Salary Cap

[Noise]

This is what i don't get.
Why do people think there is always a single person responsible when things don't go to plan?

Whether in politics, sport, the workplace, anywhere... if a decision is made by an individual then it would be crazy not to have checks and balances in place and if the decision is made by a group then why does one person always get singled out.

Of course there are "Caraige" moments when 1 person makes a mistake but i dont think this is the case in relation to our cap spend amd neither do the NRL.

MJC, if you were a betting man what chances would you say we are to losing the 4 points?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Blaming the fans who have nothing to do with any of the poor decisions that have been made the last 5 years isn't looking at deflecting blame and looking for a scapegoat????[/i]

The fans have plenty to do with why those decisions are made. Why do you think a constant stream of what you deem 'poor decisions' occur in the first place? You call it incompetence, yet these were the people chosen as the best candidates by the voting membership. So if they're incompetent why were they elected? Why don't better people put themselves forward to be judged and held accountable by this pack of rabid imbeciles?

And are they really that incompetent? These are people who have amassed solid sums of money and achieved highly in other areas of life (including the plumber). I don't think any of them are incompetent or they would never have gotten in. So you have to ask why their combined decisions over time seem to accrue to negative outcomes? Why is there the appearance of incompetence? It's a popular fantasy of the nevilles of the world that those with more power than us are incompetent and/or immoral. So if that idea helps you get out of bed each morning then that's what you're going to hope to see. And where the heart goes the head follows.

The fact is that the planning cycle required for long term success in the NRL is much longer than our club's election cycle. That's the major cause of our instability and failure. This has been identified too, which is why the recommendation to change our election structure. Annual elections (in this case) will be less disruptive than the current system because elections under the current system are for control of the entire board. Under the proposed system it's just a couple of positions. That will make it harder for groups of idiot fans like yourself to band together to SACK THE LOT OF THEM when some factional leader decides to stir you up with rhetoric.

By the way when are you making me my Sharpy Banner merkin????

I told you when I finish work.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

This is what i don't get.
Why do people think there is always a single person responsible when things don't go to plan?

Whether in politics, sport, the workplace, anywhere... if a decision is made by an individual then it would be crazy not to have checks and balances in place and if the decision is made by a group then why does one person always get singled out.

Of course there are "Caraige" moments when 1 person makes a mistake but i dont think this is the case in relation to our cap spend amd neither do the NRL.

Human nature, mate. A single scapegoat is nice and clean. It's easier to deal with and takes away the need to consider our own culpability in what went wrong. It's classic loser mentality. Nietzsche was all over this shit.

 

[oldmancraigy]

Maybe i need to down a dozen schooies to understand him better???

:lol:

It might not help you know mumbles is on about, but it'll ease the pain of having to hear it...

 

[hineyrulz]

This is what i don't get.
Why do people think there is always a single person responsible when things don't go to plan?

Whether in politics, sport, the workplace, anywhere... if a decision is made by an individual then it would be crazy not to have checks and balances in place and if the decision is made by a group then why does one person always get singled out.

Of course there are "Caraige" moments when 1 person makes a mistake but i dont think this is the case in relation to our cap spend amd neither do the NRL.

true, might be because our Chairman seems to be all things Parramatta and in the media every second day.

But he's the chairman and the buck stops with him tightly or wrongly, same way the head of a political party is to blame even though he's one of many.

 

[strider]

You're the one who wants to blame one person for everything. The fact is when shit goes wrong it's everybody's fault.

This is what i don't get.
Why do people think there is always a single person responsible when things don't go to plan?

Whether in politics, sport, the workplace, anywhere... if a decision is made by an individual then it would be crazy not to have checks and balances in place and if the decision is made by a group then why does one person always get singled out.

Of course there are "Caraige" moments when 1 person makes a mistake but i dont think this is the case in relation to our cap spend amd neither do the NRL.

Agree ... this is more than one merkins fault.

Infact Sharpe is probably putting himself under more pressure by talking publicly about it. He is potentially turning himself into the scapegoat ... he could maybe run and hide in the back and send others to do the talking ... a bit like Spags did - that merkin never fronted when things were shit.

I think our club had the Cariage moment with Seward ... unfortunately others were supposedly all out the back taking a leak while the moment(s) happened ... cant say i entirely believe that .... and I dont really believe all the crap withignoring NRL directives that we will breach the cap is a board issue - surely there were merkins making football decisions on that which probably include our much liked coach

 

[Noise]

The fact is that the planning cycle required for long term success in the NRL is much longer than our club's election cycle. That's the major cause of our instability and failure. This has been identified too, which is why the recommendation to change our election structure. Annual elections (in this case) will be less disruptive than the current system because elections under the current system are for control of the entire board. Under the proposed system it's just a couple of positions. That will make it harder for groups of idiot fans like yourself to band together to SACK THE LOT OF THEM when some factional leader decides to stir you up with rhetoric.



