hey morpheus

[millersnose]

And, to be fair, our club has been Sports headline material since Sunday, so he's half right. Not FRONT pages though...

actually anyone with half a brain could of predicted the sharks would be news since b4 the roo tour the sharks made it public there was a confrontation on as soon as opes was back



and morph specifically said it would be about the new appointment


and lets face it there wasnt many who doubted the appointment of raper - hardly a scoop

 

[Frenzy]

I'm actually prepared to cut beek.....oops sorry, Morpheus some slack here.

He knows we all knew it would be Raper. But he also knows there was more than just the board as a driving force behind it. I know it too. It's also why I have been quite hush hush on it all.

Me thinks reefy knows as well - see his post re $10mill.

 

[Morpheus]

I wish this was a court of law and I was hoping on the outcome to recieve some nice settlement money, because Millersnose, you totally got it wrong in your recent response.

You will see that the LAST sentance of what Frenzy posted " I think the response will be more to WHY ...etc etc etc " is what led me to respond " not far off the mark".

I thank Frenzy for saying as much in his post above.

Did you READ my defence at all Millersnose ?

I wonder, because I even went on to say way back then " However the issue of WHY this choice has been made, as I said, from an incident in the past, is what will keep our club...Nay......Our SPORT in the front pages for the best part of 10 days. "

WHY was highlighted.

and it was also highlighted when i reproduced it in this thread .

Why do you choose to ignore that ? or did you, as I suspect not read thru my labourious and tedious citings of evidence in my favour ?

 

[King of the Hill]

Morf why be cryptic when you have basically said 99% of what has happened? Why are you talking about this on a public forum?

"Hypothetically, they could not have made the "decision" before handing out a third breach notice could they ? that would reek of setting up their employee and conspiring to dismiss him. "

You've just explained what happened without naming the specific party that involved. Dont you think that's dangerous? Do you want everyone to know everything?

Because those who can read between the lines have already figured it out. It's only a matter of time until it gets out now, unless it already has. Do you think Ando knows?

 

[Macca]

Hey I will highlight a why.

WHY won't you let us all in on the big secret. There is a private message function here you know. All this I know something you don't know is driving me nuts. Reminds me of kindergarten. Put up or shut up!

 

[blacktip-reefy]

who's Ando?

 

[millersnose]

I'm actually prepared to cut beek.....oops sorry, Morpheus some slack here.

He knows we all knew it would be Raper. But he also knows there was more than just the board as a driving force behind it. I know it too. It's also why I have been quite hush hush on it all.

Me thinks reefy knows as well - see his post re $10mill.

lol with due respect frenzy both you and morph got it wrong

pierce/gillies was not close to the mark

all i have read is some unspecified suggestion that the board at cronulla did not make the decision to sack anderson


total nonsense

they are the only ones empowered to do so


now if the suggestion is that certain sponsors applied pressure to the board well....DDEEERRR

of course anyone paying for advertising would have been dismayed to see the sharks take such a fall as they did in 2003 and of course they would pressure the board to improve things - anyone who doubts this is very niave

i dont like unbacked claims of illegality against anyone and morpheus has a bit of a history of this

his first posts were attacks on kimmorley were he cited his "knowledge" of what players were thinking as proof ffs

there is no proof that anything weird happened


look i realise many in this forum are keen to see the board denigrated but fair dinkum this is trash

 

[The Popper]

Yep. Even the old guy fluked that one.
Just goes right around in a circle doesn't it:
- fans support the players playing for the team
- players are chosen by coach and selectors
- Board chooses coach et al
- Board's club is financed by sponsors
- fans buy the sponsors products
There ya go - we're back with the fans again. Goes right around in a circle, doesn't it.

P.S. The astute will probably note that I didn't include (financial) fans vote Board in. Just like Canberra or Macquarie St., it seems systems are in place to minimise change and the effect of votes negatively effecting the encumbents. Missed last year's meeting so I hope the push for `rolling partial Board elections' wasn't passed. The Board were pushing for that a couple of years ago but most of us voted against it, and it lost.
What does that mean? Well, it would effectively mean that Board members could hold their positions for three years (as opposed to one year) before having to be voted in again as only a portion of them would be up for election at an AGM (1/3 if I remember rightly). The reasoning behind the Board's push was to increase stability. However, there does come a time when the decks need cleaning.
I believe some other clubs have these partial elections.

 

[millersnose]

I wish this was a court of law and I was hoping on the outcome to recieve some nice settlement money, because Millersnose, you totally got it wrong in your recent response.

well that should be easy to clear up morph - lets read on

You will see that the LAST sentance of what Frenzy posted " I think the response will be more to WHY ...etc etc etc " is what led me to respond " not far off the mark".

