DKP, please - after all these years, I can't take it any more.It is not “persay”. It is “per se”.
Should have been ‘a propos’ anyway. Can’t be bothered putting the grave above the a.
Should have been ‘a propos’ anyway. Can’t be bothered putting the grave above the a.
Mods, shouldn't this thread be in the Saga section?
You would imagine they will deal with it if/when they see it.
Modding can get a tad busy
#teamredfish
Benfti likes to keep it simple and just blame dank. Obliviously he also thinks the punishment we received was of course to much. But the fact is benfti, the matter is far more complex then that. The so called conspiracy theory's are fact.The AFL made the EFC a scapegoat when the federal government and ASADA came knocking. Sure the EFC made some mistakes but they did no more, or no less then the rest of the competition. The EFC where isolated for brand management.
All the evidence exists the EFC where conspired against, for those of us who have followed this very closely read every minuet of the court case etc. know this.
Little has done the best he possibly thought he could, but he was between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately he chose to suck up the the AFL and by doing this has angered many of us. I fully understand why he did it, and respect the man, but it does not mean for one second that I or many of us like it.
Absolute ■■■■■■■ rank cop out, that’s what that is.
Hird and Co wanted the program to be better than the rest of the competition and you’re content with EFC having made some mistakes.
The gate was left wide open for the scapegoaters to do their thing.
No, it absolutely is not, did we have problems. Yes, did many of the other teams in the comp, yes. The accountability was purely put on the EFC, for the AFL to protect itself and the other clubs.
When did it become wrong or inconvenient or embarrassing to want to see culpable parties made accountable?
You know those who complain that some of us have not entirely moved on, are not obliged to participate in this thread. If you have moved on, good luck to you. But don't slag off the ones- like myself - that have not.out of curiosity, what do you expect to gain from not moving on, let alone coming on here and wallowing in mutual pity party for hird ?
I’m not saying don’t do it, as you’ve gotta do what best suits you in any situation, but i am generally interested in what people expect to happen by doing it ?
Hird’s not coming back as coach. Even if it’s proved 100% that he did nothing wrong, it’s not going to change the perception of him in the eyes of people who want to see him as a bad guy in this saga.
Seems like there’s only really 2 options. Either accept and move on whether you agree with it or not, or don’t accept it and stop actively supporting the club cos of this decision.
it seems counterproductive to ones own sanity to stay in a state of limbo persay of not moving on one way or the other.
Sorry but that’s just rubbish.
Hird not coming back as coach has so little to do with moving on or not, I cant see why people keep mentioning it. Moving on is nothing to do with Hird and everything to do with the club, the media and the AFL.
Its not about a choice of moving on.
Its about being bitter and twisted over what happened over the past three years and wanting someone to be held accountable.
Accountable for
- breaches of privacy - appealing JMidds decision would mean breaches of the privacy act could be pursued, as it stands he has deemed the players and others voluntarily gave information to a party (the AFL) who chose not to keep it private. - What a farce. Why should we move on from that?
The Players deserve better, the supporters deserve better
-continual perpetual damaging leaks to the media - why should and did the club allow, with seemingly no complaint, the governing body of which they are a party, to undermine them in the press? For three years the AFL had a campaign of undermining and creating damage to one of their own clubs. Why should we, as members, move on from that without an explanation?
And that’s just the start. There is a whole lot more that prevents some people from completely moving on and it has very little to do with Hirds coaching career.
Lets hope JT has some success in holding people and the AFL accountable for their actions. The club certainly can’t, or won’t
So, the two positions for voting at the AGM are Little and Jackson.So there will be 5 freshly elected directors after the next AGM, and those leaving have high level skills and experience. I like Paul Littles succession planning with Lindsay Tanner and Chris Muir coming in as appointments, with excellent contacts and influence. Heffernan’s background is outstanding, as is Brasher’s. So I can’t criticise the appointments we have on board (so to speak).
The treatment and loss of Hird was a literal tragedy, but in terms of playing the hand that Little was dealt, I think Little has done an outstanding job to set up the club to move forward.
