Remove this Banner Ad

The Blight Saga - Is this what really happened?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Joined
May 23, 2001
Posts
10,724
Reaction score
1,099
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Probaby rubbish, but interesting....

Got this from a friend this morning. May be crap, but a good read all
the
same...
____

Had an interesting chat this morning with a friend from who prides
himself
on good footy mail which 9 times out of 10 is usually accurate. The
timing
for the start of all this goes back a month or two. Consider the
following:
-

1. St Kilda board ask Blight for a plan for next season. He gives them
a
list of twelve names who he doesn't want to see next season. The list
contains Burke, Harvey, Leowe, Everett and Jones.

2. A member of the board leaks the list to one of the 12 players.

3. Burke and Leowe who have links to Danny Frawley approach him asking
to
be picked up next season on one year contracts with richmond knowing
that
they are going to be cut. They dont think at this stage that the board
will ever sack Blight or
that there is a problem with him.

4. There are rumblings at board level about Blights behavior and
possible
concerns about some of the names on the hit list and these are leaked
to
one of the hit list players.

5. The twelve players, with renewed confidence that their coach may not
be
as "untouchable" meet and take the list to Caro at The Age and tell her
of
a players revolt. Remember some of these names have been involved in
the
"removal" of other coaches in recent years.

6. The 12 players let the board know that they have gone to the press
and
are going to give the word to run the story unless something is done
about
there futures.

7. Grant Thomas becomes persona non grata in the St Kilda coaches box.
(see
point 2???)

8. Blight is furious and refuses to attend functions outside those
associated with coaching the team.

9. Butterss gets an unprovoked grilling of the decade on TF about
Blight
from Caro and Walls.

10. Butterss now knows that there is some truth in the players claims
about
going to the press. (Nettlefold may have been questioned by Caro or
got
the impression from her that she was holding on to some hot info on St
Kilda to further confirm Butterss and the boards concerns about the
press
knowing something)

11. Board moves quickly and sacks Blight defusing any story about a
list
and or leaks from the board at St Kilda. Caro gets the drop on the
story.
Burke is interviewed leaving the club meeting jovial but "shocked" and
states "nothing that happens in
football surprises me anymore."

12. Thomas installed as coach with deputies Burke and Harvey.

Unrelated but interestingly enough Frawley refusing to re-sign with
Richmond until the end of the year. Has he been sounded out under the
banner of the possibility of the club that he played 250 plus games
for
going to the wall if something isn't done?? If the Tigers fall from
the
eight this year would he be any better off staying there or going back
to
coach St kilda where he understands the culture and has clearly
embraced
the club in the past? Point 3 above definitely took place so he would
have known some time back that something could be "on" at St Kilda.

Butterss referred to a list of dot points being Blights Strategic plan
which was unacceptable to the board. Was this the list of names???

Interesting.
 
well it definatly sounds like it could of happen. The lack of reasons why Bilght was sacked has left the door open.

I reckon it could be very very much correct. Noone at St Kilda has gone into any detail at all about why Blight was sacked...other than "he didnt embrace the culture of the club"

That makes me think....Harvey Burke and Loewe are three of the best footballers St Kilda has ever produced...maybe the 'culture' that Butterss mentioned was referring to them?

Blight wanted them gone, the board didnt, blight get sacked for not embracing the culture.


If it is true its pretty disgraceful. There is no room for favourites in football. If that was the case then Russel Ebert would be playing at the Power right now!
 
This email was forwarded to me from someone at my old man's work, so I don't know the source directly....but the mail I've heard is Thomas is as good as the coach for 2002 - which is just amazing, especially when you have the likes of Chris Connolly and John Worsfold putting their hands up.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I like the bit about caro and wallsy pushing it along... trying to get malcolm sacked. Which one will lose his/her place when malcolm inevitably goes back on the couch ?

We should all be grateful to the saints for getting his head off the TV
 
Did anyone see on Talking Richmond last night how they were talking about the Brownlow...and Caro said "Well Matthew Richardson won Richmond the game on Friday, he should get 3 votes"....quizzical looks from Bruce and Wallsy.

Caro: "Oh, I've mentioned Richmond again....maybe a bad example"

Gee, do you think? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Did anyone see on Talking Richmond last night how they were talking about the Brownlow...and Caro said "Well Matthew Richardson won Richmond the game on Friday, he should get 3 votes"....quizzical looks from Bruce and Wallsy.

Caro: "Oh, I've mentioned Richmond again....maybe a bad example"

Gee, do you think? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I had a different though process when she said that GOALden Hawk.

I thought her point in itself was well made - Richo was a goose for the first 3 quarters but was possibly the best player afield in the last. He may well have won the game for the Tigers - at the very least, had a significant influence on the result.

Caro's point therefore was should a player be able to receive 3 votes for a quarter of football. This is fair enough.

What I thought when Bruce and Robert looked at her was that she had been told to stop going for a Richmond example to reinforce whatever (positive) point she was making.

I thought her rapid attempt to backtrack had the effect of saying "Oops, I did it again!"

(Which has now put images of Caro singing Britney Spears songs! :eek: )
 
Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Did anyone see on Talking Richmond last night how they were talking about the Brownlow...and Caro said "Well Matthew Richardson won Richmond the game on Friday, he should get 3 votes"....quizzical looks from Bruce and Wallsy.

