Boring bickering.

[saintspremiers]

I just read the Searle thread was locked as it had all the perfect elements for the AE.

So not just move it there then and let the fun continue Simon??

[Moods]

Jesus, have just read the now locked thread about Peta Searle.

I knew there were still some throwbacks living in denial in the world, but its so disappointing some are Saints fans.

The best thing that could happen is one day Peta or Misfud or Ahmed Saad might eventually become senior coach of St KFC and drive all these pathetic rats into the desert.

So many posters here are an embarrassment to developed society and especially Saints fans, and you have the nerve to hang it on P66. At least his moral compass works and he has a sense of humour. Far from the worst element of this site, and as you might imagine, that speaks volumes.

By the way, yes I am aware of the irony of someone complaining about sexism using an LMFAO avatar. I'll get round to changing it to A. Jones one of these days.

Thank you for that amazing homily. You are clearly socially and morally superior and are not afraid to tell the rest of us. It is that, or you are completely deluded. Or you're a mega-tosser, who lacks the spine and moral fortitude to form your own opinions. I'm going with the final option.

You are an enigmatic man Mr Winmar. You are a psychologist from memory working in government but I think you said you used to be a cop for years. You seem to swing wildly between hard right and politically correct at times. Possibly all the excessive manners and political correction in your job means you need a release every now and then. Austin seems to have done nothing too wrong and you have absolutely smashed him. I have a daughter and would hate her to be held back in anything she chooses to do. Attitudes towards women are pretty low ATM and that kind of tongue in cheek macho stuff doesn't really help. I have a high opinion of some of your posts and it disappoints me that you are so passionately anti Searle without giving her much of a go. Also pretty poor form hammering Austin who is one of the more respectful posters on SS. I hope you don't get a warning because the punitive measures don't really help anyone see others points of view. Just try to keep it nice.

Quite interesting isn't it/ Austinn can accuse ppl of basically being Neanderthals, but if the said Neanderthal responds, they are out of line??

Seeing that the Peta Searle thread has now been attributed to being started by myself I will say this.....My initial comment was to spark the exact reaction that it did. ie I wanted to hear from anyone who may have had some direct or indirect interaction with Peta. WW had, so had P66, so had Bunk Moreland and so had Gringo. I never intended to say that just because she was a woman that she couldn't do the job - however I don't reckon it's inappropriate to question the motives of why she was appointed. P66 was labelled a big noter, but he actually had first hand experience, and it appeared objective. Basically said that she was competent at what she did, but no world beater. Gringo's comments were also interesting in that he said that it appears that players respond to her BECAUSE she's a woman.

Football is almost exclusively a mans game is it not? Supported by stacks of women. Many of them intelligent and well informed. I know on this very forum SainterK, semper, and numerous others make more than just a token contribution to this forum - and not just from a woman's perspective, but actually make numerous good points about game plans and observations of certain players. HOWEVER (and I know I'll cop plenty for this) no woman has come close to playing the game at the highest level. Therefore they aren't exposed to the highest level of coaching, intricacies etc of playing at this level. 99.9% of us blokes who contribute on here aren't either. It's the very reason why I also questioned Misfud's appointment, not because he is of aboriginal heritage, but because of his background in footy. Why can't someone question an appointment without being labelled a woman hater or a racist??

A quick question - how many blokes coach in the ANZ Championship? How many have ever coached the Diamonds (netball I'm talking for those who don't know) Pretty sure the answer is zero! Why is that? Is that because women don't think a man can cut it? There are plenty of men that coach rep teams. I have two daughters that play at a high level. Some of their best coaches have been men, but after VNL level very few are seen as a viable option. I believe it's because no man has ever played at the highest level required and truly understands what it takes to play at that level. Do you reckon Sharelle McMahon will have to start at the bottom of the coaching chain and work her way up? I doubt it - she'll be coaching at close to the very top level within 5yrs I reckon. And no-one will question it.

Why can't WW be anti Searle just because he believes that she isn't up to the job and he bases this on ppl he knows who have played under her? Why does he even have to validate that? Why does the argument always have to denigrate into a sexist argument. I reckon it's completely valid to challenge whether Searle is good enough to coach at OUR club. I would feel exactly the same if a coach of Mt Evelyn thirds made his way through the ranks and ended up as a line coach at our club.