I think the weapons used against us by the AFL made it impossible for Hird, but he did have a hell of a crack, but in the end I think Little mitigated a lot of the damage.That said, I’m still deflated by the bullying we’ve been subjected to by the AFL, and truly hope that James and his family can emerge from this intact and able to enjoy life, and the players can get enjoyment and success out of their time with EFC and beyond.
FARK the AFL.
Little is nothing more than a puppet of the AFL that was talking tough at the beginning but then did nothing else than what the AFL wanted, and he had an active role in the Hird tragedy.If you honestly believe that you probably should just sit down in the quiet room. That is so far from the truth as to be absurd.
I know it’s a popular view from the ‘need to make this conspiracy theory stand up set’, but it is just seriously, seriously wrong.
There is plenty to get ■■■■■■ off about in this whole sorry mess without inventing things to push your agenda. Little, and Campbell, and indeed all the board members I have met (which admittedly is not all of them), are as passionate and one eyed about the club as I am. The difference is they are in a very different position to me, and can’t afford all the holier than thou stuff that supporters can. We just make noise. Their behaviour has real world ramifications. They don’t get everything right, no one does. But how some can, on one hand, lambast sections of the media for making judgement without knowing or caring for the facts, and then on the other hand do exactly the same to our board, is beyond me. To say they are just AFL stooges is not only absolutely wrong, but also highly insulting to people who work extremely hard for the club we all love.I’m sure they are all passionate, but the club under Little’s leadership caved in with court action alongside Hird, which was the best chance to put a stop to the AFL. Now they and the rest of the competition are stuck with the status quo. If Little hadn’t had such close ties with the AFL hierarchy maybe he would have continued the fight.
It makes me feel great that such passionate leaders of the club thought the best thing to do is to assist in destroying a club legend to help cover for their AFL buddies, and in doing so made the club look like a joke. Have you forgotten the best and fairest and no mention of Hird?
How is the destruction of Hird a ‘conspiracy theory’, and I need to sit down in the quiet room?
ah come on, if the board and little kept on backing hird 100% it wouldnt have stopped anything any sooner, and it would have stagnated the club even further… whether or not you agree with the move to push hird out or him resigning (whatever the fark it was), surely you can see that a rational, objective board could come to the conclusion that it was better for the club to ask him to tender his resignation than to continue down the projectory that the past 3 years placed us on
maybe that projectory was something youd want to go down in the interests of saving a club legend, but at what cost… the board supported hird when it was in the interests of the club to do so and pushed him out when it was in its best interests to do so… its unfortunate that this sort of thing happened with a club legend (huge understatement) but frankly, tarnishing club legends is a risk you take when they go into coaching for the club they have legendary status at, should something go sour
seriously, if you want a board thats just going to tounge the coaches balls for the duration of their tenure, then youre going to be a ■■■■■ football club,
*trajectory
So, the two positions for voting at the AGM are Little and Jackson.So there will be 5 freshly elected directors after the next AGM, and those leaving have high level skills and experience. I like Paul Littles succession planning with Lindsay Tanner and Chris Muir coming in as appointments, with excellent contacts and influence. Heffernan’s background is outstanding, as is Brasher’s. So I can’t criticise the appointments we have on board (so to speak).
The treatment and loss of Hird was a literal tragedy, but in terms of playing the hand that Little was dealt, I think Little has done an outstanding job to set up the club to move forward.
I think the weapons used against us by the AFL made it impossible for Hird, but he did have a hell of a crack, but in the end I think Little mitigated a lot of the damage.That said, I’m still deflated by the bullying we’ve been subjected to by the AFL, and truly hope that James and his family can emerge from this intact and able to enjoy life, and the players can get enjoyment and success out of their time with EFC and beyond.
FARK the AFL.
Little is nothing more than a puppet of the AFL that was talking tough at the beginning but then did nothing else than what the AFL wanted, and he had an active role in the Hird tragedy.If you honestly believe that you probably should just sit down in the quiet room. That is so far from the truth as to be absurd.
I know it’s a popular view from the ‘need to make this conspiracy theory stand up set’, but it is just seriously, seriously wrong.
