Sando sacked - confirmed **** crows only ****

[headache1]

Does anybody in here have any experience with contract law? I keep thinking about this payout we've made to Sanderson, and the earlier reports that we'd need to have his contract on our books for 2015/16 and counted under the new cap for football department spending, which is coming in next year. If legally speaking, our contract with Sanderson is deemed as having been completed this year with a lump sum payout, when no such cap is yet in place, is the AFL even able to force us to include it in the football departments spending over the next two years?

 

[AFC979810]

I just finished watching AFL360 from yesterday ... Voss is off the list

I've almost bought into the line that Roo has a coach in the barrel that none of us believed we could get.

But we'll see ...

Honestly the thing I just cannot understand is how the Melbourne media are acting like we missed out on Simon Goodwin. Do they honestly believe that this was a decision made on Wednesday AM - with no planning and we quickly called Simon Goodwin afterward to see if he was free? Because there is no way in hell that Roo would have been speaking to his best mate Simon Goodwin about his intentions prior to Wednesday.

Also - to those saying that Fagan had nothing to do with this decision... Horseshit.

You don't sign up as CEO on Monday and then have the coach sacked 48 hours later without the new CEO being fully involved in this decision making process. It simply could not happen.

Because the media had no idea of any of this - no rumours, no hints they are making it out to be a rash quick decision to justify that they are competent in their own work. The fact of the matter is that decisions like this require a lot of planning and people being quiet.

It has been brilliantly executed by the AFC. This is the ruthless streak we have been crying out for. We are very quickly becoming a force.

 

[AFC979810]

Does anybody in here have any experience with contract law? I keep thinking about this payout we've made to Sanderson, and the earlier reports that we'd need to have his contract on our books for 2015/16 and counted under the new cap for football department spending, which is coming in next year. If legally speaking, our contract with Sanderson is deemed as having been completed this year with a lump sum payout, when no such cap is yet in place, is the AFL even able to force us to include it in the football departments spending over the next two years?

Common sense would dictate that a payout this year would not count to the 2015/16 football department spending cap.

 

[headache1]

Common sense would dictate that a payout this year would not count to the 2015/16 football department spending cap.

Well that's what I thought, but this is the AFL we're talking about.

 

[baldandbroke]

Danger on Footy Show - there's a bit on this page:

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...ndersons-sacking/story-fnia3xzy-1227063389936

There's a bit of a write up here:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...king-patrick-dangerfield-20140918-10j1qi.html

 

[SpeciousArgument]

David King the only tv person being sensible about the sando sacking.

 

[baldandbroke]

Honestly the thing I just cannot understand is how the Melbourne media are acting like we missed out on Simon Goodwin. Do they honestly believe that this was a decision made on Wednesday AM - with no planning and we quickly called Simon Goodwin afterward to see if he was free? Because there is no way in hell that Roo would have been speaking to his best mate Simon Goodwin about his intentions prior to Wednesday.

Also - to those saying that Fagan had nothing to do with this decision... Horseshit.

You don't sign up as CEO on Monday and then have the coach sacked 48 hours later without the new CEO being fully involved in this decision making process. It simply could not happen.

Because the media had no idea of any of this - no rumours, no hints they are making it out to be a rash quick decision to justify that they are competent in their own work. The fact of the matter is that decisions like this require a lot of planning and people being quiet.

It has been brilliantly executed by the AFC. This is the ruthless streak we have been crying out for. We are very quickly becoming a force.

I think people are coming around to the fact that Roo wasn't offering Goodwin the head-coach role over the phone

Fagan wasn't involved in the decision, how could he be? He may have agreed with the process Or he may have given his opinion, but he would have had no say in Sanderson being sacked.

Was he kept up-to-speed? Of course, he's not going to start a role and then find out that the coach is gone without any prior knowledge ... but his influence on that decision was zero. Maybe his opinion on the pending decision was relevant to him getting the position. If he had shied away from a tough call like that, it would have been an indication of where he was at. He obviously understood the decision and agreed with the direction.

 

[Sanders]

I'm not referring to Woosha's age when I'm saying the game has past him by, but his ability to adapt to the changes to the game. He was still plying the Malthouse play book and when it didn't work had no answers.

Help me out here.

Was he an out of touch dinosaur when he was AFLCA coach of the year only 3 years ago?

Was he out of touch when WCE finished 4th just 3 years ago?
Was he out of touch when WCE finished 5th just 2 years ago?

When was this ice age?

 

[AFC979810]

I think people are coming around to the fact that Roo wasn't offering Goodwin the head-coach role over the phone

Fagan wasn't involved in the decision, how could he be? He may have agreed with the process Or he may have given his opinion, but he would have had no say in Sanderson being sacked.

Was he kept up-to-speed? Of course, he's not going to start a role and then find out that the coach is gone without any prior knowledge ... but his influence on that decision was zero. Maybe his opinion on the pending decision was relevant to him getting the position. If he had shied away from a tough call like that, it would have been an indication of where he was at. He obviously understood the decision and agreed with the direction.

How long do you think it took the board to court and sign Fagan? This process would have been in play for months.

Do you honestly believe that Fagan wouldn't have had his say in this? Its a pretty integral position at the club and will affect his job as CEO tremendously. He has his dirty little paws all over this.

Look at the timing. Surely if it was a board decision they would have reversed the announcements? No consideration of the hard decision Fagan made with Friend at the Brumbies?

Think this through intelligently mate.

 

[feenix67]

Help me out here.

Was he an out of touch dinosaur when he was AFLCA coach of the year only 3 years ago?

