Anderson SACKED!

[Bastard Squad]

JA wasn't sacked though, he was on match payments only for 2003 with no contract option for 2004. The club chose not to renew for 2004.

 

[Nages]

JA wasn't sacked though, he was on match payments only for 2003 with no contract option for 2004. The club chose not to renew for 2004.

Whatever - they did it without the head coach's knowledge or okay which just shouldn't happen. As such, it's obviously an attempt to get a reaction, which ultimately means the breach notice will be, at best, thin.

 

[Glennb]

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?

To be honest, this is the one breach notice that I think that Cronulla may be in strife about. I would think that CA would argue that his behaviour was in response to provocation by the board who were acting in a manner that inpinged his ability to perform his duties (sacking players).

There is a LOT that we don't know about that will swing this one way or the other, things to bear in mind include.....

1. After each of the breach notices, what training, counselling or measures where put in place by Cronulla? If none, I believe it weakens their case.

2. Need to bear in mind that three notices on their own are not enough, for arguemts sake if an employees received two warnings for not wearing correct uniform and counselling was in place and they were warned about what would happen if they didnt wear the correct uniform again.....then a week later the employee was late for work...a breach notice for being late would not be a "third strike" and grounds for dismissal. i.e. Are the 3 breach notices for the same thing?

3. And this is something I can't really make a judgement on, this is probably more likely to be heard in Supreme Court as a contract law matter (particularly due to the amounts in question) rather than arbitration due to unfair dismissal.

Glenn

 

[PJ]

Thanks Glen, I was rather hoping that was their best shot but I guess not.

 

[Macca]

But you would not even know what I'm talking about.

Do you think that you somehow know who I am or are you basing all this "you know nothing" crap only on my posts here?

Please enlighten me, Reefy. All I ever do is express my opinions here, same as you. If the fact that I disagree with you alot, means that I know nothing then I think you need a bit of a reality check yourself.

If I know so little then why do we always argue so often, why don't you rise above me like the all knowing legend you claim to be.

Otherwise, harden up and dry your eyes princess. People don't have to agree with you to be knowledgeble.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Whats the bet it all blows over with minimum pain.
whether it goes to court, arbitration whatever.
he will get his year, get a job & never walk into the shire he hates so much again.

 

[Morpheus]

Jim Barnett sits on our Board.

He is a highly experienced legal mind who not doubt has been advising the board, and has been seeking out old mates in the specific field of unfair dismissal and their advice.

I wonder how much the board has relied on his input when setting up andersons sacking ?

If he got it wrong, then the board got it wrong, and for the sake of our clubs future, NO member of the current board should be re-elected next year.

 

[fatshark]

I hear ya. I think the board would of backed off, but because of the 3 infringements the matter was all but over. Especially if that is in the contract.
Im still am extremely dissapointed in the board though, this really has put the clubs future in a bid of a hole.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Jim Barnett sits on our Board.

He is a highly experienced legal mind who not doubt has been advising the board, and has been seeking out old mates in the specific field of unfair dismissal and their advice.

I wonder how much the board has relied on his input when setting up andersons sacking ?

If he got it wrong, then the board got it wrong, and for the sake of our clubs future, NO member of the current board should be re-elected next year.

Fair enough, but if this turns out to pain free, relatively, then they have saved their ass on the Anderson appointment.
then they only have to answer for is the treatment of Gow, & the current marketing deficiencies.

 

[Mr Angry]

For the record.
I was happy for Chris to stay. I was and remain a critic of his time here, but would have let him see it out. The what's if's and but's I can hear already.

If he is as good as people say he is he will have no problems getting an NRL or ESL job - I do wish him well. I say again horses for courses.
Any success for the Sharks this year Chris can take some credit for. Well he will from me.

The fact a first grade coach got the sack after his team went from 4th to 12th in one year is hardly a suprising thing to happen, in fact at most clubs it would be suprising if he stayed. The fact a coach had his contract terminated after 2 years of a 3 year contract is hardly a precedence. How many go mid-season - contracts pfft - ask Chris Walker, Craig Coleman.......the list goes on and on and on.

If the board are as bad as people make out - their time will come.

I am just dumbfounded by the reaction - if it was a absolute dead-set Sharks legend, I could maybe understand the "I am not buying tickets" attitude. I am off to buy some Sharks gear on-line.
So we sacked a coach? Aren't players 'let go' all the time even with contracts.


Go the Sharks in 2004, in my new shirt, hat, jersey, what else they got..........

 

[millersnose]

great post mr angry

i am amazed by the reaction

some think anderson had superhuman powers that this 3rd year we would definately get it

 

[Anonymous]

So very true, Mr Angry.

Aren't players 'let go' all the time even with contracts.

Yes, but according to some the second they walk out the door for the last time, they're no longer Sharks and we aren't allowed to talk about them anymore.