The world would be so much a better place if we could just treat ppl as ppl, and not worry about skin colour, socio economics, sex, age etc. I just want the best ppl at our club. I don't want a line of ex club legends back coaching. I don't want Bangar back unless he's the best. I just want the best, and I reckon we're all entitled to question whether we've got the best, especially if they've taken an unorthodox route to the job, and especially after there has been an article written that Searle has to go back to teaching b/c no-one in the AFL wants her. Next thing you know, the saints, who have a perceptive problem with females decides they'll take her. And no-one should even blink at this?

If TOT can have a crack at the Murdoch press and be cynical about their motives without being labelled a commie, or a left wing extremist (I agree with him btw) then surely we're all mature enough to accept some scrutiny of one of our coaches....

[stinger]

Jesus, have just read the now locked thread about Peta Searle.

I knew there were still some throwbacks living in denial in the world, but its so disappointing some are Saints fans.

The best thing that could happen is one day Peta or Misfud or Ahmed Saad might eventually become senior coach of St KFC and drive all these pathetic rats into the desert.

So many posters here are an embarrassment to developed society and especially Saints fans, and you have the nerve to hang it on P66. At least his moral compass works and he has a sense of humour. Far from the worst element of this site, and as you might imagine, that speaks volumes.

By the way, yes I am aware of the irony of someone complaining about sexism using an LMFAO avatar. I'll get round to changing it to A. Jones one of these days.

Thank you for that amazing homily. You are clearly socially and morally superior and are not afraid to tell the rest of us. It is that, or you are completely deluded. Or you're a mega-tosser, who lacks the spine and moral fortitude to form your own opinions. I'm going with the final option.

You are an enigmatic man Mr Winmar. You are a psychologist from memory working in government but I think you said you used to be a cop for years. You seem to swing wildly between hard right and politically correct at times. Possibly all the excessive manners and political correction in your job means you need a release every now and then. Austin seems to have done nothing too wrong and you have absolutely smashed him. I have a daughter and would hate her to be held back in anything she chooses to do. Attitudes towards women are pretty low ATM and that kind of tongue in cheek macho stuff doesn't really help. I have a high opinion of some of your posts and it disappoints me that you are so passionately anti Searle without giving her much of a go. Also pretty poor form hammering Austin who is one of the more respectful posters on SS. I hope you don't get a warning because the punitive measures don't really help anyone see others points of view. Just try to keep it nice.

Quite interesting isn't it/ Austinn can accuse ppl of basically being Neanderthals, but if the said Neanderthal responds, they are out of line??

Seeing that the Peta Searle thread has now been attributed to being started by myself I will say this.....My initial comment was to spark the exact reaction that it did. ie I wanted to hear from anyone who may have had some direct or indirect interaction with Peta. WW had, so had P66, so had Bunk Moreland and so had Gringo. I never intended to say that just because she was a woman that she couldn't do the job - however I don't reckon it's inappropriate to question the motives of why she was appointed. P66 was labelled a big noter, but he actually had first hand experience, and it appeared objective. Basically said that she was competent at what she did, but no world beater. Gringo's comments were also interesting in that he said that it appears that players respond to her BECAUSE she's a woman.

Football is almost exclusively a mans game is it not? Supported by stacks of women. Many of them intelligent and well informed. I know on this very forum SainterK, semper, and numerous others make more than just a token contribution to this forum - and not just from a woman's perspective, but actually make numerous good points about game plans and observations of certain players. HOWEVER (and I know I'll cop plenty for this) no woman has come close to playing the game at the highest level. Therefore they aren't exposed to the highest level of coaching, intricacies etc of playing at this level. 99.9% of us blokes who contribute on here aren't either. It's the very reason why I also questioned Misfud's appointment, not because he is of aboriginal heritage, but because of his background in footy. Why can't someone question an appointment without being labelled a woman hater or a racist??

A quick question - how many blokes coach in the ANZ Championship? How many have ever coached the Diamonds (netball I'm talking for those who don't know) Pretty sure the answer is zero! Why is that? Is that because women don't think a man can cut it? There are plenty of men that coach rep teams. I have two daughters that play at a high level. Some of their best coaches have been men, but after VNL level very few are seen as a viable option. I believe it's because no man has ever played at the highest level required and truly understands what it takes to play at that level. Do you reckon Sharelle McMahon will have to start at the bottom of the coaching chain and work her way up? I doubt it - she'll be coaching at close to the very top level within 5yrs I reckon. And no-one will question it.

