Richmond president Peggy O’Neal says Tigers united behind coach Hardwick (H-Sun)

[The Big Richo]

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 

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.

[Go Richo 12]

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 

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?

[Penelope]

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

[WilliamPowell]

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.
 

[🏅Dooks]

A lot of fence sitting and card holding in this thread.

[Go Richo 12]

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.

[Go Richo 12]

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.

[Chuck17]

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

[🏅Dooks]

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.

[Hard Roar Tiger]

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.

[Penelope]

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?

[Yeahright]

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.

[🏅Dooks]

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. 

[Penelope]

often, opinions impart more knowledge about the person that made them rather than the subject they are formed about.

[🏅Dooks]

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