One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on May 17, 2015, 03:10:37 PM
-
Richmond president Peggy O’Neal says Tigers united behind coach Damien Hardwick
Sam Edmund
Herald Sun
May 17, 2015 2:27PM
RICHMOND president Peggy O’Neal says the club remains united behind under-fire coach Damien Hardwick.
Speaking before Sunday’s clash against Collingwood, O’Neal said the Tigers would not be “driven by emotional outbursts” despite a poor start to the season. Richmond hasn’t won since Round 3.
“We don’t make reactive decisions based on the latest view in the media or in the vocal minority,” O’Neal said.
“We all know that our great sport evokes great emotion; it’s one of the great things we love about the game. That emotions is heightened by traditional media, and now social media adds another more immediate voice to the news cycle with everyone able to state their opinion.
“People who work at clubs ... are not robots. Everyone feels the elation of victory and devastation of defeat. It matters to all of us.
“One of the great challenges for those within the club is to make decisions that are not driven by emotional outbursts, to not rise to the bait, to be volatile.
“Every part of our business looks at the facts, we ask hard questions and collectively we find a way forward. I think that’s been critical to the narrative that’s been Richmond over the last five seasons.
“A collective commitment was made to turn this club around and that would be done methodically. No one person was going to fix the club, there was no messiah.
“It’s a strategy that requires us to stay the course for a very long time.”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-2015-richmond-president-peggy-oneal-says-tigers-united-behind-coach-damien-hardwick/story-fni5f9jb-1227357941507
-
Piggy ONeal
-
Sack him already!!!
-
Speaking before Sunday’s clash against Collingwood, O’Neal said the Tigers would not be “driven by emotional outbursts” despite a poor start to the season. Richmond hasn’t won since Round 3.
Geez stuff me in the ass.
Get serious guys. Get rid of her.
GO PIEESSSS!!
-
I would have been shot for that comment. :snidegrin :whistle ::)
-
what a dumb woman fair dinkum
pee her off
You can call her anything except dumb. She is much smarter than 99% of the posters on OER. Don't underestimate her. Just because she doesn't shout out in the media, doesn't mean that she is not doing anything within the four walls of the RFC.
I'd prefer it that way x1000000000!
-
She doesn't know Richmond.
She has heard what other people have said about the place and based her ideas on that.
-
Snip
I haven't been on the forum much in the last 24 hours for family reasons
But thank you everyone for drawing my attention to the unacceptable posting in this thread
-
"
“One of the great challenges for those within the club is to make decisions that are not driven by emotional outbursts, to not rise to the bait, to be volatile.
“Every part of our business looks at the facts, we ask hard questions and collectively we find a way forward. I think that’s been critical to the narrative that’s been Richmond over the last five seasons.
“A collective commitment was made to turn this club around and that would be done methodically. No one person was going to fix the club, there was no messiah.
“It’s a strategy that requires us to stay the course for a very long time.”
I agree withTBR. I'd suggest Peg bone up on the history of the club and it's rhetoric to supporters over a long period of time.
It's all so convenient to take the emotion out when it suits you but what about the emotion used to tin rattle?
So it's fine to use emotion to blackmail money out of supporters but when we get frustrated over this club, coaching panel and playing group making the SAME mistakes for a second consecutive year then we are being emotional?
Spare me the rhetoric Peggy.
Maybe Peggy and the club take a fact based approach to 3-0-75?
Or a fact based approach to the impact of the leading teams program on our leadership group?
Or a fact based approach to our recruitment of post round 2 drafting in the past 4 years when compared to say Collingwood?
It would be nice if the club acknowledged it's clear shortcomings in delivering its agenda in the last season or 2 and what it's doing to learn from it and do better.
Until then, Peggy has been exposed as naive at best.
-
What a load of tripe , what part don't you understand of where we were in 2010 to where we are now .
LOL at collingwood draft picks post 33 to make your puerile point, don't embarrass us ,,,please :wallywink
-
What a load of tripe , what part don't you understand of where we were in 2010 to where we are now .
LOL at collingwood draft picks post 33 to make your puerile point, don't embarrass us ,,,please :wallywink
COLLINGWOOD
Paul Seedsman (pick 76, 2010 draft)
Alex Fasolo (pick 45, 2010 draft)
Jarrod Witts (pick 67, 2011 draft — NSW scholarship)
Jackson Ramsay (pick 38, 2012 draft)
Marley Williams (2012 rookie draft)
Jack Crisp (2012 rookie draft — selected by Brisbane)
Tom Langdon (pick 65, 2013 draft)
Jack Frost (2013 rookie draft)
Sam Dwyer (2013 rookie draft)
Adam Oxley (2013 rookie draft)
-
Ouch Bojo. Just ouch. :shh
-
I agree withTBR. I'd suggest Peg bone up on the history of the club and it's rhetoric to supporters over a long period of time.
It's all so convenient to take the emotion out when it suits you but what about the emotion used to tin rattle?
So it's fine to use emotion to blackmail money out of supporters but when we get frustrated over this club, coaching panel and playing group making the SAME mistakes for a second consecutive year then we are being emotional?
Spare me the rhetoric Peggy.
Maybe Peggy and the club take a fact based approach to 3-0-75?
Or a fact based approach to the impact of the leading teams program on our leadership group?
Or a fact based approach to our recruitment of post round 2 drafting in the past 4 years when compared to say Collingwood?
It would be nice if the club acknowledged it's clear shortcomings in delivering its agenda in the last season or 2 and what it's doing to learn from it and do better.
Until then, Peggy has been exposed as naive at best.
Good post.
-
Ouch Bojo. Just ouch. :shh
It's an absolutely ridiculous argument , how's Jesse white going, Quentin lynch , Jordan Russell, Clinton young, karnezis , Tony Armstrong ...yeah Peggy o Neil I fink eddies a much betterer Prez, just look at these recruits :ROTFL :dancing
-
Think you might have missed the list.
-
Peggy O'Neal's president's function speech:
VIDEO: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2015-05-18/oneal-r7-presidents-function
* No matter if you’re flying or failing on the field, we don’t make reactive decisions based on the latest view in the media or the vocal minority. Every part of our business looks at the facts, we ask hard questions, and collectively we find a way forward. I think that’s been critical to the narrative that’s been Richmond over the past five seasons, and these first six games.
* At the start of season 2010, the Club was in an extremely poor shape, on and off the field, to the point that some even wondered if we would even continue to exist. Membership was stagnant, corporate partnerships were difficult to attract and we had a debt approaching $5 million that saw us play games in Cairns and Darwin. The Club’s facilities were embarrassing and Punt Road Oval was in terrible shape. By Round 9, we hadn’t won a game. A collective commitment was made to turn this Club around and that it would be done methodically.
* We’re not satisfied. There’s much more to do. We’ve got enough right to ensure that the Club has a solid foundation upon which to build its future. That’s what only stable, united football clubs can do. Our resolve to build a highly-successful football team and a Club that we can be proud of, is stronger than ever.
Full article: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2015-05-18/stability-the-key-for-tigers
-
Guys, I think if you ignore it, it will go away
As for Peggy, it's comical.
-
what a dumb woman fair dinkum
pee her off
You can call her anything except dumb. She is much smarter than 99% of the posters on OER. Don't underestimate her. Just because she doesn't shout out in the media, doesn't mean that she is not doing anything within the four walls of the RFC.
I'd prefer it that way x1000000000!
i call it as i see it and its only my opinion. She sounds like a dumb american who knows very little about being a president
repeating the same garbage over and over. Didnt she once mention she wanted to win at least a final. Please
-
I would have been shot for that comment. :snidegrin :whistle ::)
i didnt think there was anything wrong with it. She does sound dumb and if i called dimma or tony abbott that no one would have said a word.
-
I heard her speech and she spoke well.Said all the right things you want to hear.
Interested in what people who have actually met peggy think
-
At least now we know Dimma is safe no matter how bad we are
-
what a dumb woman fair dinkum
pee her off
You can call her anything except dumb. She is much smarter than 99% of the posters on OER. Don't underestimate her. Just because she doesn't shout out in the media, doesn't mean that she is not doing anything within the four walls of the RFC.