Caro: "Oh, I've mentioned Richmond again....maybe a bad example"

Gee, do you think? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

God that was funny. I immediately thought of you when she said that Goalden one!
 
Originally posted by CJH


I had a different though process when she said that GOALden Hawk.

I thought her point in itself was well made - Richo was a goose for the first 3 quarters but was possibly the best player afield in the last. He may well have won the game for the Tigers - at the very least, had a significant influence on the result.

Caro's point therefore was should a player be able to receive 3 votes for a quarter of football. This is fair enough.

What I thought when Bruce and Robert looked at her was that she had been told to stop going for a Richmond example to reinforce whatever (positive) point she was making.

I thought her rapid attempt to backtrack had the effect of saying "Oops, I did it again!"

(Which has now put images of Caro singing Britney Spears songs! :eek: )

No I agree....I think someone down at Seven has had a word to the Talking Footy team, in particular Caro, about using Richmond as an example for everything. But I don't think it was that good an example, I don't think anyone though Richo deserved the 3 votes on Friday night.

A better example would have been the Essendon v Sydney final in 1999 when Mercuri had about 24 possessions in a quarter and a half before been benched with the game already Essendon's. That was an example of where a player was BOG, yet was on the bench for a significant period of time.
 
You really need to u/s the distinction b/w BOG and MVP for a particular game. Most people use them as the same term, and whilst they are obviously similar in meaning, there is a difference.

Mercuri in that 99 final (we're still waking up in the middle of the night screaming about that performance!) was definitely the MVP (ie. he was the most valuable player in deciding the result), but that doesn't always make you the BOG.

That was the point they were discussing on TF. The Brownlow has traditionally favoured the BOG, who is more consistent throughout a whole match rather than 'matchwiningly' brilliant in patches. But as the game speeds up, and players spend more time on the bench, it will be harder to keep judging it that way.

I think the sun must have got to Leigh though. If he thinks the current Brownlow system has flaws, then one where a few people sit down at the end of the year and argue about who was the best would devalue the whole thing beyond any sense of reason.


www.redandwhiteonline.com - Sydney Swans Online
 
It is largely accurate and has been posted in a.s.a-r as it occured, not after, which means that for regaulars in that forum, the sacking was no surprise. The board has been leaking at least since after the St Kilda / Collingwood practice match in February, so the undermining was on very early. AS for the visit to Frawley, this has been interpreted as players looking after themselves, but this was to sound out Frawley regarding his future. THe teminators code for embracing the club suggests they see a favourite son as the answer.
Mud

Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Probaby rubbish, but interesting....

Got this from a friend this morning. May be crap, but a good read all
the
same...
____

Had an interesting chat this morning with a friend from who prides
himself
on good footy mail which 9 times out of 10 is usually accurate. The
timing
for the start of all this goes back a month or two. Consider the
following:
-

1. St Kilda board ask Blight for a plan for next season. He gives them
a
list of twelve names who he doesn't want to see next season. The list
contains Burke, Harvey, Leowe, Everett and Jones.

2. A member of the board leaks the list to one of the 12 players.

3. Burke and Leowe who have links to Danny Frawley approach him asking
to
be picked up next season on one year contracts with richmond knowing
that
they are going to be cut. They dont think at this stage that the board
will ever sack Blight or
that there is a problem with him.

4. There are rumblings at board level about Blights behavior and
possible
concerns about some of the names on the hit list and these are leaked
to
one of the hit list players.

5. The twelve players, with renewed confidence that their coach may not
be
as "untouchable" meet and take the list to Caro at The Age and tell her
of
a players revolt. Remember some of these names have been involved in
the
"removal" of other coaches in recent years.

6. The 12 players let the board know that they have gone to the press
and
are going to give the word to run the story unless something is done
about
there futures.

7. Grant Thomas becomes persona non grata in the St Kilda coaches box.
(see
point 2???)

8. Blight is furious and refuses to attend functions outside those
associated with coaching the team.

9. Butterss gets an unprovoked grilling of the decade on TF about
Blight
from Caro and Walls.

10. Butterss now knows that there is some truth in the players claims
about
going to the press. (Nettlefold may have been questioned by Caro or
got
the impression from her that she was holding on to some hot info on St
Kilda to further confirm Butterss and the boards concerns about the
press
knowing something)

11. Board moves quickly and sacks Blight defusing any story about a
list
and or leaks from the board at St Kilda. Caro gets the drop on the
story.
Burke is interviewed leaving the club meeting jovial but "shocked" and
states "nothing that happens in
football surprises me anymore."

12. Thomas installed as coach with deputies Burke and Harvey.

Unrelated but interestingly enough Frawley refusing to re-sign with
Richmond until the end of the year. Has he been sounded out under the
banner of the possibility of the club that he played 250 plus games
for
going to the wall if something isn't done?? If the Tigers fall from
the
eight this year would he be any better off staying there or going back
to
coach St kilda where he understands the culture and has clearly
embraced
the club in the past? Point 3 above definitely took place so he would
have known some time back that something could be "on" at St Kilda.

Butterss referred to a list of dot points being Blights Strategic plan
which was unacceptable to the board. Was this the list of names???

Interesting.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom