View Full Version : Has the Knights appointment effect Judd's decision???
BomberAce7
1 Oct 2007, 14:30
Matthew Knights being our new coach have any effect on Judd saying no to us?
donsman4eva
1 Oct 2007, 14:41
I dont think he would have chosen us anyway in all honesty.
Do we really need any more Judd threads?
He is nothing to us.
Daytripper
1 Oct 2007, 15:02
Matthew Knights being our new coach have any effect on Judd saying no to us?
We will never, ever know.
Stupid question really.
We will never, ever know.
Stupid question really.
Why's it a stupid question? I'd have thought it's perfectly reasonable to ask such a thing. :confused:
BomberAce7
1 Oct 2007, 15:24
Why's it a stupid question? I'd have thought it's perfectly reasonable to ask such a thing. :confused:
Thank You!
Thank You!
No problem. :)
And, while we're on the subject .. I don't think it would have had a major bearing. But it's possible it had some effect. Particularly if you think about the fact that the chances of Judd coming would quite conceivably have increased if we'd appointed Sumich.
MarkJohnson#1
1 Oct 2007, 16:14
I dont think he would have chosen us anyway in all honesty.
A lot of people seem to share this view. I don't understand why he would prefer a team like Carlton, a rabble for the past 5 years ahead of Essendon. I can see his reasons for Collingwood being a preference, with facilities, potential for success etc. but I thought we would've had as good a chance, if not better than the blues and pies.
Daytripper
1 Oct 2007, 16:36
Why's it a stupid question? I'd have thought it's perfectly reasonable to ask such a thing. :confused:
Because its a question that nobody other than Chris Judd can ever answer.
And somehow I don't think he's going to tell us that that is the reason.
Broadside
1 Oct 2007, 16:37
A lot of people seem to share this view. I don't understand why he would prefer a team like Carlton, a rabble for the past 5 years ahead of Essendon. I can see his reasons for Collingwood being a preference, with facilities, potential for success etc. but I thought we would've had as good a chance, if not better than the blues and pies.
The Blues have finally got it together off field after 5 or 6 years of infighting and recriminations...the on field success will follow sooner or later. Whereas Essendon looks to be a little unsettled at the moment and I think you will get worse before you get better in terms of performance...we can only improve.
Anyway I think he'll go to Collingwood.
another question that you could ask is if Sheedy had been re-appointed, would Judd of come to Essendon??
DonMania#5
1 Oct 2007, 17:45
Maybe, who knows, who cares?
Gumbleton>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Judd :D
bomberbastic
1 Oct 2007, 17:47
The only hints Judd has given are that he wants to play at the MCG, wants a club that is in contention for the flag and a club that is financially sound. You could safely add a club that is willing to make room in it's salary cap for him (he will never be a veteran, so no back-ending here).
We are a club in turmoil with a poor recent track record that plays most games at the dome. If we have any sense, and our young guys are as good as I read, we shouldn't be building his salary expectations into our future plans. I don't think we were ever really in the chase, and I am glad he isn't coming our way.
Salmon Fever
1 Oct 2007, 22:09
if sumich had of been appointed i think it could only have helped getting judd but we chose to go down another path, the fact our list is top heavy with older stars means that at best we could remain in the same position for the next few years. even if we go up when lloyd, lucas retire we will go down again. I know he is a club man, i know he is great but lucas and lloyd wont be part of our next grand final team, if we can trade lucas to the bulldogs it can only benefit both teams, we need to deepen our list and bring a young brigade together all at once. Lucas wont be great forever.
Carlton and collingwood can only go one way thats up, there groups have an abundance of younger talent, collingwood has the facilites plus the media connections. Carlton has dick pratt, there facilites will improve to probably be the market leader in 3 years they have a great team off-field now. we had no competitive advantage.
He will go to collingwood no doubt, everyone wants to go there, its why we hate them.
AndyLesPaul
1 Oct 2007, 22:20
Honestly.
I don't think we shud be down in the dumps cuzza this, i mean his coming of age. and it's a huge risk to get him cuzza his injury. if u saw him in the last few games of the season. i mean no speed no kicks just handballed it off cuz his injury.