I'd prefer it that way x1000000000!
i call it as i see it and its only my opinion. She sounds like a dumb american who knows very little about being a president
repeating the same garbage over and over. Didnt she once mention she wanted to win at least a final. Please
I really don't care how intelligent anyone thinks she is, she has no soul.
Like Dimmer.
They probably don't really get music either.
-
what a dumb woman fair dinkum
pee her off
You can call her anything except dumb. She is much smarter than 99% of the posters on OER. Don't underestimate her. Just because she doesn't shout out in the media, doesn't mean that she is not doing anything within the four walls of the RFC.
I'd prefer it that way x1000000000!
i call it as i see it and its only my opinion. She sounds like a dumb american who knows very little about being a president
repeating the same garbage over and over. Didnt she once mention she wanted to win at least a final. Please
I really don't care how intelligent anyone thinks she is, she has no soul.
Like Dimmer.
They probably don't really get music either.
Peggy's a big fan of Journey, Michael Bolton, Celine Dion, John Farnham and the various work of Stock, Aitken & Waterman. Dimma loves Nickelback, Matchbox 20, Noiseworks, Dire Straits & Creed....
-
i didnt think there was anything wrong with it. She does sound dumb and if i called dimma or tony abbott that no one would have said a word.
It had absolutely nothing to do with you calling her dumb: nothing. You called her more than dumb and Then the "trolling" started
-
I heard her speech and she spoke well.Said all the right things you want to hear.
Interested in what people who have actually met peggy think
So what did she say that we wanted to hear?
The transcript in this thread was both annoying and condescending
-
So what did she say that we wanted to hear?
The transcript in this thread was both annoying and condescending
Maybe that's the issue she didn't say what you & others wanted to hear.
Reading the transcript I don't think it sounds condescending.
IMHO It's just a typical president's speech; one that attempts to pacifies some people and deliberate or not annoys the hell out of others. Typical President's speech when a club on field is going poorly
TBH it's not surprising and I really don't care. What they do behind closed doors to right things is far more important because the words out of the RFC mean very little these days
-
TBH Peggy isn't the problem at Richmond. The players are the problem and the football department that's where the problem is.
-
We beat Collingwood.
What's with the glum faces?
Drugs??? :snidegrin
-
In the speech Peggy mentions that in 2010 our club was a train wreck (not the exact words ). She didn't mention that she had already spent five years on the board so she had presided over that train wreck and didn't take any responsibility for the mess.
If you watch the video you will pick up the condescending tone of her voice with regards to the passion of the Richmond supporters and infers it is destabilising the club. Any president worth their salt would have acknowledged the patience of the supporters as this is Hardwick's sixth season.
-
shes a lawyer, lawyers talk like that. I didn't see anything wrong in how she delivered her speech.
-
Is that why were the defendants ?
-
In think what annoys most of the negative posters here is the fact that's they won't listen to the noisy minority Or the whims of the media.
Absolutely nothing wrong with what she said.
-
Hey fluffy where do you get your statistics from? You claim we are the noisy minority, how do you establish this?
-
In think what annoys most of the negative posters here is the fact that's they won't listen to the noisy minority Or the whims of the media.
Absolutely nothing wrong with what she said.
Well she didn't actually say anything so that's one way of looking at it
-
Hey fluffy where do you get your statistics from? You claim we are the noisy minority, how do you establish this?
I think you should probably re-read my post. I can't see where I said any number here was part of that group. Dont need stats to back that up.
-
If we needed speeches about sticking fat, we should have kept Danny Frawley. He was great at that.
Maybe they are related?
-
In think what annoys most of the negative posters here is the fact that's they won't listen to the noisy minority Or the whims of the media.
Absolutely nothing wrong with what she said.
Nothing right either
-
Hey fluffy where do you get your statistics from? You claim we are the noisy minority, how do you establish this?
I think you should probably re-read my post. I can't see where I said any number here was part of that group. Dont need stats to back that up.
Minority is the smaller number or part, especially a number or part representing less than half of the whole.
If you use the term it's inherent by its very definition it refers to a number.
Stats please.
-
In think what annoys most of the negative posters here is the fact that's they won't listen to the noisy minority Or the whims of the media.
Absolutely nothing wrong with what she said.
I quote what I said again. I can not see where I said any number here were the noisy minority. Peggy said that the club would not llisten to them and I said "i think" that would annoy most of the negative posters. No stats required.
-
I heard her speech and she spoke well.Said all the right things you want to hear.
Interested in what people who have actually met peggy think
She was cringe worthy and awful at the cocktail party.
-
In think what annoys most of the negative posters here is the fact that's they won't listen to the noisy minority Or the whims of the media.
Absolutely nothing wrong with what she said.
I quote what I said again. I can not see where I said any number here were the noisy minority. Peggy said that the club would not llisten to them and I said "i think" that would annoy most of the negative posters. No stats required.
Peggy Sue has never met a Richmond supporter. Her dad didnt take her to the footy. She didnt play kick to kick in the street wearing a Richmond jumper. Her entire relationship and understanding of what a Richmond supporter is comes from sitting in a board room surrounded by the kind of idiots that have made the same bad decisions for 35 years.
What the hell would she know about what constitutes a noisy minority? Was she there when the "noisy minority" held up wooden spoons when danny frawley was coaching us to death? Does she assume that supporters are happy watching the team lose 6 years into a rebuild whilst other teams like Port and the Bulldogs are speeding past us? Or does she assume that Richmond supporters will sit patiently while the club does nothing? Because history tells us that there is no such thing as a noisy minority at the Richmond Football Club.
How many of the best coaches right now like Lyon or Longmire would want to work for her? None. Is she capable of picking up the phone and recruiting an elite coach? Nope. If the club thinks it will attract more women to the club by having a female as president they are wrong. Caroline Wilson would do a better job.
-
She leaves those things up to the imbeciles you referenced earlier in your post.
That's why everyone is happy ...... Except us..
-
The so called negative minority
-
This thread is rolled gold load of shyte.
-
This thread is rolled gold load of shyte.
Yeah too many people expressing their own actual opinions and original thoughts - needs to be spammed with more lazy, copied and pasted loads of shyte like the politics thread.
-
Peggy Sue has never met a Richmond supporter. Her dad didnt take her to the footy. She didnt play kick to kick in the street wearing a Richmond jumper. Her entire relationship and understanding of what a Richmond supporter is comes from sitting in a board room surrounded by the kind of idiots that have made the same bad decisions for 35 years
She's never met a Richmond Supporter? So people like me, Jack and other members she has spoken to at VFL games, Family days etc are not actually supporters? We are what just make believe?
My Dad never took me to the footy so does that mean I not really a supporter or alternatively clueless when it comes to matters relating to the RFC? Because that seems to be what you are saying
The fact that she was a member and player sponsor long before she joined the board means nothing as well?
I have no problem with people handing out whacks but your generalisation/reasoning are not realistic because you are making sweeping statements that would appear to be factually incorrect. In this case not only towards the current president but I would suggest to fair number of members/supporters as well
-
Perrgy smergy pfft y'all
-
Ill start to like her when she has the balls the call for Dimma's head
-
I thought the term "full support" meant people were sharpening the knives. What has happened to footy double speak?
-
My Dad never took me to the footy so does that mean I not really a supporter or alternatively clueless when it comes to matters realising to the RFC?
Sorry, darling but yes, that's exactly what it means. :snidegrin
-
Peggy Sue has never met a Richmond supporter. Her dad didnt take her to the footy. She didnt play kick to kick in the street wearing a Richmond jumper. Her entire relationship and understanding of what a Richmond supporter is comes from sitting in a board room surrounded by the kind of idiots that have made the same bad decisions for 35 years
She's never met a Richmond Supporter? So people like me, Jack and other members she has spoken to at VFL games, Family days etc are not actually supporters? We are what just make believe?
My Dad never took me to the footy so does that mean I not really a supporter or alternatively clueless when it comes to matters realising to the RFC? Because that seems to be what you are saying
The fact that she was a member and player sponsor long before she joined the board means nothing as well?