Why can't WW be anti Searle just because he believes that she isn't up to the job and he bases this on ppl he knows who have played under her? Why does he even have to validate that? Why does the argument always have to denigrate into a sexist argument. I reckon it's completely valid to challenge whether Searle is good enough to coach at OUR club. I would feel exactly the same if a coach of Mt Evelyn thirds made his way through the ranks and ended up as a line coach at our club.

The world would be so much a better place if we could just treat ppl as ppl, and not worry about skin colour, socio economics, sex, age etc. I just want the best ppl at our club. I don't want a line of ex club legends back coaching. I don't want Bangar back unless he's the best. I just want the best, and I reckon we're all entitled to question whether we've got the best, especially if they've taken an unorthodox route to the job, and especially after there has been an article written that Searle has to go back to teaching b/c no-one in the AFL wants her. Next thing you know, the saints, who have a perceptive problem with females decides they'll take her. And no-one should even blink at this?

If TOT can have a crack at the Murdoch press and be cynical about their motives without being labelled a commie, or a left wing extremist (I agree with him btw) then surely we're all mature enough to accept some scrutiny of one of our coaches....

well argued...not that i agree with it all......especially the anti murdock slant...but well argued all the same.....

[markp]

A quick question - how many blokes coach in the ANZ Championship? How many have ever coached the Diamonds (netball I'm talking for those who don't know) Pretty sure the answer is zero! Why is that? Is that because women don't think a man can cut it? There are plenty of men that coach rep teams. I have two daughters that play at a high level. Some of their best coaches have been men, but after VNL level very few are seen as a viable option. I believe it's because no man has ever played at the highest level required and truly understands what it takes to play at that level. Do you reckon Sharelle McMahon will have to start at the bottom of the coaching chain and work her way up? I doubt it - she'll be coaching at close to the very top level within 5yrs I reckon. And no-one will question it.

Gender should be irrelevant, says NSW Swifts netball coach Rob Wright

April 21, 2014

He's the ANZ Championship's first male head coach of a team set to play in Canberra's first match, but NSW Swifts coach Rob Wright doesn't view himself as a trailblazer.

The 45-year-old believes gender should be irrelevant in coaching, and hopes the day will come when female coaches are similarly accepted in elite male teams.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/netball/gen ... zqx88.html

[White Winmar]

Thanks for your views, Gringo. I'm no longer consulting to government, having just finished that gig a few months ago. Far from swinging wildly from right to left, I prefer to think that I try and assess each situation, or topic, on its merits. I don't hold views that are exclusively linked to one side of politics. The past three years in Canberra have taught me that our politicians are mediocre, cardboard cut out cliches, mouthing scripts and mediocre dross like automatons.

They are slaves to the 24/7 media cycle and social networking. I don't need a release from the PC bulls*** I've been surrounded with for the last few years. One of the few advantages I had in my job, was that I was paid to have an opinion, not that they always listened. Consulting to government is something everyone should do at least once in their lifetime. It would give the average man/woman a much better understanding of the machinations of government and the public service. It would certainly be a shocking eye opener. The average schmo has no idea how self entitled and advantaged our Public servants are. There are many who work hard, but there are plenty who don't. They also have a security that people in private enterprise can only dream of.

Anyhow, just to set the record straight, as I've said before, I employ three female consultants who are very good at what they do. That's why I employ them. Their track records are impeccable. I have a partner who earns more than me and she has done better than I could ever hope to. Does this bother me? He'll no! It's fantastic!

As for my reply to Austinnnnnnnn, don't you think he took a very large, and very cheap shot at me first? Surely I have the right of reply. I'm sure he can look after himself. I will, however, try to keep things nice from here on in. A very good suggestion.

[dragit]

I assumed aaaustin was referring to #gosaintas & jamesmc, I could be wrong.

[#gosaintas]

I assumed aaaustin was referring to #gosaintas & jamesmc, I could be wrong.

Can you tell me what I said that has rattled you?

