Last year's form?

[eays]

What form Sante? In those 8 wins to end last season we beat Melbourne (16th), Port (12th), West Coast (15th), Essendon (12th), Brisbane(6th at the time finished 11th), Hawks (2nd with nothing to play for), Freo (13th) and Melbourne (16th) and it sucked a lot of posters here into thinking we were better than we really were.

EXACTLY, EXACTLY, EXACTLY ... i was saying the same at the time, those wins were meaningless against teams that were either rubbish, tanking or both. This is one of the 2 great misconceptions that seem to float around over the last year defending Wallace. Our form was never really that good last season, and anyone that thinks so is delusional.

The other great misconception is that RFC 09 are somehow similar to Geelong before they went on their upward run - that Wallace is sonehow like Thompson and that Geel persevered with Thomspon when it appeared over and we should too with Wallace. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. Geel's list was levels better than ours. But even putting that somewhat subjective assessment aside, the undisputable fact why Wallace and Thompson's situation is different is that there were some pretty big mitigating circumstances surrounding Thompson's/Cat's losses that year. I wont go into it, but rest assured, anyone connected intimately with footy (i.e. journo's, board members etc) would know why Thompson was given an extra year and his poor results excused. The same cannot be said for Wallace. He has failed, plain and simple. He must go.

 

[getthefooty]

Should of.

Ah, it's all mute anyway.

Wrong. Completely wrong. It irritates me when people use 'should of' normally, let alone trying to correct someone else with it. What he did was correct.

 

[JSFish]

Yeah I'm surprised by that RATD. To be honest I respect your intelligence so much that I'm worried it's some special case where should of is right.

 

[Tigertom]

He has failed, plain and simple. He must go.

Dont fret.............he will be gone at seasons end

 

[richoatthedisco]

Wrong. Completely wrong. It irritates me when people use 'should of' normally, let alone trying to correct someone else with it. What he did was correct.

Yeah I'm surprised by that RATD. To be honest I respect your intelligence so much that I'm worried it's some special case where should of is right.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

What about mute! C'mon! Surely that was a clue. It doesn't all go well for your academic futures boys. Heheheh.