GT wins on both counts ...

[Dan Warna]

ok, lets hope he pays HIS debts now, and squares off with Rod Butterss.

[JeffDunne]

So can we now assume that the 'white-anting' comments were completely baseless?

No, just not able to be legally quantified.

Thomas has performed and observed all of his obligations in respect of non disparagement, non poaching and confidentiality. The Club has never suggested or run a case to the contrary. I accept that Thomas has always been prepared to sign a formal deed in accordance with what was agreed at the meeting.

In a word Grumpy, your comment is "bullsh*t".

[JeffDunne]

[quote]Evidence as to the Meeting

98. Fraser telephoned Thomas after he had met with lawyers for the Club. Fraser requested Thomas attend a meeting at Butterss’ home on 12 September 2006. When Thomas arrived, Fraser, Butterss and Mark Kellett, Director of Football, were in attendance.

99. Thomas was told by Butterss that it was a unanimous decision amongst the Board that his services were to be terminated. Thomas asked why this decision had been made, and he said he was told the Board was not prepared to go into the reasons. He was told the Board needed to move quickly as a press conference had been arranged for that afternoon.

100. The Board members present suggested Thomas say he had resigned but Thomas said that would make them look like fools and that he should say they had a mutual agreement to part company.

101. There was discussion as to payment in lieu of notice. The parties agreed upon a payment of six months rather than the four and a half months provided for in the coaching agreement. What transpired at the meeting leading up to this decision is in dispute, but it is of no relevance to my ultimate determination.

102. Thomas said that Butterss then took over the discussion and he told Thomas the Club would pay him an extra $100,000 on 1 April 2007 to ensure he conducted himself in the proper manner. Thomas told Butterss he had always behaved in this way and intended to continue doing so. Thomas requested the $100,000 be paid straight away but Butterss confirmed the payment date of 1 April 2007.

103. Thomas said he made a comment to Butterss along the lines of this being “an anchor ropeâ€

[spert]

For all the good and bad GT and RB did, it's all history and will no doubt appear in a Saints compilation DVD (Blue-Ray?) in many years time, and something that members in years to come will enjoy watching in our new palacial Gold Coast social club

[GrumpyOne]

So can we now assume that the 'white-anting' comments were completely baseless?

No, just not able to be legally quantified.

Thomas has performed and observed all of his obligations in respect of non disparagement, non poaching and confidentiality. The Club has never suggested or run a case to the contrary. I accept that Thomas has always been prepared to sign a formal deed in accordance with what was agreed at the meeting.

In a word Grumpy, your comment is "bullsh*t".

OK Jeff, I'll accept that comment in light of the quote you supplied. If Butterss had appeared he might have given his reasons for that assertion, but the club not calling him to give evidence still leaves a cloud over his statements and the reasons for them. Would have preferred that the matter was proven in court, rather than accepted due to a lack of conflicting evidence.

[Con Gorozidis]

Not all that surprised. Thanks God we got rid of Roddddd as well.

Time to draw a line under the whole murky business and concentrate on the future - which does not include either Grant Thomas or Rod Butterss.

hear hear

[Ray Broughton]

Just read the transcript....

It seems the club just went belly up and didnt contest or try to contest much at all, maybe a case of take your money and go, please.

Considering the curent board would be very keen to wash their hands of this mess and really if Thomas didnt breach the agreement in regards to poaching, negative comments etc (which the court found he didn't, however I'm unsure of that) then it is only paying what he is entitled to anyway.

I think thats the stance they seem to have taken.

[evertonfc]

GT, who apparently 'bleeds' for this club, after being paid a huge salary, far in excess of what his qualifications warranted, saw the opportunity to squeeze more money out the club he 'bleeds' for. While others how cared for the club endured significant personal losses so the club could continue to survive & prosper, GT chose to milk the club for even more money that he felt 'legally' was 'entitled' to....

He turned this club from a shitheap into something half-decent, and gave us something to be aim for - and told us to start raising the bar when everyone was content to sit on their arse.

If you think he was paid too much, that's the club's fault, not his.

IMO he was worth every cent, and gave this club something it hadn't had since the 1960s.

[JeffDunne]

It makes me angry Grumpy.

It should make Ross Lyon angry too (although he'd probably just make some comment about things you can control)

What Rod did last year was incredibly destabilising and completely unnecessary.

I cannot believe we’d sack a coach and not have covered our legal obligations given the circumstances between the coach and the president.

I cannot believe someone that was about to sue the person he was sacking would be so generous with the club’s money when he didn’t need to be. FFS, pay him every cent he was entitled and not a dollar more! Given the timing of Rod’s legal case it also makes you wonder why the 1st april was picked (other than being a sick joke).

I am flabbergasted having read the ruling on the case. Why in God’s name would we argue there wasn’t an agreement in place?

Seriously, Archie, Rod and the current admin should hang their heads in shame with the defence they mounted. Embarrassing.

[evertonfc]

What Rod did last year was incredibly destabilising and completely unnecessary.

That's what hurts. RB rocked the boat so hard when he didn't have too.

After years of spinning around in a storm, we were finally on the path to somewhere decent - and RB played a huge role in getting things on course.

To see him publicly destabilise the club so viciously was just heartbreaking.

[snippa]

Enjoy your 200k of members money A Hole and never darken our door again.

Moving on........

[kaos theory]

He turned this club from a shitheap into something half-decent, and gave us something to be aim for - and told us to start raising the bar when everyone was content to sit on their arse.

If you think he was paid too much, that's the club's fault, not his.

IMO he was worth every cent, and gave this club something it hadn't had since the 1960s

That is absolute Bullsh!t everton.

He had an embarressment of riches through the draft and a number of quality players from the late nineties. GT was good at times, but ran down the overall functioning of the footy dept. Any half-decent caoch could have achieved similar, if not better results.

