Wilson was in our house ... FFS :(

[gavin_miller]

If I didn't get it into my head that my beloved club was on the downward spiral, something I saw at halftime (yes, even before the collapse) was the thing that has left sourest taste in my mouth with this current 'era' of the club ... I was at the back of the ET stand chatting, and its right near the presidents box entry. I saw with my own eyes, one REBECCA WILSON standing inside sinking the free booze and eating the free food, mingling with our people and laughing it up like she was our no.1 supporter. I was speechless, until I asked someone nearby what the f#ck was up with that ... and apparently many people were not happy with her being there, yet there was big Bazza and a few of the other board cronies socialising with her ... I mean, some people wouldnt think anything of this, but to me, it represents the total lack of heart at the club at the moment. Why would you have your enemy so close? I guess at least she will have some direct quotes for her next 'losing culture' story on us.

Tonight in general was certainly in the top five lowest moments for me as a Sharks fan of 20+ seasons...

 

[spider]

Its a shame she had probably already written her column - maybe next week there maybe some fireworks.

 

[Frenzy.]

It's obvious. She has power. The board is under siege. They need to shore up support.

I hope she enjoyed the free booze and food and STILL gets up tham royally.

 

[Generalzod]

Have your enemies closer....

 

[PJ]

Exactly Frenzy, and shows how our board are nothing more than political animals looking at covering their own ar$e$ and will sink to any depths to do so.

 

[King of the Hill]

In any game where politics is involved you have to shore up the media, regardless of how much you hate them.

 

[PJ]

That's fine KOTH, but are they doing it for the club or for themselves?

For mine it is the latter, as that is where Wilson has been aiming.

 

[King of the Hill]

Well as far as they would see it, the club and themselves are one.

 

[beekershark]

It seems like a deliberate attempt to win her over so that when the bevy of angry emails and letters about the board hit her desk in coming weeks, she may go easier on them.

I think its more about self preservation than getting the CLUB a better go in the media.

 

[Special K]

She was a friend of Stevo's for years due to their tv work, while he played for us but that didn't stop her having shots.

Screw her.

 

[zeppelin]

It seems like a deliberate attempt to win her over so that when the bevy of angry emails and letters about the board hit her desk in coming weeks, she may go easier on them.

I think its more about self preservation than getting the CLUB a better go in the media.

I cant think of any other explanation. Why else would she be here?

 

[beekershark]

She was a friend of Stevo's for years due to their tv work, while he played for us but that didn't stop her having shots.

Screw her.

yes, that's correct, yet still she went ahead and published that Stevo was talking to greg Pearce about returning early this year. She called both pearce and stevens and was told directly that no, stevo was definately not returning and that no discussions were taking place. She said that she was still going to publish to have a bit of fun, or words to that effect.

Not much cred at all.

 

[gavin_miller]

I understand the keeping your enemies close thing, but I just thought given all the BS I have seen this past month/20 years ... I thought that the club would have some sense of pride somewhere, somehow ... and I was wrong.

 

[black,white & blue]

You don't win a jerno over with a free feed and a few cans of piss. My guess is she moves in them circles, was probably in the Manly box yesterday???

 

[King of the Hill]

Look no offence to the females on here but what do women journos know about league anyway?

I don't get it.

 

[fizman]

Look no offence to the females on here but what do women journos know about league anyway?

I don't get it.

ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT!

I was watching The Main Game the other night and they have some bird as an AFL journalist and she is DISGRACEFUL.

They do this thing where the journos go head to head on a topic. They get 1 minute to debate the topic. The poor bloke didn't get chance to even speak because she didn't shut-up. All the other panelists had a good laugh.

 

[dannyboy]

Look no offence to the females on here but what do women journos know about league anyway?.

A library full more than our joke of a coach....even those that write recipes. Is Margaret Fulton still alive? Maybe she could be signed for Stu's job.

 

[King of the Hill]

I dont get this PC idea of employing women to write about sport.

Their very nature means they cannot have any involvement in the sport, unless they are physiotherapists or cheerleaders.

They cannot have any experience in league. So what gives them the qualification to comment on it? Their lack of expertise precludes them from giving any sort of expert analysis, so they are reduced to providing opinion - which is almost always flawed. Exhibit A, Rebecca Wilson.

Now I'm not saying you have to have intimate knowledge of a topic to have an opinion on it, eg. everyone has certain thoughts on politics without being involved in the game, but lets not lose sight of what product is being offered, which is, just to reiterate, OPINION, not FACT.

Females are not adequately qualified to pontificate on league issues. That is why they are so often reduced to spouting gossip pieces and looking down their noses at the latest drunken/SMS scandals.

If you need further proof, contrast Rebecca Wilson's pieces with Roy Masters'. It's chalk and cheese.

Roy's:
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/sportcolumns/masters/

Of particular concern with the input of women is that they often know deep down that they are speaking out of turn so to compensate, they have a chip on their shoulder and get very aggressive. Women journos, more than men, try to be the story rather than simply report the news. Good journos like the late Peter Frilingos do not need to make egotistic points in their columns about what stories they broke first. Their record speaks for itself.

There is also an interesting article here:
http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2005/05/23-1457-9712.html

 

[dannyboy]

...They cannot have any experience in league. So what gives them the qualification to comment on it? Their lack of expertise precludes them from giving any sort of expert analysis, so they are reduced to providing opinion

And yet many of us male forumites may have:
a) no experience at playing at 1st grade level (some may have no experience at playing at any level...ever)
b) no experience at coaching at first grade level or even anything below
c) the sole experience of being a "sideline-eye" (sorry chief for stealing your moniker momentarily) at NRL level and maybe, just maybe, in suppoprt of our own offspring in the junior rugby league.

None of the above stops us from harping on endlessly as legend in our own minds.

 

[carcharias]

And yet many of us male forumites may have:
a) no experience at playing at 1st grade level (some may have no experience at playing at any level...ever)
b) no experience at coaching at first grade level or even anything below
c) the sole experience of being a "sideline-eye" (sorry chief for stealing your moniker momentarily) at NRL level and maybe, just maybe, in suppoprt of our own offspring in the junior rugby league.

None of the above stops us from harping on endlessly as legend in our own minds.

yes but we have a penis which makes us more knowledgable about footy