[Moods]

A quick question - how many blokes coach in the ANZ Championship? How many have ever coached the Diamonds (netball I'm talking for those who don't know) Pretty sure the answer is zero! Why is that? Is that because women don't think a man can cut it? There are plenty of men that coach rep teams. I have two daughters that play at a high level. Some of their best coaches have been men, but after VNL level very few are seen as a viable option. I believe it's because no man has ever played at the highest level required and truly understands what it takes to play at that level. Do you reckon Sharelle McMahon will have to start at the bottom of the coaching chain and work her way up? I doubt it - she'll be coaching at close to the very top level within 5yrs I reckon. And no-one will question it.

Gender should be irrelevant, says NSW Swifts netball coach Rob Wright

April 21, 2014

He's the ANZ Championship's first male head coach of a team set to play in Canberra's first match, but NSW Swifts coach Rob Wright doesn't view himself as a trailblazer.

The 45-year-old believes gender should be irrelevant in coaching, and hopes the day will come when female coaches are similarly accepted in elite male teams.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/netball/gen ... zqx88.html

Good find Mark. I wasn't aware of that and read the article you attached with interest. This is nthe key part of the article for me.

He coached state representative teams at under-17, 19 and 21 level, was a development coach at NSW Institute of Sport and a Swifts assistant for over 50 games.


I guess that's what I'm looking for in an assistant that comes from left field. Someone who has coached their own teams in an elite environment.

[gringo]

Thanks for your views, Gringo. I'm no longer consulting to government, having just finished that gig a few months ago. Far from swinging wildly from right to left, I prefer to think that I try and assess each situation, or topic, on its merits. I don't hold views that are exclusively linked to one side of politics. The past three years in Canberra have taught me that our politicians are mediocre, cardboard cut out cliches, mouthing scripts and mediocre dross like automatons.

They are slaves to the 24/7 media cycle and social networking. I don't need a release from the PC bulls*** I've been surrounded with for the last few years. One of the few advantages I had in my job, was that I was paid to have an opinion, not that they always listened. Consulting to government is something everyone should do at least once in their lifetime. It would give the average man/woman a much better understanding of the machinations of government and the public service. It would certainly be a shocking eye opener. The average schmo has no idea how self entitled and advantaged our Public servants are. There are many who work hard, but there are plenty who don't. They also have a security that people in private enterprise can only dream of.

Anyhow, just to set the record straight, as I've said before, I employ three female consultants who are very good at what they do. That's why I employ them. Their track records are impeccable. I have a partner who earns more than me and she has done better than I could ever hope to. Does this bother me? He'll no! It's fantastic!

As for my reply to Austinnnnnnnn, don't you think he took a very large, and very cheap shot at me first? Surely I have the right of reply. I'm sure he can look after himself. I will, however, try to keep things nice from here on in. A very good suggestion.

I didn't read back enough obviously to see him attack you but it sounds like your very reasonable in your attitude towards women. Totally agree on politics in Australia. It's very depressing right now. I agree on public servants but you should work in the corporate world ..unfortunately they are both pretty similar. A fair percentage of us are just incompetent and lazy ,I had to go and start a business to get away from idiots. I know a few pollies and a few public servants and all say the same thing you do about deadwood littering the PS.

[dragit]

I assumed aaaustin was referring to #gosaintas & jamesmc, I could be wrong.

Can you tell me what I said that has rattled you?

Nothing rattled me champ, were you one of posters that received a warning in that thread?

[#gosaintas]

yes, for calling someone a nuffie

[dragit]

yes, for calling someone a nuffie

Apologies if I have falsely implicated you as being an arse clown.

[Enrico_Misso]

The main problem is that while you can put the usual d**khead grandstanders on "ignore" you still get to see their drivel when others quote them.

Is there an enhancement whereby we can have an "IGNORE COMPLETELY" function that eliminates their utterances from any following quotes?
That would make this site much much much better.

[BackFromUSA]

maybe if the place was brought in to this century like we've been asking for for five years it might help
christ sake
NOTHING has been done
admin feel like youre bashing your head against a wall with the owner yet?
he couldnt give a shite about this place
every year its 'we'll do something in the off season'
yeah
sure

thats half the reason people spend time elsewhere
the other half is the thread derailing by king numpty

Matrix

What is it you are specifically suggesting now?

We have become Tapatalk compliant
we have added the feature where you can see where you last read a thread
We have taken up your other suggestions where phpBB allows

The only thing rejected is embedding videos and we have good reason for that.

