Anderson SACKED!

[wittyfan]

As for Sullyfan, I have supported Opes' throughout this saga and I believe the board has made the wrong decision on many counts here. If he has to go, why not at the end of next year? This is not a good result even for anti-Ando people. To say so is stupid. Why don't you stop smoking Reefy's pole and have an original thought for yourself.

Yes, getting rid of him was never going to be an easy task, but the decision simply had to be made. Anderson is too much trouble than what he is worth. Surely, you don't have to be told all the trouble Anderson has caused this year? Even on the very short Kangaroo tour there were problems.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

no you are kidding yourself if you think the worst case scenario has not already been factored in.
This is a great result for the Sharks.
More positives on the way!!! yeeehaaa!!!!

 

[Macca]

Granted, he caused problems since becoming coach because people didn't accept his style or his theory on the way ahead for the sharks. He was pigheaded on several occasions. The way he reacted to Jarrad being sacked was appalling.

It is my opinion that he was taking us in a direction the would have ultimately seen us having a great chance of winning a premiership. A better chance than we have had for 25 years. That is why I wanted to see him finish his tenure.

OK, that is not going to happen now. I accept that he is gone and I am ready to move on. Don't ask me to be happy about it though. With the impending cost of this whole saga, there is little to be happy about.

I am ofcourse a Sharks fan first, so my support now goes to Stuart Raper. If he can take the team that Ando built to the top, then I will be ecstatic. Nothing but a premiership will do though. I don't want 2nd, 3rd 4th or any other position. Only number 1 will do. We have the playing roster to do it, so there is no excuse in 2004. There wouldn't have been for Ando, there won't be for Raper.

 

[beerboy]

for anyone who wants a beer, i have one here, nice cold VB

 

[Nages]

no you are kidding yourself if you think the worst case scenario has not already been factored in.
This is a great result for the Sharks.
More positives on the way!!! yeeehaaa!!!!

These are the same people who factored in the worst case scenario when they hired Ando for 5 years 2 years ago I presume...?

You are depriving a village something of their idiot.

 

[Shark]

Guys, too much emotion, not enough application of the grey matter.

Let's talk payouts.

A full $1.2 million payout would only be possible IF Anderson can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the team would have made the finals in Season 2004. How on Earth can he prove that? Exactly, he can't. So, scrub $400K off that potential payout figure.

The remaining $800K would only be payable in FULL, if Anderson can prove that each of the three breach notices he recieved were TOTALLY without cause, and he was a totally innocent party who did NOTHING to deserve the notices. So, let's argue that he's 50% to blame in each situation, and scrap another $400K.

So, what I think we are left looking at is this: A $400K payout to ditch him him. A year's pay, which we would have had to pay had he stayed, and presided over another poor year punctuated by disputes and innuendo.

Raper (or Rogers, or whoever they appoint) will not be costing us that.

Let's just settle down. This thing is not going to cost us too much, and certainly not anything more than the $400K we would have had to pay for season 2004 anyway.

Ray Chesterton (for what his opinion is worth) makes some very good points in the Telegraph today. Ando has a poor history when it comes to terminating contracts early. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's amazing how militant he is being. Like a criminal who fronts Court, surely his 'record' in this area will be tabled, should this saga make it to Court at all.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Finally someone with reality.

Also shark, Ando would be putting at risk his expected minimum payout if he loses.
This will go to court, then be settled out of court & everyone will be happy.

But what will the doom & gloomers say then?
In particular the one who know nothing about anything.

:lol: :lol:

 

[a_friend]

Have to say atleast the Sharks waited until after we beat the poms before firing him. It may have upset the applecart if they'd done it before.

Still, Chris was talking to clubs in England on the tour anyway.

 

[Macca]

How can you prove that they would not have made the finals next year?

Don't tell me not be emotional, either. This is something I think we should all be particularly emotional about. It could cost us our club in the worst case scenario. I can be emotional and still use the grey matter as you put it.

Reefy, if you want to call me a doomer and gloomer who knows nothing about anything, thats fine. Just remember that you have doomed and gloomed about Ando for god knows how long, and quite frakly, you really don't raise alot of valid points yourself, just whining usually.

Should be interesting to see you come up with some sort of negative angle next year now that your main target has been eliminated. I'm sure it will be all Noddy's fault if we lose a few. Clown.

 

[Shark]

Mc, I'm not saying don't get emotional about the team, and our performances - But, to get carried away with speculation about the financial side of this sad debacle helps no-one.

You make a good point - Nobody can prove what Season 2004 MAY have produced under Ando, not the club, not Ando, not anyone. So, how can that totally unknown result be considered in any payout?

My point is, both sides have stuffed this, being Ando and the Board. So, there will need to be some ground conceded by BOTH sides as they work towards a resolution. If they want to engage the lawyers, then that is their right. But, I believe that SOME commonsense will prevail, and suitable concessions will be granted by both sides.

Yes, there will be a payout. No, I don't think it will be less than $400K, but I am confident it will not be more than $600K, and certainly NOT $1.2 million.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

boohoo!!