I told you when I finish work.

If you and I (and most people on this and the other site) can see the benefits of this proposed system and if Sharp is indeed 'factionless' like you said in a previous post, then why wouldn't he want to implement these changes? Particularly when it looks to be the prime sticking point over the loss of points?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

If you and I (and most people on this and the other site) can see the benefits of this proposed system and if Sharp is indeed 'factionless' like you said in a previous post, then why wouldn't he want to implement these changes? Particularly when it looks to be the prime sticking point over the loss of points?

As the board's spokesman, Sharp is almost certainly selling the party line rather than his own opinion.

And I agree with strider that Sharp is making himself the scapegoat. He is putting his head on the block like a true leader. Also taking a lot of unnecessary pressure off Boulous.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Agree ... this is more than one merkins fault.

Of course, but it is worth remembering that there's a difference between 'fault' and 'responsibility'. I quite like Sharpy. But, as the Chair you have at least some responsibility for for the actions of those that you oversee, and for the systems in place to encourage sensible decision making.

 

[Noise]

As the board's spokesman, Sharp is almost certainly selling the party line rather than his own opinion.

And I agree with strider that Sharp is making himself the scapegoat. He is putting his head on the block like a true leader. Also taking a lot of unnecessary pressure off Boulous.

So Sharp is either getting voted down on these recommendations by the rest (majority) of the board if he indeed actually agrees with the NRLs recommendations; or he too doesn't want to see these new recommendations put in place even though they will promote long term stability. Either way it seems the board is f**king us over once again.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yeah it does. But they might genuinely believe (and they might be right) that the long term benefit of not bowing to the NRL is worth the short term pain of starting on -4 competition points.

 

[strider]

Of course, but it is worth remembering that there's a difference between 'fault' and 'responsibility'. I quite like Sharpy. But, as the Chair you have at least some responsibility for for the actions of those that you oversee, and for the systems in place to encourage sensible decision making.

Totally agree

 

[hineyrulz]

Yeah it does. But they might genuinely believe (and they might be right) that the long term benefit of not bowing to the NRL is worth the short term pain of starting on -4 competition points.

:crazy:

 

[Noise]

If we lose the 4 points does that mean the board can then unwind the other 118 recommendations that were made without penalty?

 

[EelsFan05]

Why should they be praised for something every other club will be doing??? Starting on an even keel lol, having to have 119 recommendations proposed and having a - 4 fine hanging over our heads was a good thing?? :crazy:

No they would have navigated the club out of a messy situation (if it happens), appointed a good coach that no one wanted, assembled the best roster we've had in over a decade, in the process rectified our cap, built a full time training facility and increased membership numbers. But you kept it up mate. Sharp and co can't get anything right. Dickhead.

 

[El Diablo]

If we lose the 4 points does that mean the board can then unwind the other 118 recommendations that were made without penalty?

can't see why not

 

[hineyrulz]

No they would have navigated the club out of a messy situation (if it happens), appointed a good coach that no one wanted, assembled the best roster we've had in over a decade, in the process rectified our cap, built a full time training facility and increased membership numbers. But you kept it up mate. Sharp and co can't get anything right. Dickhead.

Yeah i will kept it up, dickhead.

No need to get upset precious, it's a point of view, they have done plenty of good things no doubt about it. But all that good work will bet ruined if we go into this season on - 4. No one bar Pou thinks that is acceptable.

 

[Noise]

can't see why not

That is concerning

 

[EelsFan05]

Yeah i will kept it up, dickhead.

No need to get upset precious, it's a point of view, they have done plenty of good things no doubt about it. But all that good work will bet ruined if we go into this season on - 4. No one bar Pou thinks that is acceptable.

You calling other posters precious on this subject is ironic. Most of the good work this club does is ruined by 'supporters' like you. Who did you vote for in the last election? Or at you like most other agenda driven posters that don't like to publicly declare who/what they support so that you can jump to the other side when it suits.

 

[hineyrulz]

You calling other posters precious on this subject is ironic. Most of the good work this club does is ruined by 'supporters' like you. Who did you vote for in the last election? Or at you like most other agenda driven posters that don't like to publicly declare who/what they support so that you can jump to the other side when it suits.

:lol: Agenda driven, you don't have a clue. My agenda is a strong Parra I couldn't give a f**k about the factions. I didn't vote for anyone last election, I don't even live in the state. I am a leagues club member but can't vote because we don't do proxy voting. Something else this board promised but put it in the too hard basket. I'm just sick of this club being the laughing stock of the league. You don't think we won't be again if we start on - 4???