And just so everyone understands the "good reason", the reason is that the mods fear we will all suddenly start posting porn videos on the forum.

Which IMHO is friggin ridiculous.

If not for this ruling we could post all the videos of the draftees and other Saints youtube videos on THIS site (like you can on any other forum), instead of just having links that take you elsewhere.

This is inaccurate.

We are not concerned about current users posting porn.

The forum is an open forum allowing anyone to view and join.

Allowing embedded video will make it more attractive for others to join and qualify for posting merely to publish unwanted material and possibly illegal material .... as occurred once in the past on this forum.

It was one of the reasons it became a closed forum but now we are open again the risk is too high and allowing links but not embedding at least means that to view unwanted video involves a voluntary click to view and importantly this view is not made on our site.

The downside is that actual footy videos also have to be posted as links and viewed off site.

The upside is that we are not as an attractiive a target for those who post videos unsuited to an all ages forum.

As a forum moderated by volunteers - we believe this is the most responsible decision.

Apologies to all that find clicking on a link to view a video on another page an inconvenience.

[Austinnn]

Jesus, have just read the now locked thread about Peta Searle.

I knew there were still some throwbacks living in denial in the world, but its so disappointing some are Saints fans.

The best thing that could happen is one day Peta or Misfud or Ahmed Saad might eventually become senior coach of St KFC and drive all these pathetic rats into the desert.

So many posters here are an embarrassment to developed society and especially Saints fans, and you have the nerve to hang it on P66. At least his moral compass works and he has a sense of humour. Far from the worst element of this site, and as you might imagine, that speaks volumes.

By the way, yes I am aware of the irony of someone complaining about sexism using an LMFAO avatar. I'll get round to changing it to A. Jones one of these days.

Thank you for that amazing homily. You are clearly socially and morally superior and are not afraid to tell the rest of us. It is that, or you are completely deluded. Or you're a mega-tosser, who lacks the spine and moral fortitude to form your own opinions. I'm going with the final option.

I can form my own opinions just fine pal. First option was closer, in your case anyway. But then again most are. Since we're playing personal guessing games, my guess is you're one of those sulky men who whinge about reverse sexism. Maybe not, but you sound like that.

Thanks Gringo, I appreciate the support mate. Don't need it as WW said, but sincerely appreciate someone who can see where I'm coming from.

Wasn't especially potting WW, but anyone that reckoned on here that Searle should be treated any different to the many male equivalents who lack credit but are unquestioned. Gary Ayres rates her, plenty of pros rate her, but a handful of contacts some bloke has don't, so all of a sudden she's average and a token appointment. As for the concept that Moods gave an example of, the one that says that someone lacks necessary experience at the highest level to do a job enabling them to gain experience at the highest level, its an oldie but not really a goodie.

Searle has plenty of women's footy experience, plus sufficient men's VFL experience, but obviously a WOMAN being head coach of a VFL team is as ludicrous as a kangaroo or an unborn foetus doing the job, so she had to be realistic and look for more assistant roles. AFL assistants get more cred and cash than their VFL counterparts, so in terms of her trying to gsin experience why wouldnt she look to get that in the AFL?

We did not have to hire her, true. The argument postulated about her being an affirmative action appointment has weight, but its not like they put the tealady in charge of tactics. Finnis and co are smart enough to see the repercussions of an empty token appointment, and she has a very good rep as a coach, not as a female coach, so we'll see.

Im happy that we were brave enough, some of you clearly aren't. The women's movement is around a hundred years old, so if you're not convinced now, you'll never be. Its just a shame that so much of the world still thinks that way, and I groan whenever I see examples of sexism or whatever in the Saints family, more particularly whenever I come on this site, I start wondering if ALL Saints fans are fools or ignorant bigots. One thing you can say about P66, whatever else he is, he is neither of those. Thankfully there are others who seem normal, but there seems to be an abundance of both of the above here, even more than is typical of footy forums and comments sections. Is it something about the club? I'm starting to wonder if we are not, in fact, as bad as Collingwood supporters.

Shudder icon?

Anyway if you think I've got a superiority complex, thats fine. I don't, but neither do I mind what you think of me. I'm not here to argue. In fact I don't know why I'm here anymore. It used to be to enjoy sharing opinions about St Kilda, now its more like watching one of those old So Bad Its Good films from the 80s. Except its just bad. If this was a film, I'd slash the seats and walk out.