 

[Nages]

great post mr angry

i am amazed by the reaction

some think anderson had superhuman powers that this 3rd year we would definately get it

With all due respect, guys, for me personally it's not about Chris Anderson himself, but about what this decision says about the nature of the team we support.

I don't know about you, but I’m sick of always almost getting there - and when Ando and Kimmorely arrived I thought, 'Right, this is it.' I know it's become something of a cliche, but I do believe there is a lack of belief that we can win the comp in this Club. We’re the England of the NRL.

Whatever you say about Ando, you can’t say he didn't believe we could win. He expected to win. And it's pretty clear he seemed about ready to do anything to win. 2 years ago that seemed like a great idea to the board and to many supporters.

By booting Anderson, the Club has left me feeling hollow… like this business of winning is all too hard. I stress again, TO ME, it feels like we (or the board, at least) would be much happier to do okay with a coach who will let the board ride on the team bus and give nice answers at press conferences, etc. I've even read many posts here with fans saying “…it's not all about winning, we just want to see them play well.”

That's fine when we're running 12th, but in the future, when we once again get beat by Newcastle or the Roosters or Brisbane in important games, it's the worst feeling on earth. Particularly because it KEEPS HAPPENING. My best mates support those teams, and I’ve had a gutful of the ‘no heart’ or ‘chokers’ tag.

To me, this decision places our resolve in question, and I believe we will now have to live with the ‘Chokers’ tag for years to come. That’s why I’m so bitterly disappointed.

 

[Jimbo]

Couldn't have said it better myself, Nages.

 

[Nages]

Couldn't have said it better myself, Nages.

Thanks mate. Still hope I'm wrong, but then I just read this:

Raper gets two years to put bite back into the Sharks
By Brad Walter
December 3, 2003

More than three years after first being promised the job, Stuart Raper was last night announced coach of Cronulla.

Raper, 37, was appointed to the position for two years following the sacking of Chris Anderson at Monday night's board meeting and he IMMEDIATELY SET HIS SIGHTS ON RESTORING THE CLUB'S STANDING AS REGULAR FINALISTS after last season's disastrous 12th place.

Celebrating at home with his family - including brother Aaron and their famous father John - Raper admitted it had been a long and frustrating wait after being told at the end of the 2000 season that he would be the next coach after John Lang.

...so yay... back to being regular finalists.

(And once again, with every word I read about the Sharks it's all about broken promises, backroom deals, and just general back-stabbing. It's all just so damn depressing.)

 

[wittyfan]

Couldn't have said it better myself, Nages.

Thanks mate. Still hope I'm wrong, but then I just read this:

Raper gets two years to put bite back into the Sharks
By Brad Walter
December 3, 2003

More than three years after first being promised the job, Stuart Raper was last night announced coach of Cronulla.

Raper, 37, was appointed to the position for two years following the sacking of Chris Anderson at Monday night's board meeting and he IMMEDIATELY SET HIS SIGHTS ON RESTORING THE CLUB'S STANDING AS REGULAR FINALISTS after last season's disastrous 12th place.

Celebrating at home with his family - including brother Aaron and their famous father John - Raper admitted it had been a long and frustrating wait after being told at the end of the 2000 season that he would be the next coach after John Lang.

...so yay... back to being regular finalists.

(And once again, with every word I read about the Sharks it's all about broken promises, backroom deals, and just general back-stabbing. It's all just so damn depressing.)

You can't win the comp from 12th, Nages.

 

[Jimbo]

Yeah. Woo Hoo us. "We're only third best, but at least we look good..."

:roll:

 

[Jimbo]

You can't win the comp from 12th, Nages.

Penrith did...

 

[wittyfan]

You can't win the comp from 12th, Nages.

Penrith did...

Yes, but they had a coach that has the ability to the get the best out his players and the club. We had the complete opposite.

 

[Nages]

Couldn't have said it better myself, Nages.

Thanks mate. Still hope I'm wrong, but then I just read this:

Raper gets two years to put bite back into the Sharks
By Brad Walter
December 3, 2003

More than three years after first being promised the job, Stuart Raper was last night announced coach of Cronulla.

Raper, 37, was appointed to the position for two years following the sacking of Chris Anderson at Monday night's board meeting and he IMMEDIATELY SET HIS SIGHTS ON RESTORING THE CLUB'S STANDING AS REGULAR FINALISTS after last season's disastrous 12th place.

Celebrating at home with his family - including brother Aaron and their famous father John - Raper admitted it had been a long and frustrating wait after being told at the end of the 2000 season that he would be the next coach after John Lang.

...so yay... back to being regular finalists.

(And once again, with every word I read about the Sharks it's all about broken promises, backroom deals, and just general back-stabbing. It's all just so damn depressing.)

You can't win the comp from 12th, Nages.

We've never been able to win the comp from any position, Sul.