This guy cares far more for his ego and wealth than he does for the club.

[GrumpyOne]

It makes me angry Grumpy.

It should make Ross Lyon angry too (although he'd probably just make some comment about things you can control)

What Rod did last year was incredibly destabilising and completely unnecessary.

I cannot believe we’d sack a coach and not have covered our legal obligations given the circumstances between the coach and the president.

I cannot believe someone that was about to sue the person he was sacking would be so generous with the club’s money when he didn’t need to be. FFS, pay him every cent he was entitled and not a dollar more! Given the timing of Rod’s legal case it also makes you wonder why the 1st april was picked (other than being a sick joke).

I am flabbergasted having read the ruling on the case. Why in God’s name would we argue there wasn’t an agreement in place?

Seriously, Archie, Rod and the current admin should hang their heads in shame with the defence they mounted. Embarrassing.

Me too Jeff.

Why Rod thought he could exert pressure on a guy who "eats pressure for breakfast" is beyond me.

IMO Archie is not walking away from this with clean hands. Add this to the debacle over our shift to Frankston, and the ice must be cracking under his feet.

The current board couldn't defend the issue, as it was indefensible, and were relying on GT to settle for less on the courtroom steps.

P1ss poor judgement all round.

[Saints43]

GT must have had a crack legal team to win this case...

17 The Club, on the evidence of its CEO, Archie Fraser (“Fraserâ€

[rodgerfox]

99. Thomas was told by Butterss that it was a unanimous decision amongst the Board that his services were to be terminated. Thomas asked why this decision had been made, and he said he was told the Board was not prepared to go into the reasons. He was told the Board needed to move quickly as a press conference had been arranged for that afternoon.

WTF???

So not only do we not know why he was sacked - he doesn't either??!!

FFS, will we ever know why Rod Butterss' Board sacked a coach immediately after playing off in a 3rd successive finals series?

[SENsei]

Thanks everton for the link to the judgement. Great reading.

I found myself feeling justified in my thinking previously. Rod Butterss is a seriously dangerous man, who seems to have lucked into his wealth if his behaviour is anything to go by.

Archie Fraser is seriously tainted and his job performance shows me that we really need to be looking for his replacement, and quick. Kingston Council, unfair dismissal claims, Frankston deal....they are mounting up quick.

Grant Thomas comes out of this pretty much unscathed on the surface. I don't particularly like the man, but it seems to me that an entire club was bearing down on him and he didn't buckle. Got to respect that. Even if I don't agree with everything that happened.

Just shows that we are run just like a surburban club....just with more money and profile involved.

[SENsei]

[quote="Saints43"]GT must have had a crack legal team to win this case...

17 The Club, on the evidence of its CEO, Archie Fraser (“Fraserâ€

[saintspremiers]

typical St Kilda mess. Agree re the comments from JD re RB shafting the club.

My question though is can anyone remember what we budgetted for in respect to the payout?

I think it was about 200K?

Anyone remember?

[Ray Broughton]

I am flabbergasted having read the ruling on the case. Why in God’s name would we argue there wasn’t an agreement in place?

Seriously, Archie, Rod and the current admin should hang their heads in shame with the defence they mounted. Embarrassing.

The current board couldn't defend the issue, as it was indefensible, and were relying on GT to settle for less on the courtroom steps.

P1ss poor judgement all round.

Totally agree, a big mess with in an insipid defence, Lucky he didnt get $ 290 000.. can only be seen as good result given the facts and defence

[JeffDunne]

What amazes me most about this episode is that the 'club' didn't cover their bases when they decided to sack Thomas.

I'm also starting to see why Thomas was the bloke negotiating contracts.

[Banger2Plugger]

For a professional AFL Football Club, the non-existence of leave records is an absolute DISGRACE!!!

As a paid up member, I would like to see a recent audit management letter from our auditors - did they ever raise this issue to the board?

Fundamental, Basic, Business acrumen appears to have been severely lacking despite having some of the best business "Brains Trusts" supposedly on our prior board.

No evidence provided by the former president - no doubt not wishing to incriminate himself under cross examination - or perhaps have evidence arising from this case which might affect a subsequent court case , no evidence provided by our current CFO (probably because such evidence may indicate he was owed more annual leave than being claimed for!)

It is a shambles - I hope the current board is picking up their act in this regard - and I certainly hope our club auditor is reporting all these "failings" and the board acting on them.

[rodgerfox]

Perhaps it's best that Thomas insisted he run everything to do with footy.

Look at what the Board and CEO managed to do within their area of expertise.

Imagine what they would have done to the Footy Dept???


F*** me.

[JeffDunne]

Yes I wonder if it ever occurred to the Thomas bashers that maybe he had good reason to have a problem with the club's administration?

[SaintWal]

Piss poor by the club.

If they realised they could not go in to court with Butterrs they should have realised the case was doomed.

Payment should have been out of court ages ago.

Just another stuff up!

[spert]

GT, who apparently 'bleeds' for this club, after being paid a huge salary, far in excess of what his qualifications warranted, saw the opportunity to squeeze more money out the club he 'bleeds' for. While others how cared for the club endured significant personal losses so the club could continue to survive & prosper, GT chose to milk the club for even more money that he felt 'legally' was 'entitled' to....

He turned this club from a shitheap into something half-decent, and gave us something to be aim for - and told us to start raising the bar when everyone was content to sit on their arse.

If you think he was paid too much, that's the club's fault, not his.

IMO he was worth every cent, and gave this club something it hadn't had since the 1960s.

We had a flag in the '60s, so GT didn't give us one of those, we also played in finals up into the '70s, as we did again in the '90s, so he didn't really do anything more than a lot of others.