But whatever you think of me, try to give Peta a chance. If she's no good, she'll leave like David Teague did. Just imagine its Pete, if that helps.

[Moods]

Jesus, have just read the now locked thread about Peta Searle.

I knew there were still some throwbacks living in denial in the world, but its so disappointing some are Saints fans.

The best thing that could happen is one day Peta or Misfud or Ahmed Saad might eventually become senior coach of St KFC and drive all these pathetic rats into the desert.

So many posters here are an embarrassment to developed society and especially Saints fans, and you have the nerve to hang it on P66. At least his moral compass works and he has a sense of humour. Far from the worst element of this site, and as you might imagine, that speaks volumes.

By the way, yes I am aware of the irony of someone complaining about sexism using an LMFAO avatar. I'll get round to changing it to A. Jones one of these days.

Thank you for that amazing homily. You are clearly socially and morally superior and are not afraid to tell the rest of us. It is that, or you are completely deluded. Or you're a mega-tosser, who lacks the spine and moral fortitude to form your own opinions. I'm going with the final option.

I can form my own opinions just fine pal. First option was closer, in your case anyway. But then again most are. Since we're playing personal guessing games, my guess is you're one of those pathetic men who whinge about reverse sexism. Maybe not, but you sound like that. Anyway I'm not here to argue. In fact I don't know why I'm here anymore. It used to be to enjoy sharing opinions about St Kilda, now its more like watching one of those old So Bad Its Good films from the 80s. Except its just bad. If this was a film, I'd slash the seats and walk out.

Why would you slash the seats?? Talk about pent up aggression. Just walk out, you don't have to watch the movie, but don't commit crime in the process.

In all seriousness, I had my say, WW had his say, even Gringo had his/her say. I reckon everyone explained their viewpoint without getting personal. (since that thread was locked) Why don't you enlighten us as to why we are all so pathetic or those of us that query the appointment of Peta? Can a reasoned debate not be had without one side taking the intellectual high ground? I've not heard one reason why you believe she was a good appointment other than labelling everyone who disagrees with you as pathetic rats.

And also, why do ppl assume that saints fans are any better/worse/different to any other group of supporters? We are all just footy fans who have chosen a particular team to follow. Believe it or not there are some really nice ppl who even follow the pies and the blues. I even have a few mates who are hawks fans. Bombers.... they're hard to talk to lately

[Con Gorozidis]

Sad to say that Big footy has less. I go there more these days cos I can't be bothered here. It's a shame but can't be doing with reading idiotic opinions, and SS has more than its fair share.

A shame because you are a real joy to read Austinn. I still remember your great post about the train (or was it a bus?) ride to Waverley Park .

I also like to hear about your experiences exploring the culinary and viticultural delights of provincial Gaul and your fetish for french hip hop.

[Con Gorozidis]

And here I was thinking that someone had discovered that unknown gun international footy player from Estonia and finally started a thread about him.

gold

[Con Gorozidis]

And just so everyone understands the "good reason", the reason is that the mods fear we will all suddenly start posting porn videos on the forum.

Which IMHO is friggin ridiculous.

If not for this ruling we could post all the videos of the draftees and other Saints youtube videos on THIS site (like you can on any other forum), instead of just having links that take you elsewhere.

I am actually a sleeper cell. I dont even go for the saints at all. Ive just been biding my time waiting for the mods to let up their guard so i can post porn videos.

Jason Holmes is also in on this grand conspiracy. Hes not even a real footy player. Just biding his time undercover to take over saintsational.

[Austinnn]

Are you OS, Moods, or just up late. Maybe you should be called Night Moods.

1st point. Good point. No pent up aggro here, just a form of protest, but agree counterproductive.

2nd point. My first reaction was to consider trawling that sad thread and others for examples of pathetic-ness... But would that effort be effective? I doubt anyone would care and I would just get depressed again. I stand by the label pathetic - sorry if it offends, but it really is.