I have no problem with people handing out whacks but your generalisation/reasoning are not realistic because you are making sweeping statements that would appear to be factually incorrect. In this case not only towards the current president but I would suggest to fair number of members/supporters as well
My wack was more specific than that. She wouldnt have a clue what makes up the Richmond supporter base nor what constitues her definition of a noisy minority. She meets supporters at family days and she sponsored a player before she was on the board? And that qualifies her to understand what being a Richmond supporter is and what constitues the noisy minority? Spare me please.
I wasnt aware that family days are traditionally the venue Richmond supporters voice concerns. I dont know where you sit at the footy, but where I sit, the vast majority of supporters dont say the same things during the game they would repeat in front of their families at family day. In fact if Peggy sat with us, she would see first hand what the vast majority of Richmond supporters think about how the club is travelling. And that would not be any different to sitting anywhere else around the ground.
Did you go to the footy as a kid? Doesnt matter whether your dad took you or not, you would have experienced the highs and lows of being a Richmond supporter from seeing a premiership to wooden spoons and you will understand what makes a Richmond supporter more rabid and starved for success over anyone else. Are you saying that "sponsoring a player" is in the same category as watching Gary Ablett kick 14 goals against us and making you turn into a homicidal maniac? The vast majority of Richmond supporters have seen enough of these low points in our history to know that Damian Hardwick is not up to the job. Peggy clearly hasnt.
And on the subject of dishing out wacks, we have somewhat of a broke record syndrome. You were a hard advocate of Clinton Casey and Greg Miller and didnt approve of anyone serving them wacks. Maybe in your next family day conversation with Peggy you would like to share with her how the "noisy minority" lost patience with those two enforcers of stability.
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
-
Are you saying that "sponsoring a player" is in the same category as watching Gary Ablett kick 14 goals against us and making you turn into a homicidal maniac?
Lucky you weren't at VFL park when Dunstall kicked 17, it would have been carnage!
-
On the topic of whether the President gets the message from us scumbags in the outer.
Is she in touch with the fans. Of course not. You can't have your lobster at the footy and eat it too. It's not hard to work out what the great unwashed want-wins. Guess what, presidents want them too because it's the best way to get bums on seats.
I don't like celebrity presidents, but the role has changed a lot in AFL. I think you need a pres that can successfully lobby for changes that will benefit your club in areas such as the fixture or draft concessions. Sure the legal and business acumen may help but footy nous has got to be there.
We got a pretty soft draw this year for a top 8 side so maybe there is something going on behind the scenes. Not boasting about it is smart play.
-
I wasnt aware that family days are traditionally the venue Richmond supporters voice concerns. I dont know where you sit at the footy, but where I sit, the vast majority of supporters dont say the same things during the game they would repeat in front of their families at family day. In fact if Peggy sat with us, she would see first hand what the vast majority of Richmond supporters think about how the club is travelling. And that would not be any different to sitting anywhere else around the ground.
I would think that any time any member or supporter has an opportunity to voice an opinion to those in change you'd take it.
Not quite sure why you wouldn't be prepared to voice any concerns in front of your family unless of course you sole purpose is to be abusive. End of the day you have the opportunity you take it. You have the right as they are answerable to you as a member.
Did you go to the footy as a kid? Doesnt matter whether your dad took you or not, you would have experienced the highs and lows of being a Richmond supporter from seeing a premiership to wooden spoons and you will understand what makes a Richmond supporter more rabid and starved for success over anyone else. Are you saying that "sponsoring a player" is in the same category as watching Gary Ablett kick 14 goals against us and making you turn into a homicidal maniac? The vast majority of Richmond supporters have seen enough of these low points in our history to know that Damian Hardwick is not up to the job. Peggy clearly hasnt.
Yeah I did go to the footy as a kid just didn't with my Dad. You're the one who made an issue out of the fact she didn't go to the footy with her Dad. What's the relevance? None. But now you add conditions to that statement. You also said that the only her "only understanding of what a Richmond supporter is comes from sitting in the boardroom". Facts are she has been a member like you and me long before she joined the board. As for sponsoring a player, fact is she did that before joining the board as well.
I was only pointing out that she has had an involvement with the Club at a number of levels before joining the board. You are saying she hasn't. You are also implying that just because for whatever reason she hasn't been a Richmond supporter all her life that she has no understanding of anything to with the club's history, its past and its fans.
And on the subject of dishing out wacks, we have somewhat of a broke record syndrome. You were a hard advocate of Clinton Casey and Greg Miller and didnt approve of anyone serving them wacks. Maybe in your next family day conversation with Peggy you would like to share with her how the "noisy minority" lost patience with those two enforcers of stability.
Yes I backed the Casey re-election back on 2004 because back then based on the options we had, his ticket was a far better option. But I had no problem then like I don't one now with people handing out whacks.
BTW if you haven't worked out by now who the "noisy minority" are then you will never know.
FWIW I've done a fair amount of whacking myself over the last 12 months over the state of this Club. I've whacked every area of the club. So reckon I can say I have no problem with people whacking
Do I think she and her board are doing a good job, this jury is out. Do I have a problem with what she said on Sunday - no. Why? Because talks cheap and the words are just that words. It's actions that matter now.
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
Hawthons president did not grow up an rfc supporter. He is Hawthorn through and through. Where are ya getting your info from ::)
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
Hawthons president did not grow up an rfc supporter. He is Hawthorn through and through. Where are ya getting your info from ::)
Google it buddy boy, I've heard him interviewed and said as much ...both he and Colles debunk that nonsense you need to grow up on the terraces to be a good president , ::)
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
Hawthons president did not grow up an rfc supporter. He is Hawthorn through and through. Where are ya getting your info from ::)
He was indeed a Richmond supporter who changed I think in his teenage years to hawthorn.
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
Hawthons president did not grow up an rfc supporter. He is Hawthorn through and through. Where are ya getting your info from ::)
e
He was indeed a Richmond supporter who changed I think in his teenage years to hawthorn.
Obviously more intelligent than the rest of us.
-
Exhibit A
http://m.hawthornfc.com.au/news/2012-03-09/andrew-newbold-q-a
-
Exhibit A
http://m.hawthornfc.com.au/news/2012-03-09/andrew-newbold-q-a
:shh :lol
We should poach him to come home and replace Peggy Sue
-
Are you saying that "sponsoring a player" is in the same category as watching Gary Ablett kick 14 goals against us and making you turn into a homicidal maniac?
Lucky you weren't at VFL park when Dunstall kicked 17, it would have been carnage!
I was. I actually cried that day.
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
He was a Hawks supporter as a teenager. Read your own articles.
And how well did we do with Clinton Casey who was an Essendon supporter?
Whether you like it or note, Eddie has proven to be the best president in the AFL. We would be a different club if we had that type of passion running the club.
And all of this is despite the point. What I said was that Richmond, much more so than other clubs, and especially due to its turbulent history, needs a Richmond supporter as a president. Someone who doesnt stupidly mistake the vast majority for being a noisy minority.
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
-
Are you saying that "sponsoring a player" is in the same category as watching Gary Ablett kick 14 goals against us and making you turn into a homicidal maniac?
Lucky you weren't at VFL park when Dunstall kicked 17, it would have been carnage!
I was. I actually cried that day.
X2
And where was Peggy Sue? Playing with her dalmations, eating prawn cocktails and listening to Martika
-
I wasnt aware that family days are traditionally the venue Richmond supporters voice concerns. I dont know where you sit at the footy, but where I sit, the vast majority of supporters dont say the same things during the game they would repeat in front of their families at family day. In fact if Peggy sat with us, she would see first hand what the vast majority of Richmond supporters think about how the club is travelling. And that would not be any different to sitting anywhere else around the ground.
I would think that any time any member or supporter has an opportunity to voice an opinion to those in change you'd take it.
Not quite sure why you wouldn't be prepared to voice any concerns in front of your family unless of course you sole purpose is to be abusive. End of the day you have the opportunity you take it. You have the right as they are answerable to you as a member.
