did you just make a comment about me, thus breaching the new rules? I’m asking a question (is that allowed?)

[BackFromUSA]

I think there’s a difference between critising and insulting.

We should be able to critise players/officials if we feel it’s warranted, otherwise what’s the point?

The post under discussion was insulting and plain wrong. Sure one can be critical and many posters are but bulls*** statements should be pulled up and were by the mods. I don't have a problem with that.

He didn’t insult them personally, just said they were bad at their jobs. People might disagree and present a counter argument, but flat out banning for that seems a bit heavy handed.

You are correct. I should have counter argued. And I have done so subsequently. Sometimes as a human we make decisions and in the fullness of time know that the decision wasn’t the best. I can’t get it right 100% of the time and happy to admit when I get it wrong. What it did expose is that 1 week can be too harsh a penalty in some instances of that particular rule and I have adjusted the rule to alllow mote flexibility. Criticism is fine BUT this was a veiled assisination of their professional reputation. This upset me because unless something has changed in the past 6 months I know both statements to be incorrect. Made a bad decision in banning him for a week. He do however deserve something for inaccurately depicting their industry reputations.

[asiu]

dobbing must be a class based thing

on my side of the railroad tracks
selling out the people was frowned apon
and given the respect it deserved

[Myron Gaines]

I’ve never used the report function however I think there’s a place for it. But my gripe extends to ‘recidivist reporters’ that should be pulled up for making vexatious complaints & wasting the time of the moderator. Use the report button for serious abuse & online bullying but for commenting on a poster? Please.

[CQ SAINT]

dobbing must be a class based thing

on my side of the railroad tracks
selling out the people was frowned apon
and given the respect it deserved

We might not be from the same side of the tracks
But where I come from you'd better talk to
Not about someone
Who cant defend themselves
They might find out

Any comment about someone
Particularly here
Is weak as piss
Entirely unnecessary
and worthy of a ban.

I wouldnt hide
From a privileged position
and snipe under the cover of anonymity.
If I thought you sucked
Id say I think you suck.
Not all my mates think you suck.

Jaxons referenced others who have credibility
Demeaned an official
and then declared the sentiments
to be his own.

A week seemed fit.
You be your own judge
A day was generous
But its all futile
IMHO.

[sunsaint]

it has got to this ridiculous point
i re-watched the fox footy "Stkilda 50 years on" last night - plenty of saints people interviewed by Mike Sheehan
ex- players - ones that got transferred ed from the club and moved to other more successful clubs
the clear inference was that we were not as professional and the expectations were a lot different at their new destinations

I wonder if they posted that on here would they get banned

[asiu]

not quite sure whats actually being said there CQ Saint

what i said

was that dobbing must be a class based thing
... a lack of it

<1 day ban: commenting on a poster in a negative manner>

[CQ SAINT]

dobbing must be a class based thing

on my side of the railroad tracks
selling out the people was frowned apon
and given the respect it deserved

a lack of class?
selling out?
What is this, high school?

Cheap shots are treated with the same respect, I guess.
Jaxons was called out and reported and not the only one banned.

Like I said, i find it all futile and somwhat childish.

Fair play from my perspective.

[jaxons]

Let me say this I appreciate Back From USA retracting the ban and apologising.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong and as I said it is appreciated and respected.

Just want to say something though BackFrom USA, have a good look at what I wrote and if freedom of speech is not allowed on this forum then please let me know and I will go and re-read George Orwell 1984.

I said "Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double-dealing"

I did not personally say anything about Gubby, just what is fact in football circles.

Please remember this of only 2 years ago:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/col ... sp18m.html

This he got caught for, other things done he has not, how many football managers can you recall getting a 12 month ban from the AFL please for clearly unethical behaviour?

He is still a capable recruiter at getting people to a club, and I said nothing about his capability, just stated what is a fact on his reputation.

I also said Lethlean has never worked at club land before,this is also a fact.

I did not question his ability or personality.

Finally, I said Finnis is known as a joke of a CEO in AFL circles, this I can understand and respect may have upset some people, and I apologise if I offended.

However, I did not question his personality or character, just his perceived ability, by many people I know and talk with that are AFL inner sanctum, to do his job well for the club we love.

BackfromUSA, again thank you for admitting a wrong, and I am in full agreement that certain behaviours or actions on here should not be tolerated, but please let's be careful about sanctioning freedom of speech, as long as it is not abusive or bullying behaviour, people should be allowed to express themselves on here.

[The Recruit]

A ban for this post is totally ridiculous
Get a grip Mods and try to respond instead of react.

We are in absolute all sorts, season already looked bleak and now:
Steven mental issues
Carlisle Back is cooked
Roberton retiring
Paddy most likely will never play again

One of our big hopes and 3 of top 7 players in all kinds of trouble. Compound that with Hannas who is strugglingto get to AFL gear.

This club is in disarray.. most absolutely unavoidable but my oh my.. this is sad

When you say unavoidable, not entirely true.
We have a Head of Football who has never worked at club level before, this is a fact.
Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.
These are the people leading our football club.
Steven is back in the fold now and will play Round 1, his personal issues could not be helped.
Roberton is just bad luck for all involved.
Carlisle was cooked at start of the summer and club chose to wait until it got better, turns out the wrong choice.
And Paddy well despite the fact we should never have chosen him pick 1 to start with, his issues have arisen from poor football technique which is a coaching and development issue first and foremost.
As for Hannebery, this was Lethlean's call to pay him $800k a year for 5 years, and get a banged up footballer, who has been known by all to have social issues away from football.
Roberton and Steven were unavoidable, the rest the club has pulled the wrong reign, as usual.

<1 week ban for demeaning and casting dispersion on the character of Saints officials>

[mightysainters]

“Gubby Allen has a horrible name inside the industry for double dealing.
Finnis is regarded inside the industry as a joke of a CEO.”

Both of these statements breached the rule.

How?

He didn't say he thinks Allen is horrible, or that he thinks Finnis is a joke. He just said that it's an industry opinion.

Jaxons gets a one week ban because Herr SS ist the boss!!

It’s a total joke - agree what you’ve said RF

Very poor moderating

This ban on Jaxons is a joke.. he’s stated opinion and his view on the industry rationale based off what he has seen..

[mightysainters]

I think there’s a difference between critising and insulting.

We should be able to critise players/officials if we feel it’s warranted, otherwise what’s the point?

The post under discussion was insulting and plain wrong. Sure one can be critical and many posters are but bulls*** statements should be pulled up and were by the mods. I don't have a problem with that.

He didn’t insult them personally, just said they were bad at their jobs. People might disagree and present a counter argument, but flat out banning for that seems a bit heavy handed.

You are correct. I should have counter argued. And I have done so subsequently. Sometimes as a human we make decisions and in the fullness of time know that the decision wasn’t the best. I can’t get it right 100% of the time and happy to admit when I get it wrong. What it did expose is that 1 week can be too harsh a penalty in some instances of that particular rule and I have adjusted the rule to alllow mote flexibility. Criticism is fine BUT this was a veiled assisination of their professional reputation. This upset me because unless something has changed in the past 6 months I know both statements to be incorrect. Made a bad decision in banning him for a week. He do however deserve something for inaccurately depicting their industry reputations.

Just saw this, admitted mistake, let’s move on