Bomber4eva
1 Oct 2007, 23:48
The Blues have finally got it together off field after 5 or 6 years of infighting and recriminations...the on field success will follow sooner or later.
Was this supposed to be a joke or a serious comment??? :D
GETSOMENUTS
2 Oct 2007, 02:06
Because its a question that nobody other than Chris Judd can ever answer.
And somehow I don't think he's going to tell us that that is the reason.
Judd wants to come to Collingwood but WC has said to provide more than one club as an option. As he still wants to do the right thing by WC he has chose Carlton as a choice because they have a bit to offer the eagles. I think Carlton is his "If things turn to crap at the trade table" option.
strategy
2 Oct 2007, 11:36
Matthew Knights being our new coach have any effect on Judd saying no to us?
No because if you contact Brad Hardie ex afl player , 2 yrs ago Judd was rumoured to be starting to deal with collingwood .Judd plays everyone like a fool , even the AFL .Judd in my opinion is attempting to rig the trade / draft system .
No because if you contact Brad Hardie ex afl player , 2 yrs ago Judd was rumoured to be starting to deal with collingwood .Judd plays everyone like a fool , even the AFL .Judd in my opinion is attempting to rig the trade / draft system .
Pretty tough to rig a system where 2 parties have to agree to the trade.
Judd would have needed to be a 'yes' man so that Jackson can continue to build his power. If we let these guys (Jackson and Co) get out of hand and put themselves ahead of the club, we are in for some dark years....Melbourne-esque.
Hardwick told his interviewers how he saw it. Jackson was powerless for years with Sheedy at the helm. Now he has a good henchman in Knights (a man not even respected by his old Richmond team mates as a leader) and will be able to have his ego served as he wants it.
I SOOOO hope I am wrong about this....but it doesn't look good.
Judd would have needed to be a 'yes' man so that Jackson can continue to build his power. If we let these guys (Jackson and Co) get out of hand and put themselves ahead of the club, we are in for some dark years....Melbourne-esque.
Hardwick told his interviewers how he saw it. Jackson was powerless for years with Sheedy at the helm. Now he has a good henchman in Knights (a man not even respected by his old Richmond team mates as a leader) and will be able to have his ego served as he wants it.
I SOOOO hope I am wrong about this....but it doesn't look good.
...that is such a pile of tripe. What a pathertic post. You are a disgrace. Well done on creating another account just to post that cr*p.
The Donners
2 Oct 2007, 12:55
Pretty sure the SaveEssendon Group may have put an end to any chance Judd may have been of coming to Essendon. Why would he want to come to a club where a select group of Essendon supporters are trying to oust our president and chairman from the board?
I created that account because I am new here.....and it is not tripe. I've been a fan for 35 years and am allowed to have my opinion. If you can give me a explanation why the Essendon board has acted the way it has I am always happy to hear it - after all we all want the same thing - success but i honestly don't see it happening for a while after what I have seen and heard lately.
A lot of people seem to share this view. I don't understand why he would prefer a team like Carlton, a rabble for the past 5 years ahead of Essendon. I can see his reasons for Collingwood being a preference, with facilities, potential for success etc. but I thought we would've had as good a chance, if not better than the blues and pies.
We have been a rabble since we were caught breaching the salary cap ( Something we have in common ), but maybe he sees our list and compares it to yours. Maybe he believes our club is on the rise whilst your club is set for a decde of rebuilding. James hird was a bloody champion and without him and sheeds u are nothing. This is not a troll - I am just defending the honour of my GREAT club.
Salmon Fever
2 Oct 2007, 13:32
We have been a rabble since we were caught breaching the salary cap ( Something we have in common ), but maybe he sees our list and compares it to yours. Maybe he believes our club is on the rise whilst your club is set for a decde of rebuilding. James hird was a bloody champion and without him and sheeds u are nothing. This is not a troll - I am just defending the honour of my GREAT club.
and your almost right except for the decade of rebuilding, you can cuild around 2 great KPP players in ryder and gumby within 3-4 years especially if you have a young ruckmen in laycock, KPP prospects in neagle and daniher plus the middys in jetta, hislop, davey, monfries, stanton, watson.