Did you go to the footy as a kid? Doesnt matter whether your dad took you or not, you would have experienced the highs and lows of being a Richmond supporter from seeing a premiership to wooden spoons and you will understand what makes a Richmond supporter more rabid and starved for success over anyone else. Are you saying that "sponsoring a player" is in the same category as watching Gary Ablett kick 14 goals against us and making you turn into a homicidal maniac? The vast majority of Richmond supporters have seen enough of these low points in our history to know that Damian Hardwick is not up to the job. Peggy clearly hasnt.
Yeah I did go to the footy as a kid just didn't with my Dad. You're the one who made an issue out of the fact she didn't go to the footy with her Dad. What's the relevance? None. But now you add conditions to that statement. You also said that the only her "only understanding of what a Richmond supporter is comes from sitting in the boardroom". Facts are she has been a member like you and me long before she joined the board. As for sponsoring a player, fact is she did that before joining the board as well.
I was only pointing out that she has had an involvement with the Club at a number of levels before joining the board. You are saying she hasn't. You are also implying that just because for whatever reason she hasn't been a Richmond supporter all her life that she has no understanding of anything to with the club's history, its past and its fans.
And on the subject of dishing out wacks, we have somewhat of a broke record syndrome. You were a hard advocate of Clinton Casey and Greg Miller and didnt approve of anyone serving them wacks. Maybe in your next family day conversation with Peggy you would like to share with her how the "noisy minority" lost patience with those two enforcers of stability.
Yes I backed the Casey re-election back on 2004 because back then based on the options we had, his ticket was a far better option. But I had no problem then like I don't one now with people handing out whacks.
BTW if you haven't worked out by now who the "noisy minority" are then you will never know.
FWIW I've done a fair amount of whacking myself over the last 12 months over the state of this Club. I've whacked every area of the club. So reckon I can say I have no problem with people whacking
Do I think she and her board are doing a good job, this jury is out. Do I have a problem with what she said on Sunday - no. Why? Because talks cheap and the words are just that words. It's actions that matter now.
I am curious. If you got all 60,000 members in a room this weekend and asked them whether to sack the coach at the end of the year do you think the majority would say yes or would it be just a noisy minority that had made up their minds that he is now taking us backwards?
We already know what Peggy thinks from her speech on the weekend.
How about you?
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
The unique thing about being a Richmond supporter is that we are experts in failure. We have been to enough games, seen enough losses, got belted by 157 points, seen the likes of Carey and Dermott bully us into submission, to know when a coach's time is up.
And it irks me no end when the president says its just a noisy minority. She clearly hasnt been there long enough and seen enough failures to know that this coach is finished and its not a noisy minority that thinks so. The vast majority of supporters have seen this so many times before. Clearly she hasnt or wasnt paying attention from the corporate box.
-
1980, do you know any room in Australia that can hold 68,000 members? :gobdrop
-
1980, do you know any room in Australia that can hold 68,000 members? :gobdrop
Do it at the'G ;D
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
He was a Hawks supporter as a teenager. Read your own articles.
And how well did we do with Clinton Casey who was an Essendon supporter?
Whether you like it or note, Eddie has proven to be the best president in the AFL. We would be a different club if we had that type of passion running the club.
And all of this is despite the point. What I said was that Richmond, much more so than other clubs, and especially due to its turbulent history, needs a Richmond supporter as a president. Someone who doesnt stupidly mistake the vast majority for being a noisy minority.
Naturally it's important that they're a legit RFC supporter to ensure their interions are honorable however I'd argue it's even more important that they have a vision of what success takes and even more importantly the horsepower to get it done . Flags aren't won by clubs that are a basket case off field , only a few years ago were 5 million in debt having to play games in cairns to compensate for the loss of the royal hotel. We re far from that now and have the off field stability that wouldn't be out of place amongst premierships clubs.
On field now needs to catch up , which is generally always the case , nothing strange there
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
-
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
How can you really make an assumption as to what 60k individuals would do? Again massive generalisation
In answer to your question I have no idea what over 60k people would decide. Not even going to pretend that I know. Don't think you can claim to know either.
-
I would say Hardwick started the year with 70-30 support, and has deteriorated to 40-60 against him.
-
In think what annoys most of the negative posters here is the fact that's they won't listen to the noisy minority Or the whims of the media.
Absolutely nothing wrong with what she said.
I quote what I said again. I can not see where I said any number here were the noisy minority. Peggy said that the club would not llisten to them and I said "i think" that would annoy most of the negative posters. No stats required.
Peggy Sue has never met a Richmond supporter. Her dad didnt take her to the footy. She didnt play kick to kick in the street wearing a Richmond jumper. Her entire relationship and understanding of what a Richmond supporter is comes from sitting in a board room surrounded by the kind of idiots that have made the same bad decisions for 35 years.
What the hell would she know about what constitutes a noisy minority? Was she there when the "noisy minority" held up wooden spoons when danny frawley was coaching us to death? Does she assume that supporters are happy watching the team lose 6 years into a rebuild whilst other teams like Port and the Bulldogs are speeding past us? Or does she assume that Richmond supporters will sit patiently while the club does nothing? Because history tells us that there is no such thing as a noisy minority at the Richmond Football Club.
How many of the best coaches right now like Lyon or Longmire would want to work for her? None. Is she capable of picking up the phone and recruiting an elite coach? Nope. If the club thinks it will attract more women to the club by having a female as president they are wrong. Caroline Wilson would do a better job.
What rot!
-
I would say Hardwick started the year with 70-30 support, and has deteriorated to 40-60 against him.
Agreed. Let's not dodge the issue. We all know Richmond people. We know we have under performed, and we know more people are unhappy than happy.
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
-
Hawthorns president grew up a RFC supporter , the swans former prez was previously a board member of WC, spare me of the rhetoric. ::) Why have these guys presided over successful clubs, coz they're successful people :o
He was a Hawks supporter as a teenager. Read your own articles.
And how well did we do with Clinton Casey who was an Essendon supporter?
Whether you like it or note, Eddie has proven to be the best president in the AFL. We would be a different club if we had that type of passion running the club.
And all of this is despite the point. What I said was that Richmond, much more so than other clubs, and especially due to its turbulent history, needs a Richmond supporter as a president. Someone who doesnt stupidly mistake the vast majority for being a noisy minority.
Naturally it's important that they're a legit RFC supporter to ensure their interions are honorable however I'd argue it's even more important that they have a vision of what success takes and even more importantly the horsepower to get it done . Flags aren't won by clubs that are a basket case off field , only a few years ago were 5 million in debt having to play games in cairns to compensate for the loss of the royal hotel. We re far from that now and have the off field stability that wouldn't be out of place amongst premierships clubs.
On field now needs to catch up , which is generally always the case , nothing strange there
Yes I agree BJ we need both but we obviously right now have one without the other. Most presidents seem to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Just not ours maybe.
-
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
How can you really make an assumption as to what 60k individuals would do? Again massive generalisation
In answer to your question I have no idea what over 60k people would decide. Not even going to pretend that I know. Don't think you can claim to know either.
Yeah you do. But you just dont want to agree with me.
We are talking about RFC supporters and their reactions to dud coaches like Geischen, Frawley, Wallace etc. Its not difficult to predict how they will now react to another dud coach like Hardwíck if the club keeps defending him and accusing legitimately disappointed supporters of being a "noisy minority". You know the history as well as I do. The only possible generalisation here is that you might believe that Richmond supporters have over the past 5 years changed into Demons supporters and could not GAF about losing as long as there is snow on the slopes.
-
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
How can you really make an assumption as to what 60k individuals would do? Again massive generalisation
In answer to your question I have no idea what over 60k people would decide. Not even going to pretend that I know. Don't think you can claim to know either.
it's a no brainer that the majority would want him gone. Absolute no brainer. Whoever says otherwise really has no stuffen clue
-
Yeah you do. But you just dont want to agree with me.
We are talking about RFC supporters and their reactions to dud coaches like Geischen, Frawley, Wallace etc. Its not difficult to predict how they will now react to another dud coach like Hardwíck if the club keeps defending him and accusing legitimately disappointed supporters of being a "noisy minority". You know the history as well as I do. The only possible generalisation here is that you might believe that Richmond supporters have over the past 5 years changed into Demons supporters and could not GAF about losing as long as there is snow on the slopes.
