I find it interesting that a lot of opposition supporters are accusing the Knights of "sacking the guy they need the least". Believe it or not, we are genuine in saying that Tilse showed a lot of potential. In fact, if you still think we're full of it, refer to this thread (
http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/viewtopic.php?t=44123) from last year, in which Tilse was voted as the young gun whom we thought would have the best season in 2005. The fact that this was posted a few months ago shows that we aren't just saying he's a genuine prospect now, just because he's been sacked.
So don't feed me your crap about "throwing the smallest lamb to the slaughterhouse". There are many of the 12 players in trouble that I would prefer to lose than Tilse. But Tilse did the wrong thing, so it's only fair that he's the one to go.
A lot of people are saying that sacking Tilse was too harsh. We don't know all the facts; all we are hearing is that there are admissions about Tilse relating to sexual misconduct. I'm quite certain the Knights wouldn't have made this decision lightly. I don't see this as an over-reaction on their part.
While I'm sad to see Tilse go, I'm also 100% behind the Knights on this one. If the Bulldogs didn't have the guts to sack any of their players, then that's their problem. I'd rather lose a genuine prospect, than be known as a club who merely issues fines which really aren't a sufficient form of discipline.