- Mar 10, 2014
- 9,266
- 10,859
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Man Utd, Celtic, Tanunda
Saw Wrinkles had an anti PB's article in th Tiser. Read the first sentence. That was enough to turn the page.
I assume is was the usual vitriol and diatribe from Gramps?
Also an article about Greg Griffin saying we have no hope in hell of winning a court case on the issue of the PB.
So 2 articles attacking PAFC.
One from a player/coach of a club that has precious little success to speak of over a century of existence, and to whom the meaning of something truly heartfelt and iconic is anathema. And a man who pooh pooh's anything to do with history, heritage and tradition (apart from things associated with the War).
The other from a person who took us to court to stop us entering the AFL, and currently is engaging in a court battle against our redevelopment, and who perhaps is not as legally superior as someone who may be qualified in copywright/IP/trademark/restraint of trade law as a Queens Counsel.
The latter also giving the Club the benefit of his astonishing football savvy and nouse in offering us all insight into how Port should undertake their business and what they should focus their efforts into (well, not so much "proferring", but telling the people running the club that he knows more than them - ie. Port should concentrate on winning games, not losing premiership points, et al).
Oh golly gee wiz, YES.
I certainly will take note of what they say, for sure.
I assume is was the usual vitriol and diatribe from Gramps?
Also an article about Greg Griffin saying we have no hope in hell of winning a court case on the issue of the PB.
So 2 articles attacking PAFC.
One from a player/coach of a club that has precious little success to speak of over a century of existence, and to whom the meaning of something truly heartfelt and iconic is anathema. And a man who pooh pooh's anything to do with history, heritage and tradition (apart from things associated with the War).
The other from a person who took us to court to stop us entering the AFL, and currently is engaging in a court battle against our redevelopment, and who perhaps is not as legally superior as someone who may be qualified in copywright/IP/trademark/restraint of trade law as a Queens Counsel.
The latter also giving the Club the benefit of his astonishing football savvy and nouse in offering us all insight into how Port should undertake their business and what they should focus their efforts into (well, not so much "proferring", but telling the people running the club that he knows more than them - ie. Port should concentrate on winning games, not losing premiership points, et al).
Oh golly gee wiz, YES.
I certainly will take note of what they say, for sure.