No I don't. Has nothing to do with not wanting to agree with you.
I simply don't know what the majority of people want
Was speaking to a couple of people last week at different times. One who I thought would be pro sacking because has never rated Hardwick, never wanted him as coach but now reckon he's doing OK with the cattle his got. Then the other one who's never believed in sacking coaches saying he has to go. Two people who's view are completely different to what I thought would be
So I am not going to make assumptions of what people may or may not want. I've got my view on what should happen and that's the only view along with others views on this forum that I know for sure.
Do the majority on this forum want him gone? Easy answer is YES.
Are we the majority of Richmond supporters? That answer is clearly NO.
So again I don't believe you can claim the "Majority" want something when you, me or anyone else cannot speak for them because none of us know
-
There are probably more people on this forum that don't want Hardwick sacked but they don't say as much because of the vitriol that would follow.
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured. However, a contract extension is not what I want at this stage either.
-
Yeah you do. But you just dont want to agree with me.
We are talking about RFC supporters and their reactions to dud coaches like Geischen, Frawley, Wallace etc. Its not difficult to predict how they will now react to another dud coach like Hardwíck if the club keeps defending him and accusing legitimately disappointed supporters of being a "noisy minority". You know the history as well as I do. The only possible generalisation here is that you might believe that Richmond supporters have over the past 5 years changed into Demons supporters and could not GAF about losing as long as there is snow on the slopes.
No I don't. Has nothing to do with not wanting to agree with you.
I simply don't know what the majority of people want
Was speaking to a couple of people last week at different times. One who I thought would be pro sacking because has never rated Hardwick, never wanted him as coach but now reckon he's doing OK with the cattle his got. Then the other one who's never believed in sacking coaches saying he has to go. Two people who's view are completely different to what I thought would be
So I am not going to make assumptions of what people may or may not want. I've got my view on what should happen and that's the only view along with others views on this forum that I know for sure.
Do the majority on this forum want him gone? Easy answer is YES.
Are we the majority of Richmond supporters? That answer is clearly NO.
So again I don't believe you can claim the "Majority" want something when you, me or anyone else cannot speak for them because none of us know
Ok so we agree to disagree on what you think the majoroty of Richmond supporters want.
But thats not what I asked you. In the historical context of the Richmond footy club, which you are extremely well versed in. And with the benefit of hindsight. Did the vast majority of supporters want Frawley and Wallace sacked in their 5th year of coaching? And why would these same supporters now behave any differently after 5 years of Hardwick?
-
Lets get a petition happening to turf out the board
-
]
Ok so we agree to disagree on what you think the majoroty of Richmond supporters want.
But thats not what I asked you. In the historical context of the Richmond footy club, which you are extremely well versed in. And with the benefit of hindsight. Did the vast majority of supporters want Frawley and Wallace sacked in their 5th year of coaching? And why would these same supporters now behave any differently after 5 years of Hardwick?
Actually don't think that's what you asked but anyways....
FWIW and IMHO
Frawley = Yes, we'd clearly gone backwards
Wallace = Yes, same as above
Hardwick = will repeat what I've said before I don't know. I don't think he has the same level of support as he had say end of 2013 but does that equate to the "majority"? again my answer is I don't know
-
While the vast majority may (though I doubt it) say Hardwick needs to go, you then have the problem of what follows. The choice of a replacement would create more factions than you can imagine. It's the same trick that Howard used to neuter the Republican cause. Give them a number of options and watch them fragment. Or try the Islamic factions.
"taking us backwards in the past couple of years" is just factually incorrect. He's got us to finals in the last couple of years. I don't think that's been achieved in decades at Richmond.
I can really appreciate where WP is coming from.
We were among the less than 10 members who voted against the board changing the constitution to allow them to appoint a third of the board.
You either voted for it or condoned by abstaining. Suck it up and accept it - the board and sponsors control this club not the members.
-
"taking us backwards in the past couple of years" is just factually incorrect. He's got us to finals in the last couple of years. I don't think that's been achieved in decades at Richmond.
Thanks for the timely reminder.
I have had to explain to the simple minded on here many times the statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend over the last five years.
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
How do you come to that half wit conclusion?
Oh I see you have assumed that I make assumptions like yourself, and that there is only two possibilities at that.
You have just dragged yourself into George Bush type stupidity
Seems as you find it easier to come up with simpleton conclusions rather than answer a simple question, here's something to ponder...
what do you call it when one person bags someone else for making an unsupported assumption, then makes the exact opposite unsupported assumption themselves to say the first person was wrong?
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
How do you come to that half wit conclusion?
Oh I see you have assumed that I make assumptions like yourself, and that there is only two possibilities at that.
You have just dragged yourself into George Bush type stupidity
Seems as you find it easier to come up with simpleton conclusions rather than answer a simple question, here's something to ponder...
what do you call it when one person bags someone else for making an unsupported assumption, then makes the exact opposite unsupported assumption themselves to say the first person was wrong?
A OER forum?
-
Thanks for the timely reminder.
I have had to explain to the simple minded on here many times the statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend over the last five years.
Simply because I noted a factually incorrect assumption - taking us backwards - does not mean I support Hardwick.
The "statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend" means nothing.
Competitive sport is rife with evidence that trends mean nothing. Simply within the AFL look at Port, Suns, Carlton, Bulldogs, Saints, Eagles, Adelaide, Lions, Giants.*
That's half the competition defying trends based on last year.
* at this point
-
Thanks for the timely reminder.
I have had to explain to the simple minded on here many times the statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend over the last five years.
Simply because I noted a factually incorrect assumption - taking us backwards - does not mean I support Hardwick.
The "statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend" means nothing.
Competitive sport is rife with evidence that trends mean nothing. Simply within the AFL look at Port, Suns, Carlton, Bulldogs, Saints, Eagles, Adelaide, Lions, Giants.*
That's half the competition defying trends based on last year.
* at this point
Of course, but it is important that people blurting out untruths are brought up quick smart
-
Thanks for the timely reminder.
I have had to explain to the simple minded on here many times the statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend over the last five years.
Simply because I noted a factually incorrect assumption - taking us backwards - does not mean I support Hardwick.
The "statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend" means nothing.
Competitive sport is rife with evidence that trends mean nothing. Simply within the AFL look at Port, Suns, Carlton, Bulldogs, Saints, Eagles, Adelaide, Lions, Giants.*
That's half the competition defying trends based on last year.
* at this point
Of course, but it is important that people blurting out untruths are brought up quick smart
Yep, but that doesn't mean there's a "trend" guaranteeing success or even upwards trajectory
-
Thanks for the timely reminder.
I have had to explain to the simple minded on here many times the statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend over the last five years.
Simply because I noted a factually incorrect assumption - taking us backwards - does not mean I support Hardwick.
The "statistical trend on a linear plot graph on our trend" means nothing.
Competitive sport is rife with evidence that trends mean nothing. Simply within the AFL look at Port, Suns, Carlton, Bulldogs, Saints, Eagles, Adelaide, Lions, Giants.*
That's half the competition defying trends based on last year.
* at this point
Of course, but it is important that people blurting out untruths are brought up quick smart
Yep, but that doesn't mean there's a "trend" guaranteeing success or even upwards trajectory
Given we are talking about the RFC I also agree with that
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
How do you come to that half wit conclusion?
Oh I see you have assumed that I make assumptions like yourself, and that there is only two possibilities at that.
You have just dragged yourself into George Bush type stupidity
Seems as you find it easier to come up with simpleton conclusions rather than answer a simple question, here's something to ponder...
what do you call it when one person bags someone else for making an unsupported assumption, then makes the exact opposite unsupported assumption themselves to say the first person was wrong?
I call it debating on a football forum.
So do you or do you not support that we will win a premiership with Damian Hardiwck? In this context, no other possibilities are being debated. Just the issue of whether supporters want him replaced or whether its just a noisy minority causing trouble for what our presidesent considers to be the vast majority of sensible supporters.
