Lindsay Fox

[kolchak]

After seeing your president on "on the couch" on foxtel and how he reacted to questions being asked about why he sacked GT...its pretty obvious he has no case for sacking him....Even with talented players, footbal, or whatever business, it is still about good leadership, wich GT provided...

Remember how the Scotts (another Transport magnate and sponsor) tried to sack Mark Williams from PA....then they went on to win a premeirship and he gave them the finger....well....maybe Lindsay Fox had a few words in this decision....

I've never liked GT but now I'm thinking that he wasn't so bad and that the saints board have made a massive mistake....you all probably allready knew that...

 

[Kildonan]

It was exactly the opposite actually.
Fox was a mate of GT's and was livid when he was sacked.

 

[kolchak]

It was exactly the opposite actually.
Fox was a mate of GT's and was livid when he was sacked.

okay, I was just making a comparasin...still your president has been dogding lots of questions rather than answering them, get the feeling he is between a rock and a hard place.

 

[nicko016]

okay, I was just making a comparasin...still your president has been dogding lots of questions rather than answering them, get the feeling he is between a rock and a hard place.

He is between a rock and a hard place. Coachs are judged on their onfield performance and GT's was around 60% win/loss ratio for the last few years. He can't exactly say he sacked him because he wanted power and GT took it off him, can he?

 

[sauce_head]

Butterss has contributed to turning the club around so should firstly be respected for that.

Secondly, he has the interest of the StKilda Football Club as his number one priority.

Thirdly, there was concern that GT had too much control. This was not just internal concerns, but external as well. His autocratic style meant he was responsible for too much and should something happen to him, who could take over?

That "the club is bigger than the individual" was something GT preached to effect. Unfortunately for him, he was deemed to be in this position.

Only time will tell, lets hope it proves to be the correct decision.

Interesting articles by Patrick Smith:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20419621-12270,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20401522-12270,00.html

 

[Bourky23]

is fox still buying the board or taking it over or watever he said he'd do??

 

[m.diddy]

This is not a dig at you Kolchak.

Don't you love it how everyone thought GT was **** and should be sacked now once he is so many people are saying it was the wrong decision and he provides good leadership etc.

 

[sainter]

Don't you love it how everyone thought GT was **** and should be sacked now once he is so many people are saying it was the wrong decision and he provides good leadership etc.

It makes me sick.

 

[kolchak]

This is not a dig at you Kolchak.

Don't you love it how everyone thought GT was **** and should be sacked now once he is so many people are saying it was the wrong decision and he provides good leadership etc.

Fair enough...I have givin it to your coach on this forum when he got sacked...but I think Im wrong...

The only relavent reasons I have heard are, "cant take the club to the next level", "ruled in an autocratic style". At best these are weak reasons, because they have not been backed up by anything substantial...

Football has many ironies, this is just another irony...what kind of answer is that.

 

[sainter]

Fair enough...I have givin it to your coach on this forum when he got sacked...but I think Im wrong...

The only relavent reasons I have heard are, "cant take the club to the next level", "ruled in an autocratic style". At best these are weak reasons, because they have not been backed up by anything substantial...

Football has many ironies, this is just another irony...what kind of answer is that.

Well I'll probably give you an even more curious answer because I disagree with his sacking but will defend the right and the reasoning for the board to make the decision that they did.

I'm not going to defend the decision that the board made because I don't agree with it but at the same time it's far too easy to dismiss this as a personal matter between Butterss and Thomas. As disappointing as it is for those of us who respected Thommo and wanted him as our coach in 2007, sacking someone for the autocratic style that you speak of is a legitimate reason. Thomas had more control over the club than any other coach in the league and if he is at odds with the board and unwilling to hand back that power then it makes it very difficult for him to continue.

As m.diddy eluded to earlier it's also quite irritating having to listen to everyone criticise the decision to sack him when the majority of those people have spent the past 6 years bagging the hell out of him.

 

[kolchak]

Well I'll probably give you an even more curious answer because I disagree with his sacking but will defend the right and the reasoning for the board to make the decision that they did.