I thank Frenzy for saying as much in his post above.

frankly morph i am interested in what you had to say on this matter not frenzy's speculation

your grasping at frenzy's support makes me more suspicious


and no the thread in question was your direct reply to frenzy's direct suggestion that gillies/pierce would get the nod

Did you READ my defence at all Millers

very carefully morph

I wonder, because I even went on to say way back then " However the issue of WHY this choice has been made, as I said, from an incident in the past, is what will keep our club...Nay......Our SPORT in the front pages for the best part of 10 days. "

WHY was highlighted.

again i remind you your "not far off the mark" statement was directly in response to frenzy's pierce/ gillies suggestion

Why do you choose to ignore that ? or did you, as I suspect not read thru my labourious and tedious citings of evidence in my favour ?

with due respect morph you have not addressed the original question


i put it to you for one reason or another your goal was to denigrate the board with a bit of gossip

now this gossip has not proven to be fact you are at a loss to explain it

 

[Macca]

I think that if what Morph is talking about does come out then the front pages will definatley get a run. It hasn't come out yet. I sort of hope it doesn't. I wonder how much Ando knows about this. If he does, then it will come out next year, when he starts his legal battle with us.

 

[Morpheus]

Hmm,

It does appear rather clear what the " you are not far off the mark" comment refers to, and that is obviously Frenzys comments regarding WHY the call was made, not what the call would be.

Of course millersnose, If you have a better understanding of what i was getting and and intending when replying to Frenzy, you are merely doing exactly what you accused me of doing weeks ago when I reflected a story about kimmorleys actions and words which i saw first hand, Mind-reading.

You accuse me of something, then proceed in this thread to do the same.

A job in parliament awaits you surely !

Mcsharkie, where is the fun in just blurting out facts ? most people seem to have grasped the story here without it being spelled out, and spelling things out and naming people is something that seems to have been agreed is not all that wise on a public forum, I believe one of the previous chat groups was closed due to such things wasn't it ?

 

[Morpheus]

I might add if I may MIllsernose, that you say that factually no other party was involved in making the decision on our coach for next year or the sacking of previous coach other than the board ?

I know otherwise.

However there is no problem with that, you and I share a conflicting view. All I seem to be required to do is continually defend my stance, yet i am happy to let you hold whatever you view you wish without attacking you or asking from whence this great factual declaration by you came from.

I will continue debating the issue on the same grounds and trust with respect you will do the same.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

ooohhhh, he ducks he weaves! This guy has got all the moves!!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Hey Morph, even I have got more predictions right than you.

Redemption is a beautiful thing, so, why don't you tell us all something we don't already know, & we can put this thread to bed.

 

[millersnose]

Mcsharkie, where is the fun in just blurting out facts ?

indeed

most people seem to have grasped the story here without it being spelled out, and spelling things out

oh really?

and naming people is something that seems to have been agreed is not all that wise on a public forum, I believe one of the previous chat groups was closed due to such things wasn't it ?

no one is asking for names - just an explanation as to why your prediction that you were so adament about didnt come true

 

[millersnose]

I might add if I may MIllsernose, that you say that factually no other party was involved in making the decision on our coach for next year or the sacking of previous coach other than the board ?

of course

the board runs the club

I know otherwise.

oh?

the jews?

george w. bush?

well, special agent 007, hint

is it mineral
animal vegetable political supernatural?

However there is no problem with that, you and I share a conflicting view.

no you dont have a "view"
you are asserting that you know something to be a fact

you are asserting the board at cronulla do not have powers tht a board of directors hold

l I seem to be required to do is continually defend my stance, yet i am happy to let you hold whatever you view you wish without attacking you or asking from whence this great factual declaration by you came from.

all of my posts are open to challenge as are yours morfy

though i am not the one with the big claims

I will continue debating the issue on the same grounds and trust with respect you will do the same.

oh you can be assured of that ;-)

 

[Macca]

Do you really think I spelled it out?

The whole subject is Ando. That's the only name I mentioned. No one else.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

hey Millers, I wouldn't put it past that jew lovin george dubya.

 

[Anonymous]

is it mineral
animal vegetable political supernatural?

Are you implying that politicians aren't animals?

 

[King of the Hill]

hey Millers, I wouldn't put it past that jew lovin george dubya.

:lol:
the evil jews fight wars by proxy: they get millernose to fight and die for them

 

[Jimbo]

is it mineral
animal vegetable political supernatural?

Are you implying that politicians aren't animals?

Most of them are vegetables