If you want your name calling to have any impact, back it up with an opinion on the subject.
-
]
Ok so we agree to disagree on what you think the majoroty of Richmond supporters want.
But thats not what I asked you. In the historical context of the Richmond footy club, which you are extremely well versed in. And with the benefit of hindsight. Did the vast majority of supporters want Frawley and Wallace sacked in their 5th year of coaching? And why would these same supporters now behave any differently after 5 years of Hardwick?
Actually don't think that's what you asked but anyways....
FWIW and IMHO
Frawley = Yes, we'd clearly gone backwards
Wallace = Yes, same as above
Hardwick = will repeat what I've said before I don't know. I don't think he has the same level of support as he had say end of 2013 but does that equate to the "majority"? again my answer is I don't know
OK WP. A fair and reasonable response that I completely take at face value.
I'll ask a completely different question. If it was your decision alone, would you replace him at the end of the season or let him see out his contract?
-
I think some research is required before we decide if it is noisy minority or vast majority that wants Hardwick sacked.
It must have vigour, a decent sampling size to reduce the margin of error and have random selection of participants.
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
How do you come to that half wit conclusion?
Oh I see you have assumed that I make assumptions like yourself, and that there is only two possibilities at that.
You have just dragged yourself into George Bush type stupidity
Seems as you find it easier to come up with simpleton conclusions rather than answer a simple question, here's something to ponder...
what do you call it when one person bags someone else for making an unsupported assumption, then makes the exact opposite unsupported assumption themselves to say the first person was wrong?
I call it debating on a football forum.
So do you or do you not support that we will win a premiership with Damian Hardiwck? In this context, no other possibilities are being debated. Just the issue of whether supporters want him replaced or whether its just a noisy minority causing trouble for what our presidesent considers to be the vast majority of sensible supporters.
If you want your name calling to have any impact, back it up with an opinion on the subject.
LMAO,
In what alternate reality is bagging someone's assumption as being uniformed, then using your own uninformed assumption as proof they are wrong regarded as debating?
name calling? lmao
My opinion is 1 person just as yours is, and i am not presumptuous enough to think that everyone else thinks the same. so it is irrelevant.
The question at hand is what everyone else thinks, which you think you know, but you cant tell us how you know.
Nothing more, nothing less.
-
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured.....
Of course it must. Of course
-
I hope Peggy Sue Winfrey took note of what Fathead just said on Fox Footy during the discussion about Carlton and Malthouse regarding club presidents showing leadership...
-
Peggy Sue Winfrey needs to take note of what Fathead just said on Fox Footy during the discussion about Carlton annd Malthouse regarding Club Presidents showing leadership...
Peggy Sue Bornhoffen wouldn't know what Fox Footy is, let alone Carlton
-
Anyone who was at the cocktail party knows we need a new President immediately.
Insipid, ineloquent, uninspiring and a sheer inability to connect with the club.
-
Anyone who was at the cocktail party knows we need a new President immediately.
Insipid, ineloquent, uninspiring and a sheer inability to connect with the club.
Inability to connect with others too
-
Anyone who was at the cocktail party knows we need a new President immediately.
Insipid, ineloquent, uninspiring and a sheer inability to connect with the club.
When did you draw that conclusion, after the 7th or 8th free beer :lol
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
How do you come to that half wit conclusion?
Oh I see you have assumed that I make assumptions like yourself, and that there is only two possibilities at that.
You have just dragged yourself into George Bush type stupidity
Seems as you find it easier to come up with simpleton conclusions rather than answer a simple question, here's something to ponder...
what do you call it when one person bags someone else for making an unsupported assumption, then makes the exact opposite unsupported assumption themselves to say the first person was wrong?
I call it debating on a football forum.
So do you or do you not support that we will win a premiership with Damian Hardiwck? In this context, no other possibilities are being debated. Just the issue of whether supporters want him replaced or whether its just a noisy minority causing trouble for what our presidesent considers to be the vast majority of sensible supporters.
If you want your name calling to have any impact, back it up with an opinion on the subject.
LMAO,
In what alternate reality is bagging someone's assumption as being uniformed, then using your own uninformed assumption as proof they are wrong regarded as debating?
name calling? lmao
My opinion is 1 person just as yours is, and i am not presumptuous enough to think that everyone else thinks the same. so it is irrelevant.
The question at hand is what everyone else thinks, which you think you know, but you cant tell us how you know.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Ok I'll bite.
I take issue with the president making an assumption that its only a noisy majority of supporters that dont support Hardwick and you take issue with me that I made an assumption that her assumption is wrong. So if you think just one person cannot make these assumptions, you should also take issue with President Peg doing the very same thing.
More importantly however, you cannot keep hiding behind your "But I'm just one man" argument. Its entirely disingenuious. I asked you if you thought we'd win a premiership under Hardiwck and you ran away from answering. I look forward to your opinon on this matter. We can agree beforehand that it does not represent the vast majority of opinion.
BTW is you nic Al in honor of Al Bundy? I'd be wasting my time on you if it is.
-
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured.....
Of course it must. Of course
It's pretty hard to attract quality coaches to your club if you are renown for breaking contracts. That's why bomber knocked us back. It's also an expensive exercise. And call me old fashioned but I think if you offer a contract, you should honour it.
-
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured.....
Of course it must. Of course
It's pretty hard to attract quality coaches to your club if you are renown for breaking contracts. That's why bomber knocked us back. It's also an expensive exercise. And call me old fashioned but I think if you offer a contract, you should honour it.
Great logic. How on earth did Freo get Ross Lyon after they broke Mark Harvey's contract? How did Melbourne attract Paul Roos after they broke Mark Neeld's contract?
-
Anyone who was at the cocktail party knows we need a new President immediately.
Insipid, ineloquent, uninspiring and a sheer inability to connect with the club.
When did you draw that conclusion, after the 7th or 8th free beer :lol
I'd probably had 15 by that stage.
Did you go? Her 'speech' was bloody embarrassing.
I was standing next to Alex Rance and after she spoke he said Stuff this, I'm out of here.
-
Anyone who was at the cocktail party knows we need a new President immediately.
Insipid, ineloquent, uninspiring and a sheer inability to connect with the club.
When did you draw that conclusion, after the 7th or 8th free beer :lol
I'd probably had 15 by that stage.
Did you go? Her 'speech' was bloody embarrassing.
I was standing next to Alex Rance and after she spoke he said Stuff this, I'm out of here.
Do JWs swear?
-
just curious about you decide it is the vast majority?
Just answered that question to WP.
You put 60,000 members in a room and the vast majority will say Hardwick needs to go as he is taking us backwards in the past couple of years.
that doesn't answer how you came to the conclusion. it is merely another assumption similar to the first.
So how do you draw this conclusion?
So I take it you are assuming the exact opposite of what I am proposing? That most Richmond supporters think we will win a premiership with Damian Hardwick? Common say it.
How do you come to that half wit conclusion?
Oh I see you have assumed that I make assumptions like yourself, and that there is only two possibilities at that.
You have just dragged yourself into George Bush type stupidity
Seems as you find it easier to come up with simpleton conclusions rather than answer a simple question, here's something to ponder...
what do you call it when one person bags someone else for making an unsupported assumption, then makes the exact opposite unsupported assumption themselves to say the first person was wrong?
I call it debating on a football forum.
So do you or do you not support that we will win a premiership with Damian Hardiwck? In this context, no other possibilities are being debated. Just the issue of whether supporters want him replaced or whether its just a noisy minority causing trouble for what our presidesent considers to be the vast majority of sensible supporters.
If you want your name calling to have any impact, back it up with an opinion on the subject.
LMAO,
In what alternate reality is bagging someone's assumption as being uniformed, then using your own uninformed assumption as proof they are wrong regarded as debating?
name calling? lmao
My opinion is 1 person just as yours is, and i am not presumptuous enough to think that everyone else thinks the same. so it is irrelevant.
The question at hand is what everyone else thinks, which you think you know, but you cant tell us how you know.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Ok I'll bite.