Was he out of touch when WCE finished 4th just 3 years ago?
Was he out of touch when WCE finished 5th just 2 years ago?

When was this ice age?

I agree. Worsfold had a long stint at West Coast - if you include his playing years, a very long stint. He clearly needed the break, and has shown he is still connected to the footy world by taking the Coaches Association spot.

Im almost positive he is #1 on the list.

 

[Sanders]

And of course it was well known that after 12 years as coach, and with his marriage publicly breaking down, that woosha was burnt out and needed a break. So he resigned.

After only 1 year out of the game, he's past it?

C'mon. Get real

 

[baldandbroke]

How long do you think it took the board to court and sign Fagan? This process would have been in play for months.

Do you honestly believe that Fagan wouldn't have had his say in this? Its a pretty integral position at the club and will affect his job as CEO tremendously. He has his dirty little paws all over this.

Look at the timing. Surely if it was a board decision they would have reversed the announcements? No consideration of the hard decision Fagan made with Friend at the Brumbies?

Think this through intelligently mate.

I'm not sure where you are coming from here ...

"He has his dirty little paws all over this" ? What does that mean? Do you have an axe to grind with Fagan from his Rugby days?

It has been discussed earlier in this thread to death - go back and look for yourself plenty of evidence that counters your position.

 

[AFC979810]

I'm not sure where you are coming from here ...

"He has his dirty little paws all over this" ? What does that mean? Do you have an axe to grind with Fagan from his Rugby days?

It has been discussed earlier in this thread to death - go back and look for yourself plenty of evidence that counters your position.

No. I love Fagan. Think his appointment is absolutely brilliant and he is the right man for the job.

The board would have had a fair idea that they wanted to remove Sando. Fagan would have been heavily involved in it all.

What evidence counters my position?

 

[baldandbroke]

No. I love Fagan. Think his appointment is absolutely brilliant and he is the right man for the job.

The board would have had a fair idea that they wanted to remove Sando. Fagan would have been heavily involved in it all.

What evidence counters my position?

Check back at about page 60 or so

 

[feenix67]

No. I love Fagan. Think his appointment is absolutely brilliant and he is the right man for the job.

The board would have had a fair idea that they wanted to remove Sando. Fagan would have been heavily involved in it all.

What evidence counters my position?

The fact he wasnt involved in the review, for starters. He would have bene aware, but he wasn't "heavily involved". And his paws looked pretty clean to me

 

[baldandbroke]

And of course it was well known that after 12 years as coach, and with his marriage publicly breaking down, that woosha was burnt out and needed a break. So he resigned.

After only 1 year out of the game, he's past it?

C'mon. Get real

I think Woosha ruled himself out didnt he Sanders ... not that means he won't change his mind ... but is he the type of coach that Roo and Co. will be banking on to bring the Crows up to the level they are spruiking? I'm not so sure.

 

[baldandbroke]

The fact he wasnt involved in the review, for starters. He would have bene aware, but he wasn't "heavily involved". And his paws looked pretty clean to me

And his paws looked anything but little !

 

[AFC979810]

Check back at about page 60 or so

Checked out from 57 - 70.

There is no evidence whatsover. Just people thinking that because he signed officially on Monday - he couldn't have been involved.

 

[AFC979810]

The fact he wasnt involved in the review, for starters. He would have bene aware, but he wasn't "heavily involved". And his paws looked pretty clean to me

He would have had access to all info from that review. He couldn't be a part of the review officially if he hadn't signed.

It is extremely naive to think that a company decision as big as this wouldn't have the heavy involvement, support of the new CEO who is responsible for all aspects of our footy club.

 

[feenix67]

He would have had access to all info from that review. He couldn't be a part of the review officially if he hadn't signed.

It is extremely naive to think that a company decision as big as this wouldn't have the heavy involvement, support of the new CEO who is responsible for all aspects of our footy club.

So you're saying that while Fagan was in charge of one of the bigger portfolios in the ARU, he was working nights being heavily involved in our internal review? Have you seen his wife? There's just not enough hours in the day

 

[AFC979810]

So you're saying that while Fagan was in charge of one of the bigger portfolios in the ARU, he was working nights being heavily involved in our internal review? Have you seen his wife? There's just not enough hours in the day

Ha ha ha..

I actually think thats his motivation in moving to the AFC. He has already shown all of the northern states his better half - now he needs to go around showcasing her to the southern states.

 

[GROTTO]

Rucci: "Sanderson has been sacked? What? When? I still don't even know who the new CEO is..."

Winning caption for my picture.

 

[baldandbroke]

Checked out from 57 - 70.

There is no evidence whatsover. Just people thinking that because he signed officially on Monday - he couldn't have been involved.

I think you missed some posts ...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...rmed-crows-only.1077206/page-61#post-35161164

But anyway, it seems you believe Fagan was instrumental in the sacking of Sanderson ... I completely disagree, and think it has been discussed round-and-round before on this very thread.

Thats ok, I don't need to convince you and please don't feel the need to try and convince me.

 

[GROTTO]

That's a pretty damning article for Victorian Clubs trying to poach Danger in today's The Age.

 

[GROTTO]

I think you missed some posts ...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...rmed-crows-only.1077206/page-61#post-35161164

But anyway, it seems you believe Fagan was instrumental in the sacking of Sanderson ... I completely disagree, and think it has been discussed round-and-round before on this very thread.

Thats ok, I don't need to convince you and please don't feel the need to try and convince me.

Even if he was in an unofficial capacity last week, I don't believe at all he was responsible for the decision. He may have had input, but I don't feel his input would have swayed one way or the other. The Club decision to sack him happened prior to Fagans appointment .