Mr Rucci says: Show your faces

[spindoctor]

Originally posted by RooDog
yes im Rucci! you have blown my cover!

nar really im a 19yr old uni student... if i knew how to take pictures i have on my computer and put them on the net id put my photo up!!No offence taken McLeod23 i just decided to email once and he has replied on a few occasions with things to post on the internet!

Adam

I'm pretty sure a 19 year old uni student would be able to put a picture of themselves on the net.

You are Rucci, aren't you?

The thing that ruins your story is that there's an 'Attach file' option at the bottom of the post box which is quite large and obvious and includes gifs and jpegs. Post a picture of yourself with today's paper thanks. If there is no proof of date, you could just be Rucci posting any old photo of someone.

 

[_espoir]

OHH so its okay for YOU not to post something spindoctor but RooDog HAS TO?

 

[spindoctor]

I'm not trying to say I'm not Rucci after posting all his messages.

And he offered to - said he had all these photos on his computer. I didn't offer to.

I just find it highly unusual that a 19-year-old uni student wouldnt have a clue how to post a picture, especially considering it's an OPTION when you post a message.

 

[Mong]

Originally posted by jmorg1
It's a bit of a joke really. I think of this forum as a place where supporters can hang out and have a chat about their team. Kind of like when you are heading home on the bus or train from a game and you meet other supporters and you just start chatting.

Exactly. It's just a bit of fun.

I don't think any of us seriously expect the Crows to be answerable to us. Not on here anyway. Only if we approach the club by email or letter or whatever.

Are we the only fans in Australia that discuss these issues?

I've got to say, Rucci really appears to be consumed by the discussion on this board. He really seems to get him fired up. I think he erred by revelaing that he reads here and having correspondence with members of this forum.


****

 

[RooDog]

Originally posted by spindoctor
I'm not trying to say I'm not Rucci after posting all his messages.

And he offered to - said he had all these photos on his computer. I didn't offer to.

I just find it highly unusual that a 19-year-old uni student wouldnt have a clue how to post a picture, especially considering it's an OPTION when you post a message.

my files are too big because they were taken with a high quality digital camera!!

 

[_espoir]

Originally posted by RooDog
my files are too big because they were taken with a high quality digital camera!!

email them to me i'll resize them and upload them for ya

still dont have to prove yourself!

 

[RooDog]

Originally posted by _espoir
email them to me i'll resize them and upload them for ya

still dont have to prove yourself!

nar its okay i dont mind....

people can see me if they like...

if you really want ill even post my name if it makes you feel better Spinny

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by RooDog
nar its okay i dont mind....

people can see me if they like...

if you really want ill even post my name if it makes you feel better Spinny

That's bullsh*t!!

Don't post your pic or your name if you don't want to. I wouldn't and I don't think you should. Don't allow yourself to be pressured into it.

You don't have to prove anything to anybody. It's ludicrous to suggest that YOU are Rucci, and I can't even vaguely understand why anyone would even think that you are.

Just keep up the good work as the intermediary. Whether we agree with Michaelangelo or not is irrelevant. It's all good fun and I'm enjoying all of this. I hope it continues.

 

[RooDog]

Mr Rucci has agreed to meet with the members of this board...

he just has to get back to me with a time that is best for him soon and then perhaps it could be organised??? who would come from here?

 

[Cove Cobra]

I'd be quite happy to meet anybody who is interested in the future of the Adelaide Football Club Mr Rucci; other than opportunistic journalists who wish to create stories "out of thin air".

Remember the Monday morning of Ayres' sacking Michaelangelo?

Unfortunately I feel that IMO you do not have the best interests of the Club at heart and are more interested in stirring up trouble.

oh and p.s. My name is Jay

 

[Fergus]

I'd be happy to meet Michelangelo.

 

[maccas_no1]

Rucci you have stooped to new lows and now you are starting to dig Your team loses by 40 pts yet all you can worry about is what is posted here, and think that some 'unoffical match committee' has been formed I used to think that Mike Sheehan was a useless piece of crap journo, but sorry Michaelangelo you take the cake, if you have to rely on what is post here to get a stories then you need to get out of your profession, please note I wrote PROFESSION, Profession meaning you could be a least PROFESSIONAL about your bloody job

By the way my name is Marty.