If you want a specific reason of why the reverse sexism argument is pathetic, I can do that. Might open up a can of worms and get the thread locked though. I'll just say that it's only men who are afraid their golden years of total dominance might end that use it, same as the reverse racism idea. The idea is if a woman gets a taste of fair treatment, some people assume she is being preferred because of her gender, cos they can't believe that a woman would be better. That's the instinct, initially. Feel threatened by the concept of a woman being good in a traditionally male domain? How is a chick gonna tell a bunch of big boofy blokes what to do? (Like none of them have mothers or older women or, shock, dominant wives) (anyone worth their salt involved in education these days might question the role of an instructor being 'telling someone what to do', but that is another rant) The whole thing is a fear of change, of having to redefine what we are, or do. Must we? Why can't it stay like it was? Political Correctness gone mad. Next we won't even have the men's toilets to ourselves, will we? But these frightened men are smart enough not to rant and rave so they insinuate, they sow doubt. They wonder why others don't instinctively doubt like they do. Fear. Sad. Pathetic. Tedious.

When Peta Searle joined us, did you see a new assistant coach or a reaction to our poor image in regards to women? If option 2, did it annoy you? Before you found out about her background? Would you have thought the same about a male coach you didn't know about? I was a lot more annoyed when we hired the Junkyard Dog, frankly. To make it in footy, you have to be an explayer or have something special. Got a feeling Searle has something special, but if not, she'll go the way of Brendan McCartney no worries.

You want reasons pro-Peta, go to the threads that opened up when she was appointed, full of some very valid reasons. Experienced winner, successful motivator, excellent communicator. Gets big wraps from respectable referees, see for yourself.

Final point, fair enough. I agree, got some very respectable pies fans for friends, all their own teeth and totally normal necks. I know we are all the same, its just the only fan forum I frequent. Whenever I have paid a visit to oppo fan forums, I've been struck by lack of backwards attitudes - maybe its just particular to this site because it's better at Big Footy. I dunno, but seems like a lot of folks on here with what might most diplomatically be called 'traditional values'. Lots of soft -isms. Folks that long for the good old days... Again, I could fill the next few hours trawling SS for shameful examples, but what a sad and useless waste of time. You've all seen what I'm talking about - if you don't agree, I won't convince you.

Thanks for the respect, hopefully you get where I'm coming from. Sorry to everyone else who is sick of arguing. In the end I realise I should just let it go and just accept it, but it gets tiring reading the same old rubbish.

[Austinnn]

Sad to say that Big footy has less. I go there more these days cos I can't be bothered here. It's a shame but can't be doing with reading idiotic opinions, and SS has more than its fair share.

A shame because you are a real joy to read Austinn. I still remember your great post about the train (or was it a bus?) ride to Waverley Park .

I also like to hear about your experiences exploring the culinary and viticultural delights of provincial Gaul and your fetish for french hip hop.

Likewise mate! Breath of fresh air a lot of the time, you are. Twas a train, and a bike. Don't always agree but I appreciate your work, and the high quality porn you post.

[HitTheBoundary]

The only thing rejected is embedding videos and we have good reason for that.

And just so everyone understands the "good reason", the reason is that the mods fear we will all suddenly start posting porn videos on the forum.

Which IMHO is friggin ridiculous.

If not for this ruling we could post all the videos of the draftees and other Saints youtube videos on THIS site (like you can on any other forum), instead of just having links that take you elsewhere.

This is inaccurate.

We are not concerned about current users posting porn.

The forum is an open forum allowing anyone to view and join.

Allowing embedded video will make it more attractive for others to join and qualify for posting merely to publish unwanted material and possibly illegal material .... as occurred once in the past on this forum.

It was one of the reasons it became a closed forum but now we are open again the risk is too high and allowing links but not embedding at least means that to view unwanted video involves a voluntary click to view and importantly this view is not made on our site.

The downside is that actual footy videos also have to be posted as links and viewed off site.

The upside is that we are not as an attractiive a target for those who post videos unsuited to an all ages forum.

As a forum moderated by volunteers - we believe this is the most responsible decision.

Apologies to all that find clicking on a link to view a video on another page an inconvenience.

So I was innacurate because I said "porn" instead of "unwanted and possibly illegal material"?
Are you a politician?

It's not the "incovenience", it's just that it detracts from the site, unneccessarily IMO.
You say you want this site to do well, then hobble it.
Bigfooty is open to the public and they seem to cope fine - and it adds greatly to the user experience.
People can post dodgy images now (and they don't) so why will they suddenly become deviants?
Mods such as Kosi and St.Byron are here most days and seem well able to cope.

Does Admin sleep with the light on? Talk about jumping at shadows, lol.

