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

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Holy crap!!! The last time I saw any AFL news today was around 15:00pm, now I log on to bigfooty and I'm met with this thread! So what have I missed? Who's responsible (besides Sando, obviously)? Who pulled the trigger? Who, what, where, how, and why?:eek:

All I can say is FAN-EFFING-TASTIC, my club's finally grown a pair!:p

P.S. I feel a little sad for Sando, he seemed like a genuinely nice guy and I was willing to give him next year as a last chance, but seeing the club take a strong stance in the pursuit of excellence is a breath of fresh air.

78 pages for you fabs, start reading!:)
 
You've missed my point.

I'm not saying that was the case, I'm saying the way they've handled the communication side destroys the perceived credibility of the decision, even if it was the right one.

No one remembers this s**t in the long run if we win games of football in the wash up. Everyone was so offended by Freo and now Freo are everyone's darling.

Winning is the mother of perception.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I don't know about the rest of you but I'm ******* exhausted.

The big fish, Fagan's appointment and now tonight... The last week on here has been more interesting than it was for the actual season. :p

Wait till you wake up tomorrow. Cameron is coming to the Crows announcement. :eek::p
 
I'm not sure if this has been suggested yet and I'm too lazy to read through the entire thread, so apologies if it already has been.
We were complaining not too long ago about our board; that the only chance the members could have of at least one member-elected board member was if we had some media attention and past players stirring the pot. I can certainly see some past players stirring the pot, McDermott being the most recent one I have read of. Should we be getting vocal also? It seems there are some big changes happening down at West Lakes, I feel like we should join in on the fun...
 
I don't think Fagan "starts" in three weeks time. His press conference also wasn't his starting point. I don't think his "right people in the right seats" line was just a coincidence. Decisions were being made. And I reckon the coaching situation at the club would have been the No 1 talking point during all interviews and discussions, going back however long. It's not hypotheticals either. It's real-time, real-life specifics. This is our club, these are our team results, here are the results of our review, here is the feedback from the players. What do you do?
+1
Remember how Fagan (and Chapman, with a whimsical expression) repeatedly mentioned how AF grilled the Panel? ;)
 
I'm worried about Dangers as well.
No one remembers this s**t in the long run if we win games of football in the wash up. Everyone was so offended by Freo and now Freo are everyone's darling.

Winning is the mother of perception.
I fhucking hate Freo, and I f-ing hate Ross Lyon. Seriously they can go jump.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

From a management perspective, AFC would have to have an experienced big name coach ready to go in order to pull off a move like this. Removing Sanderson, with his record, still large membership support, having to pay him out and the barriers he has faced post Tippett-gate is massive. The first thing the board would have done when even considering ending his tenure is look at the market for coaches, and it looks very patchy to me.

The only thing that could have spurred this without the above happening is the leadership group having lost faith in him. Since Dangerfield is a part of the leadership group either he would have played a role in this or he was cut off from the other leaders and will leave tomorrow. If the leadership group wanted sando out, and we haven't found an experienced coach, heaven help us.
 
I've got no issue how it was handled. Kept the media out of it totally, AFC command the story not the media and doesn't allow ferrets like Rucci to twist an angle when there isn't one.
Also makes the media muppets look stupid not to have the story or any inkling of one.
AFC have kept quiet on the Fagan signing and now Sando. Tight, cohesive and united. They've got a definite plan, they're controlling it on their terms and they're acting it out on their terms.
The rest will unfold. How it turns out in the next few years is another thing.

Also it happening so late in the afternoon means it hit the news and radio channels at the right time for maximum exposure.
 
Also, I saw something on the pride( an info graphic shared to it), on Facebook about danger requesting a trade to Vic.

That's bullshit right?
Yep. It's from a Facebook page that pretty much guesses on trades, drafts and other player movement. It posts real stories as well when they happen but it's largely guesswork.
 
So can anyone tell me is the sando sacked thread on the port board bigger than this one?

A couple of years above us and they're all suffering from delusions of grandeur.

"Da Pair are da number 1 c1ub in sA 11!!!"

"Dem Cowz are erelevent"

"We havz dem runnin sceerd"

"Da Portwiss is da Pair ground now, dem Cowz need go back to West Lakes"

"Cows are a plastic francheyes"

"We will win evree flag in da AFL, no-one will ever stop us"

Give them a couple of years and once they drop away reality will set back in as they'll be back down to sub 20k crowds as the bandwagoners will go back into hiding.
 
Does the AFL need to sanction it? Am not sure this constitutes a conflict of interest. Also, pretty well known so certainly not a behind closed door deal.

I think he's just stirring s**t.

The put money into it, not getting free money so I can't see that the AFL need to sanction it.

Surely putting your own money into an investment is kosher.
 
Posted in other thread.... but relevant here too


Meh, he was a past player when they did this, then he got on a board.

Also, they are investing together, not "Roo is giving them buckets of cash for no reason" .

Also Grant Thomas is an absolute flog.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top