Andos gone & the club is better for it. Move on.

noddy has a heap of challenges in front of him & I for one am looking forward to him accepting & meeting those challenges & proving me wrong about his style of play & right that the anderson & kimmorley realtionship was incestuosly bad for his career.
bring on the Noddy that was at the mariners.
But you would not even know what I'm talking about.

 

[SirShire]

Beeker doesn't even post here. :?

Of course he does :lol:

:shock: Who as?

and you can't work it out ????

just proves my original point

You have no credibility whatsover here either. 24 posts only!

Quality, not quantity!

 

[wittyfan]

You have no credibility whatsover here either. 24 posts only!

Quality, not quantity![/quote]

That's quite debatable. :lol:

 

[SirShire]

No, its not Sullyfan. Its logic.

As for all this shit, there is nothing we can do. It has been a shitfight for both sides and it ended this way, out of our hands.

Whilst I think Ando was a decent coach, and that he could have brought us a premiership, he is gone. The club should now focus on football for 2004 and completely f**k administration off.

The only thing that will put a smile on my face as a result of this crap would be to see Deano back in the black, white and blue.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Hey I heard the Treist thing is not a done deal. Far from it.
What gives there?

 

[Mr Angry]

My guess is BK reefy - not Dean's biggest fan, but that is a guess.

My Attitude.

If the club is to die out of this, it started the day they hired him, not the day they fired him.

I have no such concerns, all clubs are stronger than a single personality, always will be.

Go the Sharks in 2004 with CA
Go the Sharks in 2004 without CA

You want checkbook Premierships - go follow Manly!!! I always thought that was a key difference between us and them - they would sell their Grandmother for a premiership, we are prepared to wait until we can do it on our terms - like the QLD cricket team after 100 years how sweet was the win.
You are all defending a life-member of another club as if he was a born and bred Shark - he is a hired mercenary nothing more.

I have never seen us Sharks supporters so keen to turn on one another, are the dragqueens taunts getting to you??? No premierships blah, blah, blah.
16 teams 1 winner 15 losers - is this now the Sharks mentality also.

I am actually looking forward to season 2004.

Chris who?

 

[Nages]

My guess is BK reefy - not Dean's biggest fan, but that is a guess.

My Attitude.

If the club is to die out of this, it started the day they hired him, not the day they fired him.

I have no such concerns, all clubs are stronger than a single personality, always will be.

Go the Sharks in 2004 with CA
Go the Sharks in 2004 without CA

You want checkbook Premierships - go follow Manly!!! I always thought that was a key difference between us and them - they would sell their Grandmother for a premiership, we are prepared to wait until we can do it on our terms - like the QLD cricket team after 100 years how sweet was the win.
You are all defending a life-member of another club as if he was a born and bred Shark - he is a hired mercenary nothing more.

I have never seen us Sharks supporters so keen to turn on one another, are the dragqueens taunts getting to you??? No premierships blah, blah, blah.
16 teams 1 winner 15 losers - is this now the Sharks mentality also.

I am actually looking forward to season 2004.

Chris who?

Mmmm... Interesting. Should we also get rid of all players not born in the shire? Geez, wouldn't the win be sweet THEN!

 

[Glennb]

The remaining $800K would only be payable in FULL, if Anderson can prove that each of the three breach notices he recieved were TOTALLY without cause, and he was a totally innocent party who did NOTHING to deserve the notices. So, let's argue that he's 50% to blame in each situation, and scrap another $400K./quote]

Unfortunately for the purposes of debate you have a poor grasp on the Unfair Dismissal law. Under the law they are obliged only to determine whether his dismissal was unfair at all, not a little bit unfair or TOTALLY unfair. There is no grey and they have very tangible guidelines. For this reason CA would only need to show that one of the breach notices is without merit (at all) because it appears that Cronulla have hung their hat on the "three strikes" thinking of unfair dismissal (which is pure ignorance....you only need one carefully structured breach notice to dismiss someone fairly). When you hang your hat on the "3 strikes" mentality, you only need one strike to come undone and the whole mess will unravel.

Secondly, CA would NOT have to prove that he would have made the eight next year to be entitled to some redress of his option. Assuming that they found he was unfairly dismissed, he merely has to show that he was deprived of the opportunity to make the 8 and thereby exercise the option (pretty clear cut victory to CA surely) for him to be entitled to some recompense from the option.

I work in this field and IMO CA would have a pretty good claim on at least one of the breach notices from the information in the papers.

Glenn B

 

[PJ]

Glenn while the paper talk is of the 3 breach notices I think they are going to try for the one big one where Anderson verbally abused people on finding his son was released.

There are various versions of the cirumstances of this event but I have a question. If the court does find it was serious enough a breach how does Anderson stand if he tries to show that the sackig of his son was an attempt to bring about such a reaction?

 

[Nages]

Glenn while the paper talk is of the 3 breach notices I think they are going to try for the one big one where Anderson verbally abused people on finding his son was released.

There are various versions of the cirumstances of this event but I have a question. If the court does find it was serious enough a breach how does Anderson stand if he tries to show that the sackig of his son was an attempt to bring about such a reaction?

A most excellent question.

Sacking a player without the coach's knowledge is interesting enough. That it was the coach's son makes for very dirty laundry indeed. I'd certainly hate to be defending such actions.