We have been a rabble since we were caught breaching the salary cap ( Something we have in common ), but maybe he sees our list and compares it to yours. Maybe he believes our club is on the rise whilst your club is set for a decde of rebuilding. James hird was a bloody champion and without him and sheeds u are nothing. This is not a troll - I am just defending the honour of my GREAT club.
We both know the only reason he would think about Carlton is that you would have offered him a sh*tload of cash.
Hi SOT4 - we can afford the cash and have plenty of room in our salary cap and have WA players and have access to extra corporate support. Any ideas why he said a flat "no" to us? I thought your opinion would be interesting to hear on this one.
I hope I'm not coming across too negatively mate - I care a LOT about the Dons...but I don't want us to become a self deluded, premiership starved club, just trying to keep face. I want us to be the best we can be. So when appointments like Knights happen, when we miss out on Judd for no apparent reason, I think we owe it to ourselves to ask these questions.
I have heard from the corporate world about Jackson and his ego so I put it out there.
Any thoughts?
Hi SOT4 - we can afford the cash and have plenty of room in our salary cap and have WA players and have access to extra corporate support. Any ideas why he said a flat "no" to us? I thought your opinion would be interesting to hear on this one.
I hope I'm not coming across too negatively mate - I care a LOT about the Dons...but I don't want us to become a self deluded, premiership starved club, just trying to keep face. I want us to be the best we can be. So when appointments like Knights happen, when we miss out on Judd for no apparent reason, I think we owe it to ourselves to ask these questions.
I have heard from the corporate world about Jackson and his ego so I put it out there.
Any thoughts?
I know Jackson, I don't love the guy but he isn't the villain you make him out to be.
My thoughts on Judd- we were never really a massive chance to get him. I obviously can't say exactly why he didn't choose us. It could have been because we play a lot at the Dome, it could have been because he doesn't rate our list, it could have been because we didn't have a coach and may have to rebuild a bit after the loss of Sheeds and Hird. I don't know. What I do know is that Pratt would have gone all out to get Judd. The way a businessman's mind would work, and Pratt is a true businessman, is that he would see the chance for a quick fix for the club and he would pursue it all costs. I would say that Carlton have offered Judd ridiculous amounts of money- 1.2mil+- and that is something I don't think we would ever do as a club. IMO, and it is only my opinoin, Judd never seriously entertained us. It was always Collingwood for success or the Blues for money.
Apologies for my response to your earlier post, it just seemed ludicrous to the point that I assumed someone had made a new account to pump up SE. I take offence from your post because it is a personal attack on Jackson on the basis of rumours from the corporate world. I personally think Knights was the best candidate behind Bomber Thompson. People assuming the board did this to control the club are insane. How long will the baord last if in three years we haven't improved. The board will forever be remembered as those who sacked Sheedy, their interest is in Essendon being successful, and as such they would have absolutely no motivation to appoint an inferior coach. Appointing Dimma was the easy option, but the board chose who they thought was the best candidate. Knights was also recommended by the Strike management group ahead of Hardwick, so they obviously thought he was the best candidate as well. Your point that Knights was appointed so the board can rule is insane, as Knights owes the board nothing more than Dimma.
The Donners
2 Oct 2007, 16:20
I know Jackson, I don't love the guy but he isn't the villain you make him out to be.
My thoughts on Judd- we were never really a massive chance to get him. I obviously can't say exactly why he didn't choose us. It could have been because we play a lot at the Dome, it could have been because he doesn't rate our list, it could have been because we didn't have a coach and may have to rebuild a bit after the loss of Sheeds and Hird. I don't know. What I do know is that Pratt would have gone all out to get Judd. The way a businessman's mind would work, and Pratt is a true businessman, is that he would see the chance for a quick fix for the club and he would pursue it all costs. I would say that Carlton have offered Judd ridiculous amounts of money- 1.2mil+- and that is something I don't think we would ever do as a club. IMO, and it is only my opinoin, Judd never seriously entertained us. It was always Collingwood for success or the Blues for money.