That is curious....sorry if I am irratating you, but that was not my intention...I was just questioning the reasons why they made the decision, cause the only answers I have heard from them (the StKilda Board, namely the president), are answers like football is full of ironies...Not really answering any questions just dodging them...not really trying to defend GT as much...

 

[sainter]

No, that's fair enough.

Basically I think it came down to the President, CEO and Board coming to the conclusion that he wasn't the man to coach us to a premiership. Like I said Thommo probably had more control than any other coach in the league as we didn't really have a Football Manager which meant he was in charge of the players contracts and that kind of thing.

I'm disappointed with the decision but I think some people out there have taken some liberties and drawn their own conclusions. To be fair Rod Butterss didn't really come across too well on TV the other night which didn't help his cause.

 

[samm]

Well I'll probably give you an even more curious answer because I disagree with his sacking but will defend the right and the reasoning for the board to make the decision that they did.

That is curious....sorry if I am irratating you, but that was not my intention...I was just questioning the reasons why they made the decision, cause the only answers I have heard from them (the StKilda Board, namely the president), are answers like football is full of ironies...Not really answering any questions just dodging them...not really trying to defend GT as much...

Grant thomas was bound by contract not to bag the vclub in any way. The president as bound by contract as well probably to keep the reasons to himself or to the board .

therefore he could never answer the questions honestly.

I have no idea whether it was a good idea to sack him or not. but ajust the same as others, i had gotten very tired of people cxonstantly bagging him, and now all of a sudden when the saints sack him, he is everybody's friend and they all think it was a bad idea and they love him.

nearly to the point of the saying 'greatest thing since sliced bread'.

Teh only other comments to make is that from what Carolyne wilson had written that he would not hand back control to the club.

what development in the younger players did he do?

what recruitement has he done well over the past 3 years? not very well, i would say. what 18 -20 year old have come thru the system? He might say the it was beverdge who was given full reign, but i bet ya he didn't pick mcgough, murray, rix etc

 

[SpInNeR]

Grant thomas was bound by contract not to bag the vclub in any way. The president as bound by contract as well probably to keep the reasons to himself or to the board .

therefore he could never answer the questions honestly.

I have no idea whether it was a good idea to sack him or not. but ajust the same as others, i had gotten very tired of people cxonstantly bagging him, and now all of a sudden when the saints sack him, he is everybody's friend and they all think it was a bad idea and they love him.

nearly to the point of the saying 'greatest thing since sliced bread'.

Teh only other comments to make is that from what Carolyne wilson had written that he would not hand back control to the club.

what development in the younger players did he do?

what recruitement has he done well over the past 3 years? not very well, i would say. what 18 -20 year old have come thru the system? He might say the it was beverdge who was given full reign, but i bet ya he didn't pick mcgough, murray, rix etc

what 18-20 year olds????


gilbet, mcQualter, f.Watts (extra two years under his belt)

2 prelims in a row dont hand you a bunch of early picks....


dont make an opnion after the one game you went to this year...as it was...just because you were in the finals.

I had to edit your post because Samm made the comment you quoted, not Kolchak

 

[sainter]

I agree with Spinner but try and make the point by attacking the argument and not the user.

This season we've got a crack at a top 10 pick which will no doubt go on a promising 17/18 year old and I'm sure we won't give up a second or third pick either unless it's for a player who will address one of our weaknesses.

Our terrible seasons from 2000 - 2002 allowed us to rebuild our list with some gun youngsters and in the last few years we haven't had that opportunity.

 

[kolchak]

I agree with Spinner but try and make the point by attacking the argument and not the user.

Im not trying to attack the saints...this sorta **** has happened at Hawthorn too and I was not very happy about it...I thought our board made the problems for themselves in our case...Im not trying to say GT was good or he was crap, in this thread, I was trying to work out the reasons why he got sacked...They seem pretty weak to me and I thought there could be other reasons. I like Lindsay Fox, so I wasn't out to bag him, but maybe there was someone influentinal at the club, a sponsor, who had a say in this descision, it does happen, PA was my example...and they are a very strong club...

 

[SpInNeR]

he was talking ab0out me attacking the poster...not you.