2019 Discussion

[Fangs]

I own these forums, got you all under the thumb.

I'll deal with you later.

 

[Fangs]

Ennis wants Griffin to Sharks:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...1355/amp/Ennis-calls-Sharks-hunt-Griffin.html

Moylan to Panthers mid-season, Maloney to UK.

Great news. We get the prince of Penrith back and the Sharks relocate off the back of crap results under Griffin.

Oh happy days.

 

[umina panther]

We might finally be able to beat them if that ever happened

 

[mxlegend99]

Ennis wants Griffin to Sharks:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...1355/amp/Ennis-calls-Sharks-hunt-Griffin.html

Moylan to Panthers mid-season, Maloney to UK.

Yeah but that dickhead thinks we sacked him.

"I would probably lean towards Anthony Griffin to be honest," Ennis told Fox Sports.

"Only for the sheer fact that he was doing a tremendous job at Penrith last year. They were in the top four for the majority of the season before he got the sack.

 

[Thirsty Panther]

Looks like the Sharks are signing Morris as the new coach.
https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/01/31/john-morris-set-to-be-confirmed-as-new-sharks-coach/
So that means Ciraldo gets to win a comp with us

 

[Fangs]

Griffin will perfect the Waratahs line out in 2019 and return triumphantly as head coach of the South Queensland Sharks in 2020.

 

[franklin2323]

We might finally be able to beat them if that ever happened

We used to beat them when our Roster was better everytime in recent history we always have guys out

 

[franklin2323]

Griffin will perfect the Waratahs line out in 2019 and return triumphantly as head coach of the South Queensland Sharks in 2020.

Does anyone comeback to RL from RU? RU is being held together by Leagues that were rubbish but are stars over there

 

[franklin2323]

Ennis wants Griffin to Sharks:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...1355/amp/Ennis-calls-Sharks-hunt-Griffin.html

Moylan to Panthers mid-season, Maloney to UK.

Doesn't Gus not think Moylan is a half? That alone will mean he won't comeback

 

[Pomoz]

Heads should of rolled over the whole shambles

Why? Coaches are changed all the time in professional sport. During his tenure the club made the semi-finals and juniors were blooded, so he was relatively successful. The fact the club didn't think he could take them too the next level doesn't make him a failure.

If you sacked people every time a coach was changed it would a) cost the club a fortune and b) leave the club constantly in a state of flux as new staff were bedded in and they changed how things were done. Then, inevitably, the coach gets sacked and it all happens again.

We have stability, increased membership, new sponsors, success in multiple junior teams and a club that made the semi finals four time in five years, why would you sack the people who have made that happen?

There is no need to disrespect what Hook achieved, but he didn't look capable of getting us to the big dance and he had three shots at it. Telling him he could look around next year makes sense and is a fair thing to do so Hook has a chance to apply for other jobs. The fact he walked away is understandable, it would have been had to hear that he wasn't wanted any more. This type of conversation has been had countless times in sport and at companies with their senior management. Some people stay and work out their notice, some storm out the building. Different personalities, different strokes and all that.

We don't know, because it was a private settlement, but I can't see why the club would restrict Hook from working elsewhere except during the finals, series because it would be too disruptive. There has been a procession of assistants that have come through the Panthers during the last few years whom are privy to the workings of the inner sanctum and most have left to take other jobs. I can't see why the club would restrict Hook, it makes no sense at all.

 

[franklin2323]

Why? Coaches are changed all the time in professional sport. During his tenure the club made the semi-finals and juniors were blooded, so he was relatively successful. The fact the club didn't think he could take them too the next level doesn't make him a failure.

If you sacked people every time a coach was changed it would a) cost the club a fortune and b) leave the club constantly in a state of flux as new staff were bedded in and they changed how things were done. Then, inevitably, the coach gets sacked and it all happens again.

We have stability, increased membership, new sponsors, success in multiple junior teams and a club that made the semi finals four time in five years, why would you sack the people who have made that happen?

There is no need to disrespect what Hook achieved, but he didn't look capable of getting us to the big dance and he had three shots at it. Telling him he could look around next year makes sense and is a fair thing to do so Hook has a chance to apply for other jobs. The fact he walked away is understandable, it would have been had to hear that he wasn't wanted any more. This type of conversation has been had countless times in sport and at companies with their senior management. Some people stay and work out their notice, some storm out the building. Different personalities, different strokes and all that.