Apologies for my response to your earlier post, it just seemed ludicrous to the point that I assumed someone had made a new account to pump up SE. I take offence from your post because it is a personal attack on Jackson on the basis of rumours from the corporate world. I personally think Knights was the best candidate behind Bomber Thompson. People assuming the board did this to control the club are insane. How long will the baord last if in three years we haven't improved. The board will forever be remembered as those who sacked Sheedy, their interest is in Essendon being successful, and as such they would have absolutely no motivation to appoint an inferior coach. Appointing Dimma was the easy option, but the board chose who they thought was the best candidate. Knights was also recommended by the Strike management group ahead of Hardwick, so they obviously thought he was the best candidate as well. Your point that Knights was appointed so the board can rule is insane, as Knights owes the board nothing more than Dimma.
Not disputing it, but could you provide evidence where the Strike Management Group recommended Knights over Dimma? I realise one of the coaching scouts was Andrew McKay, what are his credentials with regards to coaching or finding a coach? Is it just that he is a past player?
Did any former Essendon players sit on the board to choose Knights?
Is it that most of the Essendon players are happy that Knights was chosen because perhaps their careers are saved??? Had Dimma got the position I would suggest at least 10 of them would've been without a job... that's enough for any of the players to choose Knights!!! Self preservation!!!
Don't get me wrong, I've warmed to Knights' appointment but on the same token I'm skeptical about how it came about!
I think its fair to say guys the Knights decision didnt have an effect when you consider the record of the coach of the club Judd has chosen. How many straight losses was it?:o
What I heard is that Jackson did not agree with Dimma on direction in the interview process and only Knightsy's last "we can do it" PowerPoint presentation got him the quick fix appointment. So my point isnt insane it is just questioning mgmnt. It is not insane either that the board would want to try to take more control after losing Sheedy, Hird and no September again - I'm not questioning their intention for the club, just not convinced they are doing this in a healthy way.
I am not a fan of SE. Tonight is a waste of time and money. And like you, I don't know how things will go but I bloody hope they go well. I started watching in the short years of Billy Stephens and remember what it is like to be embedded at the bottom. I never want the club to go there again.
And again, the fact that we are where we are, begs these questions be asked.
I will be out there each week next year supporting Knightsy and the team who are ALL just trying to do their best - but i am still to be convinced the board is too. Time will tell.....
Cheers and Go Bombers!
What I heard is that Jackson did not agree with Dimma on direction in the interview process and only Knightsy's last "we can do it" PowerPoint presentation got him the quick fix appointment. So my point isnt insane it is just questioning mgmnt. It is not insane either that the board would want to try to take more control after losing Sheedy, Hird and no September again - I'm not questioning their intention for the club, just not convinced they are doing this in a healthy way.
I am not a fan of SE. Tonight is a waste of time and money. And like you, I don't know how things will go but I bloody hope they go well. I started watching in the short years of Billy Stephens and remember what it is like to be embedded at the bottom. I never want the club to go there again.
And again, the fact that we are where we are, begs these questions be asked.
I will be out there each week next year supporting Knightsy and the team who are ALL just trying to do their best - but i am still to be convinced the board is too. Time will tell.....
Cheers and Go Bombers!
How about that when Dimma was asked about how to treat Aboriginal players, he replied "the same as everyone else".
That didn't help his cause at all.
I have also heard that in the media simulation, he stuffed it up, where as Knighter nailed it.
My point is all the above, as well as what you stated is all media speculation, and we don't know whats true and what isn't
I think everyone should have an opinion and voice it as well BUT just remember the amount of sucess we have had and then look at other boards/clubs and how they have performed.
We can do much better for sure, but not if we are divided.
Guess you are right - will we be much stronger if we stick together no matter what what we think. Even if speculation is right about the board it wont help the club if supporters don't stay bonded no matter how good/bad we think things are.
Glad I did join up and voice my concerns and good to read to read your replies...
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 08:43
How about that when Dimma was asked about how to treat Aboriginal players, he replied "the same as everyone else".
That didn't help his cause at all.
I have also heard that in the media simulation, he stuffed it up, where as Knighter nailed it.
