- May 31, 2017
- 377
- 456
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
yeah of course,you surely know more than bassett and co if he is appointed,maybe you should applyYes, they win if they don't appoint him because he's s**t and they avoid stepping in it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yeah of course,you surely know more than bassett and co if he is appointed,maybe you should applyYes, they win if they don't appoint him because he's s**t and they avoid stepping in it.
I’m not set on Scott.. the best candidate wins in my opinion.. but let’s look at the arguments:The first part is anecdotal but the second part contains some very fine points Gringo.
These are a convincing platform to launch an argument to the whole debate and I really can’t counter any of them off the top of my head without research.
Well done on lifting the standard and presenting an argument lacking in emotion.
Well done on lifting the standard and presenting an argument lacking in emotion.
so the club will be the panel?I won't because the club make dumb decisions all the time.
But they haven't even sacked Richo let alone appointed a panel. Farce ahahahahha.No.
Besides these panels can be a farce.
I may be 100% wrong, and if he gets the job I hope that I am 100% wrong, but I just do not believe that there are not better candidates.
That'll show them...splittersI'll walk away from the club until round one next year in protest.
I reckon the club saw the writing on the wall and have targeted Horse.In which case let’s dump Richo right now!
Seriously though, I think there’s more to it than just that. They are a completely different team.
Yeah I back up my tough talk with actions.That'll show them...splitters
Man seriously, I think you want to believe that because of your bias against Scott.He's backed kids in who Scott had told the club were no good, he's built the game plan around the sides strengths as well. They have all these hard nuts, he's made them a hard nut team. He's made some nuanced changes in the game plan rather than kick it to Brown. North supporters are ringing in talking about winning the premiership the way they are playing. I rate what Shaw has done to turn the side around from the dull lifeless corpse that they looked when he took over. When people called in to rate lists North were down with us as s**tter than Carlton and GC on SEN before he took over.
I agree, he's been ******* impressive has Shaw.He's backed kids in who Scott had told the club were no good, he's built the game plan around the sides strengths as well. They have all these hard nuts, he's made them a hard nut team. He's made some nuanced changes in the game plan rather than kick it to Brown. North supporters are ringing in talking about winning the premiership the way they are playing. I rate what Shaw has done to turn the side around from the dull lifeless corpse that they looked when he took over. When people called in to rate lists North were down with us as s**tter than Carlton and GC on SEN before he took over.
I was waiting for someone with an opposing view to my own to present an argument based on fact not emotive opinion.So if you did not consider arguments such as these, what were you basing your support of Scott on?
Why I do not want him is based on his coaching record and lack of success over decade. That he could suddenly turn this around in one off season would seem to me logically improbable.
We need to enter 2020 with momentum. Appointing some one with Scott's baggage (ie poor coaching record etc) means enter the season with a the hand brake on.
That he would also negatively impact factors such as membership is to me another good reason to not appoint him.
But they haven't even sacked Richo let alone appointed a panel. Farce ahahahahha.
So what process would you advocate? Someone speaks to their friends who speaks to another person who knows someone that has spoken to a certain person that may have an idea about a certain process that could lead to someone knowing which person we are talking about in the first place.
He sure is one angry muthaSo he's still s**t but an angry pissed off little man as well?
yeah of course,you surely know more than bassett and co if he is appointed,maybe you should apply
Man seriously, I think you want to believe that because of your bias against Scott.
None of that is remotely accurate. Scott obviously had the belief they didn't need to rebuild which was opposit of the club's thinking. Fair enough.. the only solution was to part ways
The way they're playing at the moment vindicates Scott. Not the other way around.
Their system as a foundation hasn't changed. A few tweaks here and there , yeah of course, those nuances have worked but as a whole , their game style remains the same.
We can't underestimate the attitude of players when they're put into that scenario. They could either completely flop or rise to the occasion.
Of course it doesn’t guarantee successI was not saying not to use a panel. Indeed we should or at least a working group/ sub-committee.
What I was saying that using a panel does not guarantee success, and indeed sometimes panels (not just on coaching) are biased. Depending who was on the panel may yield markedly different results.
ie
Lethers, Finnis, Bassat
Roo, Sheldon, Bassat
Ball, GT, Bassat
Well which ever way it goes let’s hope there will be the integrity as I’m sure there will be
Well if they at least interview the candidate that’ll be one step better than last time
Of course it doesn’t guarantee success
What you are suggesting is that it isn’t possible for Scott to be the best candidate or are you suggesting if the panel decides on Scott then in your opinion they have no credibility?
Bit of bias residing in there Stefan
Well which ever way it goes let’s hope there will be the integrity as I’m sure there will be
I do not thank that Clarkson or Beveridge are achievable.
Actually Scott thought the club needed a rebuild, so he hasn't been vindicated he's been proven entirely wrong.Man seriously, I think you want to believe that because of your bias against Scott.
None of that is remotely accurate. Scott obviously had the belief they didn't need to rebuild which was opposit of the club's thinking. Fair enough.. the only solution was to part ways
The way they're playing at the moment vindicates Scott. Not the other way around.
Their system as a foundation hasn't changed. A few tweaks here and there , yeah of course, those nuances have worked but as a whole , their game style remains the same.
We can't underestimate the attitude of players when they're put into that scenario. They could either completely flop or rise to the occasion.