 

[arrowman]

OK, there's a group of supporters on this board (or in the pub, or in the outer at Footy Park, or on the bus, it doesn't matter) who have several concerns
1. That Neil Craig would not be a good choice for coach of AFC;
2. That the AFC may favour Craig in the selection process and not be diligent enough in the process;
3. That the Adelaide media are giving Craig a far too easy run in terms of criticism, and that this in turn may tell the rest of the world (including prospective coaches) that AFC is not going to follow an objective process.

Now, whether these opinions are right or wrong, the point is they are just that - opinions. The problem (to me, as a newcomer to this forum, directed here by the way by one of Rucci's articles ) is No 3 above - that these "counter-Craig" opinions are not getting a fair enough airing in the media.

Assuming the opening post on this thread is genuinely a message from Rucci, I would say this to the other member of this board:

Rucci is not interested in dissenting opinions. He has access to these already and chooses to not publish them. He prefers to stir up controversy and talk of "unofficial match committees" and "unsuccessful aspirants for the AFC board". In his (journalistic) world the opinions are not the issue - the fact that they exist, and may be stirred up into a "controversy", is.

So if you do meet with Rucci, keep this in mind. If you want a public airing of genuine dissenting views about Neil Craig, then be careful. Rucci may only be interested in writing about the "UMC" and trying to stir up a Carlton-like situation, not (as he should be) giving a genuinely objective assessment of Craig's potential as a coach - pluses AND minuses.

 

[spindoctor]

I wouldn't meet with Rucci. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him and I would not recommend any of you do so either, as he seems to be the type who would slap a lawsuit on you for defaming him.

Plus, I'm not exactly keen to come back from overseas just to meet with the Ruccdog...

 

[dA Crow]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
Rucci you have stooped to new lows and now you are starting to dig Your team loses by 40 pts yet all you can worry about is what is posted here, and think that some 'unoffical match committee' has been formed I used to think that Mike Sheehan was a useless piece of crap journo, but sorry Michaelangelo you take the cake, if you have to rely on what is post here to get a stories then you need to get out of your profession, please note I wrote PROFESSION, Profession meaning you could be a least PROFESSIONAL about your bloody job

By the way my name is Marty.

Spot on ... the more we discuss this fool, the more crap he will continue to produce.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by arrowman
OK, there's a group of supporters on this board (or in the pub, or in the outer at Footy Park, or on the bus, it doesn't matter) who have several concerns
1. That Neil Craig would not be a good choice for coach of AFC;
2. That the AFC may favour Craig in the selection process and not be diligent enough in the process;
3. That the Adelaide media are giving Craig a far too easy run in terms of criticism, and that this in turn may tell the rest of the world (including prospective coaches) that AFC is not going to follow an objective process.

Now, whether these opinions are right or wrong, the point is they are just that - opinions. The problem (to me, as a newcomer to this forum, directed here by the way by one of Rucci's articles ) is No 3 above - that these "counter-Craig" opinions are not getting a fair enough airing in the media.

Assuming the opening post on this thread is genuinely a message from Rucci, I would say this to the other member of this board:

Rucci is not interested in dissenting opinions. He has access to these already and chooses to not publish them. He prefers to stir up controversy and talk of "unofficial match committees" and "unsuccessful aspirants for the AFC board". In his (journalistic) world the opinions are not the issue - the fact that they exist, and may be stirred up into a "controversy", is.

So if you do meet with Rucci, keep this in mind. If you want a public airing of genuine dissenting views about Neil Craig, then be careful. Rucci may only be interested in writing about the "UMC" and trying to stir up a Carlton-like situation, not (as he should be) giving a genuinely objective assessment of Craig's potential as a coach - pluses AND minuses.

Very astute post.

You've saved me a lot of typing because my thought processes went along identical lines to yours.

Along with fellow media "personalities" in McDermott, Rowe and Aiston, he has been guilty of pushing Craig's barrow disproportionately to Craig's ability.

IMO he's only interested in controversy, not a balanced media presentation.

So what would be the point of such a meeting??

 

[arrowman]

Thanks macca23. I charge $25/hour for typing.

Seriously, if anyone on this board is going to talk to the media in person, it should be with Graham Cornes. He would actually understand the issues.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

if anyone does meet with him, might be worth while recording the conversation aswell, so when he does twist your words you have something to fall back on.

Would not trust him!