My point is all the above, as well as what you stated is all media speculation, and we don't know whats true and what isn't
I think everyone should have an opinion and voice it as well BUT just remember the amount of sucess we have had and then look at other boards/clubs and how they have performed.
We can do much better for sure, but not if we are divided.
I think Knights will revolutionise how coaches coach teams! I have jumped on board!
However, where you suggested how Dimma would treat aboriginals, I 100% agree with him, if they want equality, treat them equally! I have no time for molly-coddling! Every man equal, no treating any man differently because of their creed or colour.
There is a major difference with regards to treating everyone the same and having respect for another's culture i.e. Houli. They are enabling him to follow his religious guidelines and I am behind that, but I'm not behind being softer to one ethnic or alternative culture than another i.e. aboriginals.
I have aboriginal family members, I am not aboriginal myself, but I do know that for my family members in particular they do not want any special treatment because they are aboriginal, contrary to stereotypes!
However, where you suggested how Dimma would treat aboriginals, I 100% agree with him, if they want equality, treat them equally! I have no time for molly-coddling! Every man equal, no treating any man differently because of their creed or colour.
There is a major difference with regards to treating everyone the same and having respect for another's culture i.e. Houli. They are enabling him to follow his religious guidelines and I am behind that, but I'm not behind being softer to one ethnic or alternative culture than another i.e. aboriginals.
I have aboriginal family members, I am not aboriginal myself, but I do know that for my family members in particular they do not want any special treatment because they are aboriginal, contrary to stereotypes!
That is such an ignorant and simplistic a view. Do you aboriginal family members live within the aboriginal culture? Do they continue to follow aboriginal customs and beliefs? Judging from your post I'm going to say no. There is a cultural difference between indigenous Australians and non-indigenous australians which is undeniable. Aspects of their culture would mean that ranting and raving would be completely futile and even damaging. Their customs involve things such as having trouble answering direct questions, and trouble saying 'no', problems which have hampered the legal system for years. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from employing the same coaching style to players when it will be completely ineffective. If Davey drops a mark, what can be gained from ripping into such a quietly spoken guy? This is applicable not just to race, but to individual players, as an approach such as that advocated by Dimma is outdated and ineffective.
Look at Port Adeliade, they have such success with indigenous players because they are good at recognising the differences in culture and managing them. A team which has such a large indigenous contigent as Essendon would have to recognise and deal with these issues, which Knights is doing. His approach demonstrates that he is socially aware, and should be applauded, while Dimma's approach shows that he is outdated. Pagan was one of the last remaining coaches who emplyed that method, and he was sacked because of his outdated styles. You don't understand the difference between being 'soft' to one culture, and recognising that certain players will have different needs. This doesn't mean that Knights won't give an indigenous player a rocket if he is being deliberately lazy, or misbehaving, it simply means that he knows that this will not always be effective. It shows a felxibility in his thinking. Knights is advocating education about their needs so that he may better coach them. How is that a bad thing?
To say 'if they want equality then they should be treated equally' is liek saying that immigrants should forego their religion if they want Australian citizenship. It shows a lack of comprehension of the complexity that multiculturalsim in Australia involves. I see this as the most impressive aspect of his coaching so far.
Guess you are right - will we be much stronger if we stick together no matter what what we think. Even if speculation is right about the board it wont help the club if supporters don't stay bonded no matter how good/bad we think things are.
Glad I did join up and voice my concerns and good to read to read your replies...
That's the key to my dissapointment with many posters. There is a difference between voicing well founded and logical concerns about the clubs chocies, and attempting to damage the club. Save Essendon was trying to hurt the club, just as all those who were saying sack Sheedy and Horsborough were. Even if we don't agree with a decision, for the stability of the club it is essential we support the baord and the club, and then express our concerns in the right environment (the AGM). We are not Richmond or St Kilda.
I think Knights will revolutionise how coaches coach teams! I have jumped on board!
However, where you suggested how Dimma would treat aboriginals, I 100% agree with him, if they want equality, treat them equally! I have no time for molly-coddling! Every man equal, no treating any man differently because of their creed or colour.
There is a major difference with regards to treating everyone the same and having respect for another's culture i.e. Houli. They are enabling him to follow his religious guidelines and I am behind that, but I'm not behind being softer to one ethnic or alternative culture than another i.e. aboriginals.