We don't know, because it was a private settlement, but I can't see why the club would restrict Hook from working elsewhere except during the finals, series because it would be too disruptive. There has been a procession of assistants that have come through the Panthers during the last few years whom are privy to the workings of the inner sanctum and most have left to take other jobs. I can't see why the club would restrict Hook, it makes no sense at all.

According to Gus. He was helping Hook through things 12-18 months before he was sacked.

In that time the club captain was sacked due to not getting on with coach (amongst other reasons)
Re-signed the same guy that is being worked with.
Then repeated the mistake of not doing proper interviews for the coach.

So somewhere along the line someone didn't do their job

 

[betcats]

Yes, sacked is a contractual law term. We'll give you the crayons to write with.

So stop using your legal definitions to tell me I’m wrong. Griffin was sacked by anyone’s definition of the word.

 

[betcats]

Yeah but that dickhead thinks we sacked him.

Someone better explain that it was actually Griffins choice to walk away.

 

[betcats]

You were the one saying that he could not get an NRL gig and that you knew that he didn't have any thing, such as payout clauses etc, stopping him. So again, put up the proof or, even better, stfu. Most others on here don't give a sh!t, it's just you trying to prove your point. You already did, you are a fool. Not too many on here doubt that.

You claimed it was likely before I ever said anything about it you complete moron. How is it likely?? I have asked that three times now and the only answer I got was ‘barret’ who quit his job so only an imbecile would use his situation as evidence.

Name me one coach who got sacked and couldn’t take another job before their contract was up?

I can name two or three in the last two years who got sacked and have taken up new nrl coaching jobs with other clubs before their contract would’ve been up. So it’s not common practice, no one can even name one other time it has happened in the nrl and yet you think it’s likely? But you won’t even say why you think that and now you want me to provide evidence. My evidence is my bullshit detector mate, you’re talking shit.

Edit: we also had an assistant coach resign last year and take up a job with the dragons in the same season a week or two later, we have a current assistant interviewing at another nrl club for a job as reported this week. But yeah it sure is likely we sacked griffin then paid him extra so he would agree to not take another job in the Nrl, because we are so against our coaches working at other clubs after us.

 

[betcats]

...

 

[betcats]

Doesn't Gus not think Moylan is a half? That alone will mean he won't comeback

He once picked a future nsw team with Moylan in the halves in one of his media jobs. Moylan certainly won’t be coming back tho.

 

[soc123_au]

Pascoe's arse groove was still fresh in his chair & there was still a warm cup of coffee on his desk when he started at the Tigers, you would think if Griffin had a no compete clause he would have too.

 

[Abacus]

So stop using your legal definitions to tell me I’m wrong. Griffin was sacked by anyone’s definition of the word.

Not about legal definitions, its about process. But keep your head in your arse.

 

[Abacus]

Pascoe's arse groove was still fresh in his chair & there was still a warm cup of coffee on his desk when he started at the Tigers, you would think if Griffin had a no compete clause he would have too.

Not sure who you're referring to here - Ivan?

 

[Abacus]

You claimed it was likely before I ever said anything about it you complete moron. How is it likely?? I have asked that three times now and the only answer I got was ‘barret’ who quit his job so only an imbecile would use his situation as evidence.

Name me one coach who got sacked and couldn’t take another job before their contract was up?

I can name two or three in the last two years who got sacked and have taken up new nrl coaching jobs with other clubs before their contract would’ve been up. So it’s not common practice, no one can even name one other time it has happened in the nrl and yet you think it’s likely? But you won’t even say why you think that and now you want me to provide evidence. My evidence is my bullshit detector mate, you’re talking shit.

Edit: we also had an assistant coach resign last year and take up a job with the dragons in the same season a week or two later, we have a current assistant interviewing at another nrl club for a job as reported this week. But yeah it sure is likely we sacked griffin then paid him extra so he would agree to not take another job in the Nrl, because we are so against our coaches working at other clubs after us.

No one said it's likely, just possible. I've already outlined how it could come about. It wouldn't have been the club's choice to pay extra and given the bad blood, the club could have attached the no compete clause to the extra funding demanded by Griffin. Its all hypothetical anyway so no need to lose your shit over it.