 

[tribey]

Originally posted by arrowman
OK, there's a group of supporters on this board (or in the pub, or in the outer at Footy Park, or on the bus, it doesn't matter) who have several concerns
1. That Neil Craig would not be a good choice for coach of AFC;
2. That the AFC may favour Craig in the selection process and not be diligent enough in the process;
3. That the Adelaide media are giving Craig a far too easy run in terms of criticism, and that this in turn may tell the rest of the world (including prospective coaches) that AFC is not going to follow an objective process.

Now, whether these opinions are right or wrong, the point is they are just that - opinions. The problem (to me, as a newcomer to this forum, directed here by the way by one of Rucci's articles ) is No 3 above - that these "counter-Craig" opinions are not getting a fair enough airing in the media.

Assuming the opening post on this thread is genuinely a message from Rucci, I would say this to the other member of this board:

Rucci is not interested in dissenting opinions. He has access to these already and chooses to not publish them. He prefers to stir up controversy and talk of "unofficial match committees" and "unsuccessful aspirants for the AFC board". In his (journalistic) world the opinions are not the issue - the fact that they exist, and may be stirred up into a "controversy", is.

So if you do meet with Rucci, keep this in mind. If you want a public airing of genuine dissenting views about Neil Craig, then be careful. Rucci may only be interested in writing about the "UMC" and trying to stir up a Carlton-like situation, not (as he should be) giving a genuinely objective assessment of Craig's potential as a coach - pluses AND minuses.

Quality post arrowman.

I hereby put you and macca23 in charge of getting our avatars and sigs back

 

[Cove Cobra]

Originally posted by arrowman
OK, there's a group of supporters on this board (or in the pub, or in the outer at Footy Park, or on the bus, it doesn't matter) who have several concerns
1. That Neil Craig would not be a good choice for coach of AFC;
2. That the AFC may favour Craig in the selection process and not be diligent enough in the process;
3. That the Adelaide media are giving Craig a far too easy run in terms of criticism, and that this in turn may tell the rest of the world (including prospective coaches) that AFC is not going to follow an objective process.

Now, whether these opinions are right or wrong, the point is they are just that - opinions. The problem (to me, as a newcomer to this forum, directed here by the way by one of Rucci's articles ) is No 3 above - that these "counter-Craig" opinions are not getting a fair enough airing in the media.

Assuming the opening post on this thread is genuinely a message from Rucci, I would say this to the other member of this board:

Rucci is not interested in dissenting opinions. He has access to these already and chooses to not publish them. He prefers to stir up controversy and talk of "unofficial match committees" and "unsuccessful aspirants for the AFC board". In his (journalistic) world the opinions are not the issue - the fact that they exist, and may be stirred up into a "controversy", is.

So if you do meet with Rucci, keep this in mind. If you want a public airing of genuine dissenting views about Neil Craig, then be careful. Rucci may only be interested in writing about the "UMC" and trying to stir up a Carlton-like situation, not (as he should be) giving a genuinely objective assessment of Craig's potential as a coach - pluses AND minuses.

Another quality comment from an intellectual Adelaide supporter. Excellent grammar and very thought-provoking.

I agree, Michaelangelo would only sensationalise the issue, which is extremely disappointing due to the fact we are ONLY die-hard, TRUE supporters who are interested in the long-term profitabality; both on-field and off-field, of the Organisation.

As macca23 has stated on so many previous occasions, total transparancy of the selection process must take place. IMO i think that the process will drag on (as Triggy has stated) until they are sure.

How long does it take for the Selection group to analyse candidates? Surely not 10 - 12 weeks? There is a core group of 3 coaches (including Craig) plus 2 -3 assistants to have a look at.

Surely the Club knows which path it wants to take?

 

[Mong]

Arrowman I couldn't have said it better myself (and I have tried with a couple of your points).


****

 

[tribey]

I wonder what Michelangelo Goebbe... sorry Rucci thinks of this particular thread?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by dyertribe
I wonder what Michelangelo Goebbe... sorry Rucci thinks of this particular thread?

Think he is of the theory that any publicity is good publicity. Sure he is getting a kick out of it.

 

[PrideOf]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Sure he is getting a kick out of it.

He'll be sitting in a lonely room in his lonely house hitting refresh every 30 seconds to see what effect he's having on half-a-dozen footy fans.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by PrideOf
He'll be sitting in a lonely room in his lonely house hitting refresh every 30 seconds to see what effect he's having on half-a-dozen footy fans.

Must pride himself on upsetting Crow supporters ... that's why we should not take him to seriously ... I'm more concerned about him putting of prospective coaches with the Craig propoganda.