I have aboriginal family members, I am not aboriginal myself, but I do know that for my family members in particular they do not want any special treatment because they are aboriginal, contrary to stereotypes!
Why is there a major difference between a persons cultural beliefs and their religious beliefs?
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 13:21
That is such an ignorant and simplistic a view. Do you aboriginal family members live within the aboriginal culture? Do they continue to follow aboriginal customs and beliefs? Judging from your post I'm going to say no. There is a cultural difference between indigenous Australians and non-indigenous australians which is undeniable. Aspects of their culture would mean that ranting and raving would be completely futile and even damaging. Their customs involve things such as having trouble answering direct questions, and trouble saying 'no', problems which have hampered the legal system for years. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from employing the same coaching style to players when it will be completely ineffective. If Davey drops a mark, what can be gained from ripping into such a quietly spoken guy? This is applicable not just to race, but to individual players, as an approach such as that advocated by Dimma is outdated and ineffective.
Look at Port Adeliade, they have such success with indigenous players because they are good at recognising the differences in culture and managing them. A team which has such a large indigenous contigent as Essendon would have to recognise and deal with these issues, which Knights is doing. His approach demonstrates that he is socially aware, and should be applauded, while Dimma's approach shows that he is outdated. Pagan was one of the last remaining coaches who emplyed that method, and he was sacked because of his outdated styles. You don't understand the difference between being 'soft' to one culture, and recognising that certain players will have different needs. This doesn't mean that Knights won't give an indigenous player a rocket if he is being deliberately lazy, or misbehaving, it simply means that he knows that this will not always be effective. It shows a felxibility in his thinking. Knights is advocating education about their needs so that he may better coach them. How is that a bad thing?
To say 'if they want equality then they should be treated equally' is liek saying that immigrants should forego their religion if they want Australian citizenship. It shows a lack of comprehension of the complexity that multiculturalsim in Australia involves. I see this as the most impressive aspect of his coaching so far.
You are more than welcome to go off on a tangent and interpret what I said however way you want. Isn't treating people different because of their colour, creed or religion racist???
The more you molly-coddle... the deeper the divide!
You have no proof of how Port Adelaide treat their aboriginals.
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 13:25
Why is there a major difference between a persons cultural beliefs and their religious beliefs?
Culture is a "norm" of a society or community group, a religion is a set of common beliefs. Really, they are subtle differences.
Having studied your question in the past, to me, there is not a great difference between the two... but I'm not overly religious.
I realise I said major difference, what I meant was "main" difference. I'm sure I could have worded it better.
You are more than welcome to go off on a tangent and interpret what I said however way you want. Isn't treating people different because of their colour, creed or religion racist???
The more you molly-coddle... the deeper the divide!
...that is ridiculous. Treating people different by respecting their culture is not racist. As I said, your view is way too simplistic, and you seem unable to recognise that there are cultural differences. This is a point that has been accepted by the legal system, in the recognition and use of their own legal customs in the judicial system. Stating that there are differences in culture and the way that indigenous individuals live is not discriminating against them. Every indigenous person in Australia will not experience the same cultural variations (take for example your family members who no doubt do not live within the Aboriginal culture), simply those who have been brought up within the culture. Racism asserts a superiority of race, or a major difference that results due to the race of an individual. This approach from Knights is based upon the upbringing and cultural education of the individual, and not the colour of their skin or the simple fact that one of their parents was indengous, or their great grandfather was indegnous.
You have said there is little difference between relgiion and race, so to follow your line of reasoning the club changing Houli's training around is a form of discrimination. Your line fo thinking woudl see Houli training with everyone else as if he wants accpetance and equality then he shoudl act the same, and be treated the same. Even you recognised that their treatment of Houli is acceptable and correct, yet you fail to see how ludicrous and flawed your argument is? Your view shows an atounding amount of ignorance about what most would consider simple issues.
