Welcome everyone to One-Eyed Richmond's Tiger Forum Cheers from mightytiges and WilliamPowell.
Wow, Balm was just saying on SEN that he'll remain on the list for the rest of this season so he actually hasent been delisted as such!I'm not sure why or how but this now makes the whole thing look like a bigger joke
Quite surprised they didnt keep up the smoke screen until after the board elections. Chris can now concentrate on dealing and fixing his issues and thats great.Now my beef is with this basket case of a club...who is responsible for putting us into this situation? By responsible I mean, who put forward the idea and who signed off on it, because taking into account 1. 2 year extrension before this year to our coach2. 2 year extrension then given to Hampson, prior to review which quite clearly pointed to the football dept not being up to par with its desicions3. The review ending up with most of the football staff hired being marched outand now this, I cant understand how there are people at the club still employed in their positions. i.e. Dan Richardson and Blair Hartley to name 2.I have heard the SEN grab with Balme with Ralph and its pretty concerning that his usual calm self was put to the side today...tipping he didnt know what he signed on for as well...we are in deep poo with this board pulling swifty after swiftyIts crystal cleat that the current CEO and the board he steers, has no idea on how to build a footy team...they might be good at bringing out nice pics of graphs and promoting our standing in the community but when it comes to football they miss the mark by a very very long way
Quote from: YellowandBlackBlood on November 22, 2016, 09:13:45 PMQuote from: Ruanaidh on November 22, 2016, 08:51:25 PMCalled it before we recruited him. I wanted Dunkley with that pick.What?You would have given up two seconds rounders for Dunkley?I say rubbish! Because in the end pick 31 would never have got Dunkley.....Clarify that statement. Are you saying I didn't state that at the time? I always wanted Dunkley with our 2nd rounder. The fact that we improved our draft position to 19 by including a future 2nd round pick in prior negotiations never altered my position.
Quote from: Ruanaidh on November 22, 2016, 08:51:25 PMCalled it before we recruited him. I wanted Dunkley with that pick.What?You would have given up two seconds rounders for Dunkley?I say rubbish! Because in the end pick 31 would never have got Dunkley.....
Called it before we recruited him. I wanted Dunkley with that pick.
Quote from: Ruanaidh on November 23, 2016, 09:17:35 AMQuote from: YellowandBlackBlood on November 22, 2016, 09:13:45 PMQuote from: Ruanaidh on November 22, 2016, 08:51:25 PMCalled it before we recruited him. I wanted Dunkley with that pick.What?You would have given up two seconds rounders for Dunkley?I say rubbish! Because in the end pick 31 would never have got Dunkley.....Clarify that statement. Are you saying I didn't state that at the time? I always wanted Dunkley with our 2nd rounder. The fact that we improved our draft position to 19 by including a future 2nd round pick in prior negotiations never altered my position.I'm saying that they only traded for pick 19 to get Yarran. If they wanted Dunkley, they would either have picked him at 12 or hoped he slid to 31. There is no way known they would have done the trade to get 19 for Dunkley. That is reality. What you are saying was never a real option. So what is the purpose of staying something that would never ever have occurred?
Quote from: Loui Tufga on November 23, 2016, 09:22:02 AMWow, Balm was just saying on SEN that he'll remain on the list for the rest of this season so he actually hasent been delisted as such!I'm not sure why or how but this now makes the whole thing look like a bigger joke Ok...now I'm slightly annoyed....
Quote from: YellowandBlackBlood on November 23, 2016, 12:58:01 PMQuote from: Ruanaidh on November 23, 2016, 09:17:35 AMQuote from: YellowandBlackBlood on November 22, 2016, 09:13:45 PMQuote from: Ruanaidh on November 22, 2016, 08:51:25 PMCalled it before we recruited him. I wanted Dunkley with that pick.What?You would have given up two seconds rounders for Dunkley?I say rubbish! Because in the end pick 31 would never have got Dunkley.....Clarify that statement. Are you saying I didn't state that at the time? I always wanted Dunkley with our 2nd rounder. The fact that we improved our draft position to 19 by including a future 2nd round pick in prior negotiations never altered my position.I'm saying that they only traded for pick 19 to get Yarran. If they wanted Dunkley, they would either have picked him at 12 or hoped he slid to 31. There is no way known they would have done the trade to get 19 for Dunkley. That is reality. What you are saying was never a real option. So what is the purpose of staying something that would never ever have occurred?Late in negotiations (after the horse trading to get 19) they still had time to come to their senses (act on adverse Yarran info) and keep 19 which would have enabled the selection of Dunkley. You're acting as if this scenario was an impossibility when indeed it was the correct course of action in order to extricate themselves from the parlous situation they found themselves in.
Quote from: Ruanaidh on November 23, 2016, 01:27:06 PMQuote from: YellowandBlackBlood on November 23, 2016, 12:58:01 PMQuote from: Ruanaidh on November 23, 2016, 09:17:35 AMQuote from: YellowandBlackBlood on November 22, 2016, 09:13:45 PMQuote from: Ruanaidh on November 22, 2016, 08:51:25 PMCalled it before we recruited him. I wanted Dunkley with that pick.What?You would have given up two seconds rounders for Dunkley?I say rubbish! Because in the end pick 31 would never have got Dunkley.....Clarify that statement. Are you saying I didn't state that at the time? I always wanted Dunkley with our 2nd rounder. The fact that we improved our draft position to 19 by including a future 2nd round pick in prior negotiations never altered my position.I'm saying that they only traded for pick 19 to get Yarran. If they wanted Dunkley, they would either have picked him at 12 or hoped he slid to 31. There is no way known they would have done the trade to get 19 for Dunkley. That is reality. What you are saying was never a real option. So what is the purpose of staying something that would never ever have occurred?Late in negotiations (after the horse trading to get 19) they still had time to come to their senses (act on adverse Yarran info) and keep 19 which would have enabled the selection of Dunkley. You're acting as if this scenario was an impossibility when indeed it was the correct course of action in order to extricate themselves from the parlous situation they found themselves in.Imagine if we had of caved and gave up pick 12.........
Quote from: Yeahright on November 23, 2016, 07:25:23 AMQuote from: Dookster on November 22, 2016, 10:05:43 PMI am in a sort of complicated shockThe same sort of shock you get from a rusty trumboneHow do you know that?
Quote from: Dookster on November 22, 2016, 10:05:43 PMI am in a sort of complicated shockThe same sort of shock you get from a rusty trumbone
I am in a sort of complicated shock
He'll be our best pick up ever
Now paying two blokes not to play for us....Deledio & Yarran....
Quote from: Diocletian on November 23, 2016, 02:23:50 PMNow paying two blokes not to play for us....Deledio & Yarran.... Taking stability to a whole new level