I take issue with the president making an assumption that its only a noisy majority of supporters that dont support Hardwick and you take issue with me that I made an assumption that her assumption is wrong. So if you think just one person cannot make these assumptions, you should also take issue with President Peg doing the very same thing.
More importantly however, you cannot keep hiding behind your "But I'm just one man" argument. Its entirely disingenuious. I asked you if you thought we'd win a premiership under Hardiwck and you ran away from answering. I look forward to your opinon on this matter. We can agree beforehand that it does not represent the vast majority of opinion.
BTW is you nic Al in honor of Al Bundy? I'd be wasting my time on you if it is.
I've spelt out what i was questioning but you still dont get it and go off on some weird tangent again?
i will ask the question again, maybe you will get it.
"how do you decide it is the vast majority?"
pretty simple question really.
everything else is irrelevant, including my view about hardwicks coaching, on which i have stated previously so I'm not hiding behind anything.
You are the one not answering the question and hiding behind feigned stupidity
-
OK WP. A fair and reasonable response that I completely take at face value.
I'll ask a completely different question. If it was your decision alone, would you replace him at the end of the season or let him see out his contract?
Traditionally I am believer in honouring contracts but I am now more open to not honouring this contract than I would have been 12 months ago
Depends on results TBBH.
if we make finals and win one then yes he sees out his contract. But under NO circumstances would I consider an extension
If we make finals and again go out 1st round I'd be more likely to honour the contract than to sack. 3 finals appearances in a row is something no one would have achieved since Hafey. But I would want to see is a senior assistant come in, really don't know why they haven't done that already
If we don't make finals this year, then I'd seriously look at moving him on but only if there was a guarantee of getting a top liner to replace him.
Also have to consider the debacle that we are witnessing with the GC Suns. Don't think we want to end up in that situation.
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
-
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured.....
Of course it must. Of course
It's pretty hard to attract quality coaches to your club if you are renown for breaking contracts. That's why bomber knocked us back. It's also an expensive exercise. And call me old fashioned but I think if you offer a contract, you should honour it.
Great logic. How on earth did Freo get Ross Lyon after they broke Mark Harvey's contract? How did Melbourne attract Paul Roos after they broke Mark Neeld's contract?
My logic is not based on what Fremantle and Sydney have done, its based on what we have done. Fact is, we got Hardwick because no-one else wanted us. We had to offer Wallace 5 years because he needed some security in case he got the green grass. Our reputation for sacking coaches has hurt us, financially and as a career prospect.
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
And when to up the stakes
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
I guess, but I guess my point was, kinda, people know Hardwick isn't going to take us forward, they are just waiting for a few more losses before admitting. Very safe.
-
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured.....
Of course it must. Of course
It's pretty hard to attract quality coaches to your club if you are renown for breaking contracts. That's why bomber knocked us back. It's also an expensive exercise. And call me old fashioned but I think if you offer a contract, you should honour it.
Great logic. How on earth did Freo get Ross Lyon after they broke Mark Harvey's contract? How did Melbourne attract Paul Roos after they broke Mark Neeld's contract?
My logic is not based on what Fremantle and Sydney have done, its based on what we have done. Fact is, we got Hardwick because no-one else wanted us. We had to offer Wallace 5 years because he needed some security in case he got the green grass. Our reputation for sacking coaches has hurt us, financially and as a career prospect.
I reckon this is outdated thinking on 2 levels:-
1. The landscape has changed, way too much money in coaching now. Freo have a poor record with regard to sacking coaches - Neesham, Connolly - Drum found out from the media
2. Even if you debated point 1, we actually haven't sacked a coach before the end of their contract in 16 years. Frawley and Wallace weren't renewed, Hardwicks has been renewed twice. If anything, we are too secure now
Bottom line, the era of the gun coaches restricted to the elite few finished with Malthouse.
You can pick from a diverse selection of senior assistant coached and as Hinkley, Richardson and Walsh are showing, age isn't much of a barrier.
Assistant coaches are better developed, have more experience and generally are better creditionalled than ever to hit the ground running as senior coaches.
I'd argue the coaches I've mentioned are better creditionalled than Dimma right now.
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
I guess, but I guess my point was, kinda, people know Hardwick isn't going to take us forward, they are just waiting for a few more losses before admitting. Very safe.
Who are you referring to?
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
I guess, but I guess my point was, kinda, people know Hardwick isn't going to take us forward, they are just waiting for a few more losses before admitting. Very safe.
Or, perhaps, people don't get any enjoyment or satisfaction for ranting on the Sack Hardwick thread and prefer to just let things play it's course seeing as he already has a contract and it's abundantly clear nothing is going to change with that in the meantime.
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
I guess, but I guess my point was, kinda, people know Hardwick isn't going to take us forward, they are just waiting for a few more losses before admitting. Very safe.
Or, perhaps, people don't get any enjoyment or satisfaction for ranting on the Sack Hardwick thread and prefer to just let things play it's course seeing as he already has a contract and it's abundantly clear nothing is going to change with that in the meantime.
I don't think I've been necessarily ranting, perhaps my statements are uncomfortable to consider, and there's no other way to address them.....but I digress......
I find communicating, discussing, debating and rationalising things to be natural, as a member of the human race. Irrespective of whether something may not occur. Opinions are interesting and Impart knowledge by addition and deduction.
If that is in some way doesn't sit comfortably in this situation then maybe come back to this thread once a decision is about to be made and you can have your say then. :cheers
-
often, opinions impart more knowledge about the person that made them rather than the subject they are formed about.
-
often, opinions impart more knowledge about the person that made them rather than the subject they are formed about.
Sometimes. Sometimes a lack of opinion but a lot of talk and background noise paints a pretty accurate picture too.
The psychology is fascinating :)
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
I guess, but I guess my point was, kinda, people know Hardwick isn't going to take us forward, they are just waiting for a few more losses before admitting. Very safe.
Or, perhaps, people don't get any enjoyment or satisfaction for ranting on the Sack Hardwick thread and prefer to just let things play it's course seeing as he already has a contract and it's abundantly clear nothing is going to change with that in the meantime.
I don't think I've been necessarily ranting, perhaps my statements are uncomfortable to consider, and there's no other way to address them.....but I digress......
I find communicating, discussing, debating and rationalising things to be natural, as a member of the human race. Irrespective of whether something may not occur. Opinions are interesting and Impart knowledge by addition and deduction.
If that is in some way doesn't sit comfortably in this situation then maybe come back to this thread once a decision is about to be made and you can have your say then. :cheers
Wasn't singling you out about the ranting, more just a generalisation of what's been going on in that thread.
I've had my say so not sure why I have to come back later? I don't like Hardwick anymore I think we now need to go and get someone better but I don't see the point in dumping him mid-year. We aren't going to get anyone good mid-year it just won't happen. That's my opinion and just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean I'm a fence sitter and waiting for things to unfold
-
A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.
You've got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.
I guess, but I guess my point was, kinda, people know Hardwick isn't going to take us forward, they are just waiting for a few more losses before admitting. Very safe.
Or, perhaps, people don't get any enjoyment or satisfaction for ranting on the Sack Hardwick thread and prefer to just let things play it's course seeing as he already has a contract and it's abundantly clear nothing is going to change with that in the meantime.
I don't think I've been necessarily ranting, perhaps my statements are uncomfortable to consider, and there's no other way to address them.....but I digress......
I find communicating, discussing, debating and rationalising things to be natural, as a member of the human race. Irrespective of whether something may not occur. Opinions are interesting and Impart knowledge by addition and deduction.
If that is in some way doesn't sit comfortably in this situation then maybe come back to this thread once a decision is about to be made and you can have your say then. :cheers
Wasn't singling you out about the ranting, more just a generalisation of what's been going on in that thread.
