Sangreal 86
Juniors
- Messages
- 689
Mateo didn't sign anything near that amount
Yes he did
Mateo didn't sign anything near that amount
You are kidding Gronk, Hadley lost respect for Roy, he never had respect for any person who would stand against his mate. Over many years I have seen the respect shown by Hadley to good people, and some who have been very close to him...he is a fair weather sailor and we will see how he can ethically protect his mate in the future. There is another very powerful man within the same network as Hadley who wants full detail...very interesting times ahead.
It is sad on this site to see even when you are shown the truth, you just throw the baby out with the bath water.
I read the board report, and for me it raised more questions than it answered.
I have shown the report to a number of members who are not part of our online community and they have voice the same concerns to me, they wonder about some of the points raised in the report and believe it raised more questions than it answers.
On a looking at the big picture here, the Board has engaged its detractors with fire, It will be interesting to see how this election campaign goes from here. I guess we will all have to wait and see what happens when Hadley gets back from India for round 2.
All I can say is it is interesting times.
Also thank you to Jodeci for stating that Indeed I don't mind change. But I want to see change for the better. As long as the club improves on all fronts then I am happy.
No point shooting the messenger Sevens. I just saying what I heard, not backing him. :roll:
No matter what that report says, or who it attempts to shift blame to, it doesn't change my opinion that some of the board members, including Spagnolo, are snakes.
Anderson was clearly destined to be sacked, which makes me wonder why he was single handedly allowed to release players at all??
So the board could publish more reasons as to why the contract of Anderson was terminated. ;-)
Just flicking through the report, I find it hard to believe that some members would think that Peter Wynn's Score would be linked to the leagues club, and then to go on to mention they are competitors.
To me that is nothing but a attempt to discredit Peter Wynn, should any challenge to the board be forthcoming by raising the spectre of a conflict of interest should Peter Wynn be elected.
So the board could publish more reasons as to why the contract of Anderson was terminated. ;-)
you should read the fair work transcript for Delaney v parra, it is even better.
http://www.fwa.gov.au/FWAISYS/isysquery/a76515ee-eb8f-4932-b563-27080b4fdfce/2/doc/
It appears Cofrancesco was very much in the middle of Delaneys sacking and received a promotion before being sacked himself.
Mr Nofals is mentioned in the evidence as reporting to Delaney but after her dismissal is appointed to a role that is now a higher level than that previously held by Delaney.
Absolute rubbish that anyone would discredit "Wally", he has the right to challenge, as does anyone else. Peter is a very close friend to the majority of us, but his business is in direct competition to the clubs outlet. If Peter were to run and be successful, I am sure that the conflict of interest could be worked out for him to take up and acting role. My only concerns is that Peter is running for the sole reason that he can make a difference to the future success of this clubs, and not the private agenda of someone from the past.
Well if anything, it only makes them look dumber because it was a very good call IMO to let go of all 3 of them when u consider the offers they had on the table! :lol:
No matter what that report says, or who it attempts to shift blame to, it doesn't change my opinion that some of the board members, including Spagnolo, are snakes.
Anderson was clearly destined to be sacked, which makes me wonder why he was single handedly allowed to release players at all??
Just flicking through the report, I find it hard to believe that some members would think that Peter Wynn's Score would be linked to the leagues club, and then to go on to mention they are competitors.
To me that is nothing but a attempt to discredit Peter Wynn, should any challenge to the board be forthcoming by raising the spectre of a conflict of interest should Peter Wynn be elected.
Absolute rubbish that anyone would discredit "Wally", he has the right to challenge, as does anyone else. Peter is a very close friend to the majority of us, but his business is in direct competition to the clubs outlet. If Peter were to run and be successful, I am sure that the conflict of interest could be worked out for him to take up and acting role. My only concerns is that Peter is running for the sole reason that he can make a difference to the future success of this clubs, and not the private agenda of someone from the past.
To my way of reading the report has done this by claiming him as a competitor and claiming conflict of interest, unless I am very much mistaken Peter Wynn sells more merchandise than just Parramatta supporter gear and across a variety of sporting codes.
And to even have concerns he is doing this as some sort of agenda from someone else is again to my way of thinking attempting to discredit him.
We need to take the candidates on face value, and not attempt to link them to the past, but let there records speak for themselves
Still it is an interesting way to treat a long term sponsor of the club.
Either way on the Conflict of interest, my read on the situation is as long as he doesn't run for the leagues club board, no conflict would arise.
If he ran for the LC board, and was successful he would have to excuse himself from any discussions in relation to the merchandise store.
Snakes hide behind things, just as you are here, behind "Parra Guru".
Daniel had the same conditions in his contract as Stephan Kearney has, and any coach in the NRL. Any coach who signed their contract handing over recruitment to their respective boards would be an absolute fool.
Daniel would select who he wanted and who he did not , and then would obviously consult with Paul to see if the the new recruiting of the players he wanted were viable under the salary cap, a procedure that happens at every club.
Mate you seem to have great incite into the machinations of this club? Daniel was never destined to be sacked, do you think this board and management wanted him to fail or something. Daniel made his bed by demanding an extension of his contract......The End !!