Anyway, I've made my case numerous times to no avail so I give up.

[stinger]

Jesus, have just read the now locked thread about Peta Searle.

I knew there were still some throwbacks living in denial in the world, but its so disappointing some are Saints fans.

The best thing that could happen is one day Peta or Misfud or Ahmed Saad might eventually become senior coach of St KFC and drive all these pathetic rats into the desert.

So many posters here are an embarrassment to developed society and especially Saints fans, and you have the nerve to hang it on P66. At least his moral compass works and he has a sense of humour. Far from the worst element of this site, and as you might imagine, that speaks volumes.

By the way, yes I am aware of the irony of someone complaining about sexism using an LMFAO avatar. I'll get round to changing it to A. Jones one of these days.

Thank you for that amazing homily. You are clearly socially and morally superior and are not afraid to tell the rest of us. It is that, or you are completely deluded. Or you're a mega-tosser, who lacks the spine and moral fortitude to form your own opinions. I'm going with the final option.

I can form my own opinions just fine pal. First option was closer, in your case anyway. But then again most are. Since we're playing personal guessing games, my guess is you're one of those sulky men who whinge about reverse sexism. Maybe not, but you sound like that.

Thanks Gringo, I appreciate the support mate. Don't need it as WW said, but sincerely appreciate someone who can see where I'm coming from.

Wasn't especially potting WW, but anyone that reckoned on here that Searle should be treated any different to the many male equivalents who lack credit but are unquestioned. Gary Ayres rates her, plenty of pros rate her, but a handful of contacts some bloke has don't, so all of a sudden she's average and a token appointment. As for the concept that Moods gave an example of, the one that says that someone lacks necessary experience at the highest level to do a job enabling them to gain experience at the highest level, its an oldie but not really a goodie.

Searle has plenty of women's footy experience, plus sufficient men's VFL experience, but obviously a WOMAN being head coach of a VFL team is as ludicrous as a kangaroo or an unborn foetus doing the job, so she had to be realistic and look for more assistant roles. AFL assistants get more cred and cash than their VFL counterparts, so in terms of her trying to gsin experience why wouldnt she look to get that in the AFL?

We did not have to hire her, true. The argument postulated about her being an affirmative action appointment has weight, but its not like they put the tealady in charge of tactics. Finnis and co are smart enough to see the repercussions of an empty token appointment, and she has a very good rep as a coach, not as a female coach, so we'll see.

Im happy that we were brave enough, some of you clearly aren't. The women's movement is around a hundred years old, so if you're not convinced now, you'll never be. Its just a shame that so much of the world still thinks that way, and I groan whenever I see examples of sexism or whatever in the Saints family, more particularly whenever I come on this site, I start wondering if ALL Saints fans are fools or ignorant bigots. One thing you can say about P66, whatever else he is, he is neither of those. Thankfully there are others who seem normal, but there seems to be an abundance of both of the above here, even more than is typical of footy forums and comments sections. Is it something about the club? I'm starting to wonder if we are not, in fact, as bad as Collingwood supporters.

Shudder icon?

Anyway if you think I've got a superiority complex, thats fine. I don't, but neither do I mind what you think of me. I'm not here to argue. In fact I don't know why I'm here anymore. It used to be to enjoy sharing opinions about St Kilda, now its more like watching one of those old So Bad Its Good films from the 80s. Except its just bad. If this was a film, I'd slash the seats and walk out.

But whatever you think of me, try to give Peta a chance. If she's no good, she'll leave like David Teague did. Just imagine its Pete, if that helps.

seat slasher are you??...yeah. i've come across more than my fair share of those.....but your the first one i've encountered on this site...look i share your views on peta, but there we diverge.......your comments on other forum members make you sound like a real tosser. and a dill.......

[plugger66]

Well Im not sure what this thread is doing but Austin made a good point. Think of Peta Searle as Peter Searle. I have now done that and have decided from what I saw at Port that there are 60 other Peter Searles in the VFL and I cant work out why we picked this Peter. Try as I might I still see it as an appointment to get on the good side of 50% of the population. I base that on the little experience I had with Peter.

[st.byron]

well argued...not that i agree with it all......especially the anti murdock slant...but well argued all the same.....

It baffles me how anyone can think that Murdoch is a force for good in the world. The very epitome of self interest and greed.