I've had my say so not sure why I have to come back later? I don't like Hardwick anymore I think we now need to go and get someone better but I don't see the point in dumping him mid-year. We aren't going to get anyone good mid-year it just won't happen. That's my opinion and just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean I'm a fence sitter and waiting for things to unfold
Fair enough
-
As long as Hardwick, Hackson, Hartley & Richardson are all gone before the next trade & draft period, otherwise it'll be three year extensions to Grigg, Vickery & Morris , another year for Newman, more sympathy years for Foley & Knights, Armfield, Ellard & Garland f.a., injury-prone skinny flanker first pick, second rounder for Ayce Cordy and still no decent small forward amongst the magic beans......
-
As long as Hardwick, Hackson, Hartley & Richardson are all gone before the next trade & draft period, otherwise it'll be three year extensions to Grigg, Vickery & Morris , another year for Newman, more sympathy years for Foley & Knights, Armfield, Ellard & Garland f.a., injury-prone skinny flanker first pick, second rounder for Ayce Cordy and still no decent small forward amongst the magic beans......
one could riducule this post, unfortunately some of us know all too well this is close to the money :clapping
-
often, opinions impart more knowledge about the person that made them rather than the subject they are formed about.
Sometimes. Sometimes a lack of opinion but a lot of talk and background noise paints a pretty accurate picture too.
The psychology is fascinating :)
yeah it is, but who do you keep referring to for not having an opinion and on what subject specifically.
As a side note, should opinion be informed or do you advocate and encourage people to sprout uninformed opinions?
-
As long as Hardwick, Hackson, Hartley & Richardson are all gone before the next trade & draft period, otherwise it'll be three year extensions to Grigg, Vickery & Morris , another year for Newman, more sympathy years for Foley & Knights, Armfield, Ellard & Garland f.a., injury-prone skinny flanker first pick, second rounder for Ayce Cordy and still no decent small forward amongst the magic beans......
one could riducule this post, unfortunately some of us know all too well this is close to the money :clapping
Yes :dancingpickle we do :lightning
-
I wouldn't bet on it :shh
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
-
right about now i am concerned the sun wont rise in the morning
-
right about now i am concerned the sun wont rise in the morning
So we stuffed up our father-sun pick as well?
-
often, opinions impart more knowledge about the person that made them rather than the subject they are formed about.
Sometimes. Sometimes a lack of opinion but a lot of talk and background noise paints a pretty accurate picture too.
The psychology is fascinating :)
yeah it is, but who do you keep referring to for not having an opinion and on what subject specifically.
As a side note, should opinion be informed or do you advocate and encourage people to sprout uninformed opinions?
I dunno. Everybody do what you want I really don't care
-
i think you do.....
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
Monday? I was thinking Tuesday myself
As for 2016, reckon unless she's planning on quitting she ain't going anywhere ;D
-
My logic is not based on what Fremantle and Sydney have done, its based on what we have done. Fact is, we got Hardwick because no-one else wanted us. We had to offer Wallace 5 years because he needed some security in case he got the green grass. Our reputation for sacking coaches has hurt us, financially and as a career prospect.
Absolutely agree with this.
We (supporters) can argue as much as we like that we haven't sacked a coach for over a decade.
Yes Wallace "resigned", Frawley saw out his contract.
But the fact remains our reputation in the 20-30 years prior defined our Club and it has impacted on our ability to attract people to our Club.
As for fence sitting. Do I think Hardwick will take us to a flag? No I don't but as Yeahright said I cannot see the point of getting rid of him now, mid season. It achieves nothing but the normal carry on about the RFc sacking coaches.
Let's get through the season and see where we are, what we have achieved and then make a decision
-
It won't matter if we sack him mid-season or at the end. He has a contract until the end of 2016 so unless he coaches until then he will be sacked.
-
I don't want Hardwick sacked, a contract is a contract and it must be honoured.....
Of course it must. Of course
It's pretty hard to attract quality coaches to your club if you are renown for breaking contracts. That's why bomber knocked us back. It's also an expensive exercise. And call me old fashioned but I think if you offer a contract, you should honour it.
Great logic. How on earth did Freo get Ross Lyon after they broke Mark Harvey's contract? How did Melbourne attract Paul Roos after they broke Mark Neeld's contract?
My logic is not based on what Fremantle and Sydney have done, its based on what we have done. Fact is, we got Hardwick because no-one else wanted us. We had to offer Wallace 5 years because he needed some security in case he got the green grass. Our reputation for sacking coaches has hurt us, financially and as a career prospect.
Are you serious? We had both Hinkley and Richardson apply for the job and were shortlisted. We picked Hardwick over both of them!!!
-
often, opinions impart more knowledge about the person that made them rather than the subject they are formed about.
Sometimes. Sometimes a lack of opinion but a lot of talk and background noise paints a pretty accurate picture too.
The psychology is fascinating :)
You two should "get a room fun boys" ;D
-
My logic is not based on what Fremantle and Sydney have done, its based on what we have done. Fact is, we got Hardwick because no-one else wanted us. We had to offer Wallace 5 years because he needed some security in case he got the green grass. Our reputation for sacking coaches has hurt us, financially and as a career prospect.
Absolutely agree with this.
We (supporters) can argue as much as we like that we haven't sacked a coach for over a decade.
Yes Wallace "resigned", Frawley saw out his contract.
But the fact remains our reputation in the 20-30 years prior defined our Club and it has impacted on our ability to attract people to our Club.
As for fence sitting. Do I think Hardwick will take us to a flag? No I don't but as Yeahright said I cannot see the point of getting rid of him now, mid season. It achieves nothing but the normal carry on about the RFc sacking coaches.
Let's get through the season and see where we are, what we have achieved and then make a decision
It has in the past impacted our ability to attract people to the club. We certainly would not have had Frawley as coach if we didnt have the reputation, but we have had our pick of coaches with Wallace (we beat out his old club Hawthorn for him) and Hardwick as well as assistants etc.
We more than any other club have consecutively given 3 different coaches a chance to build a team over 5 years. I doubt that kind of reputation puts off people coming to the club today.
-
Not sure WP has has enough sleep 1980 is spot on. Who wouldn't knock back a 5 year deal for doing SFA which the last 3 have done. I can only think if bucks declining the job but his pies job was already signed up.
Sack him now and we are in the running for Worsfold. His the man IMO to turn this disaster of a club around
We are avoiding the inevitable which will come anyway so send him on his way
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
The Sun has risen today
Bring on Monday #byemick
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
Monday? I was thinking Tuesday myself
As for 2016, reckon unless she's planning on quitting she ain't going anywhere ;D
Malcolm Speed
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
Monday? I was thinking Tuesday myself
As for 2016, reckon unless she's planning on quitting she ain't going anywhere ;D
Malcolm Speed
Are you implying a challenge from Mr Speed?
Aint going to happen
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
Monday? I was thinking Tuesday myself
As for 2016, reckon unless she's planning on quitting she ain't going anywhere ;D
Malcolm Speed
Are you implying a challenge from Mr Speed?
Aint going to happen
I reckon he doesn't rate Peggy Sue
-
There are 3 Certainties in life
Sun will rise in the morning
Mick will get the flick on Monday
Peggy won't be at Punt Rd in 2016 ;)
Monday? I was thinking Tuesday myself
As for 2016, reckon unless she's planning on quitting she ain't going anywhere ;D
Malcolm Speed
should have got the job the last time.
-
I was hoping Speed would get it the first time round, not concerned with O'Neal either way. I'm happy for someone to run the club like a business, with their head and not their heart, as long as there is a please explain directed at the football side when needed when that department isn't pulling their weight.
-
I was hoping Speed would get it the first time round, not concerned with O'Neal either way. I'm happy for someone to run the club like a business, with their head and not their heart, as long as there is a please explain directed at the football side when needed when that department isn't pulling their weight.
like now you mean? She has already spoken and its far less convincing that one of claw's post match essays. She's gotta go
-
Well Peggy has done well over the last 4 weeks. With that hamstring injury behind her, she has helped the tiges get over the line against more fancied opponents.
She puts more intense training as the reason for the turn around in form, "Damian told be just to go out and enjoy myself on the ground. I've done just that and it has eerily silenced all the critics!"
Benny Gale has been elated with the turn around in the president's fortunes too. "We knew she had it in her. We knew she could turn the ship around!" :snidegrin :snidegrin :snidegrin
-
:lol