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 13:55
...that is ridiculous. Treating people different by respecting their culture is not racist. As I said, your view is way too simplistic, and you seem unable to recognise that there are cultural differences. This is a point that has been accepted by the legal system, in the recognition and use of their own legal customs in the judicial system. Stating that there are differences in culture and the way that indigenous individuals live is not discriminating against them. Every indigenous person in Australia will not experience the same cultural variations (take for example your family members who no doubt do not live within the Aboriginal culture), simply those who have been brought up within the culture. Racism asserts a superiority of race, or a major difference that results due to the race of an individual. This approach from Knights is based upon the upbringing and cultural education of the individual, and not the colour of their skin or the simple fact that one of their parents was indengous, or their great grandfather was indegnous.
You have said there is little difference between relgiion and race, so to follow your line of reasoning the club changing Houli's training around is a form of discrimination. Your line fo thinking woudl see Houli training with everyone else as if he wants accpetance and equality then he shoudl act the same, and be treated the same. Even you recognised that their treatment of Houli is acceptable and correct, yet you fail to see how ludicrous and flawed your argument is? Your view shows an atounding amount of ignorance about what most would consider simple issues.
We are going to agree to disagree.
We are going to agree to disagree.
Alternatively we could agree you're wrong? Just a thought.;)
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 14:55
Alternatively we could agree you're wrong? Just a thought.;)
I'm not wrong, we have differing views. You think being soft on the minority is helping them, I don't.
I'm not wrong, we have differing views. You think being soft on the minority is helping them, I don't.
I hate that people on here fail to comprehend the majority of people's posts. They simply cannot understand them, its annoying as hell. My post read,
You don't understand the difference between being 'soft' to one culture, and recognising that certain players will have different needs. This doesn't mean that Knights won't give an indigenous player a rocket if he is being deliberately lazy, or misbehaving, it simply means that he knows that this will not always be effective.
You simply display yet again that you can't understand that difference, you seem to lack the capability for abstract thought.
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 15:34
I hate that people on here fail to comprehend the majority of people's posts. They simply cannot understand them, its annoying as hell. My post read,
You simply display yet again that you can't understand that difference, you seem to lack the capability for abstract thought.
Seems to me as though its alright for you to take what people say out of context but not the other way around? Let me guess, you are a girl/woman? I live with one, I know how they behave!
Hislop200
3 Oct 2007, 16:04
Who cares
Geel, port, coll, kangas did alright this year without Judd
Glad he didnt come to us would have lost a lot future
Seems to me as though its alright for you to take what people say out of context but not the other way around? Let me guess, you are a girl/woman? I live with one, I know how they behave!
Nope I'm a bloke. I don't care how you Mum/Sister behaves, and don't see how it's relevent. When did I take what you said out of context?
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 16:20
Nope I'm a bloke. I don't care how you Mum/Sister behaves, and don't see how it's relevent. When did I take what you said out of context?
I agree with Hislop200
I agree with Hislop200
Good to see you answered the question...
The Donners
3 Oct 2007, 16:44
Nope I'm a bloke. I don't care how you Mum/Sister behaves, and don't see how it's relevent. When did I take what you said out of context?
But if you were a girl/woman shouldn't I treat you differently because you have a different culture
I can't even remember my original post, contrary to other posters I don't have all day to be making posts on a football forum!
But if you were a girl/woman shouldn't I treat you differently because you have a different culture
Haha , you really don;t know what culture means do you? This is the problem, you're obviously about 12 years old. It's okay I'll stop know, as I realised that a kid of your age wil be stubborn and won't accept the right point of view.
I can't even remember my original post, contrary to other posters I don't have all day to be making posts on a football forum!
So far today you have made 25 posts, between 8 30am and 4 30pm- seems you do have all day champ.
The Donners
4 Oct 2007, 08:38
Haha , you really don;t know what culture means do you? This is the problem, you're obviously about 12 years old. It's okay I'll stop know, as I realised that a kid of your age wil be stubborn and won't accept the right point of view.
So far today you have made 25 posts, between 8 30am and 4 30pm- seems you do have all day champ.
Gees, if that continues I'll get the sack!!! Hahahahaha
Ummm... are you a stalker???
AndyLesPaul
4 Oct 2007, 08:43
Knights would have convinced him to come if he wanted to come her