There is plenty to get ■■■■■■ off about in this whole sorry mess without inventing things to push your agenda. Little, and Campbell, and indeed all the board members I have met (which admittedly is not all of them), are as passionate and one eyed about the club as I am. The difference is they are in a very different position to me, and can’t afford all the holier than thou stuff that supporters can. We just make noise. Their behaviour has real world ramifications. They don’t get everything right, no one does. But how some can, on one hand, lambast sections of the media for making judgement without knowing or caring for the facts, and then on the other hand do exactly the same to our board, is beyond me. To say they are just AFL stooges is not only absolutely wrong, but also highly insulting to people who work extremely hard for the club we all love.I’m sure they are all passionate, but the club under Little’s leadership caved in with court action alongside Hird, which was the best chance to put a stop to the AFL. Now they and the rest of the competition are stuck with the status quo. If Little hadn’t had such close ties with the AFL hierarchy maybe he would have continued the fight.
It makes me feel great that such passionate leaders of the club thought the best thing to do is to assist in destroying a club legend to help cover for their AFL buddies, and in doing so made the club look like a joke. Have you forgotten the best and fairest and no mention of Hird?
How is the destruction of Hird a ‘conspiracy theory’, and I need to sit down in the quiet room?
ah come on, if the board and little kept on backing hird 100% it wouldnt have stopped anything any sooner, and it would have stagnated the club even further… whether or not you agree with the move to push hird out or him resigning (whatever the fark it was), surely you can see that a rational, objective board could come to the conclusion that it was better for the club to ask him to tender his resignation than to continue down the projectory that the past 3 years placed us on
maybe that projectory was something youd want to go down in the interests of saving a club legend, but at what cost… the board supported hird when it was in the interests of the club to do so and pushed him out when it was in its best interests to do so… its unfortunate that this sort of thing happened with a club legend (huge understatement) but frankly, tarnishing club legends is a risk you take when they go into coaching for the club they have legendary status at, should something go sour
seriously, if you want a board thats just going to tounge the coaches balls for the duration of their tenure, then youre going to be a ■■■■■ football club,
*trajectory
projectory is a word too, none of your fancy oxford english mind.
What I’ve learned from the last few pages is that if alex ever offers to tongue your balls, say no.
Now I think I’ve read everything - DKP questioning others for wallowing in pity. Now THATS nonsense on stilts.
Benfti likes to keep it simple and just blame dank. Obliviously he also thinks the punishment we received was of course to much. But the fact is benfti, the matter is far more complex then that. The so called conspiracy theory's are fact.The AFL made the EFC a scapegoat when the federal government and ASADA came knocking. Sure the EFC made some mistakes but they did no more, or no less then the rest of the competition. The EFC where isolated for brand management.
All the evidence exists the EFC where conspired against, for those of us who have followed this very closely read every minuet of the court case etc. know this.
Little has done the best he possibly thought he could, but he was between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately he chose to suck up the the AFL and by doing this has angered many of us. I fully understand why he did it, and respect the man, but it does not mean for one second that I or many of us like it.
Absolute ■■■■■■■ rank cop out, that’s what that is.
Hird and Co wanted the program to be better than the rest of the competition and you’re content with EFC having made some mistakes.
The gate was left wide open for the scapegoaters to do their thing.It’s been well established that the program was implemented to catch up to the rest of the comp. Fair to say other clubs already had established supplement programs.
And it’s important to put it into context: there were half a dozen other clubs with equally poorly run programs.
So don’t give us that bullshit that ours was especially bad and especially ambitious.
Bullshit.
The only context you need to be concerned about is the EFC program.
The program was earmarked to be better than “them”. Dank walking through the corridors of Windy Hill unfettered and clueless about who received an injection on any particular day is especially bad. The boundaries were pushed and that’s ambitious.
What boundaries and what exactly were we guilty of doing again?
Benfti likes to keep it simplje and just blame dank. Obliviously he also thinks the punishment we received was of course to much. But the fact is benfti, the matter is far more complex then that. The so called conspiracy theory's are fact.The AFL made the EFC a scapegoat when the federal government and ASADA came knocking. Sure the EFC made some mistakes but they did no more, or no less then the rest of the competition. The EFC where isolated for brand management.
All the evidence exists the EFC where conspired against, for those of us who have followed this very closely read every minuet of the court case etc. know this.
Little has done the best he possibly thought he could, but he was between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately he chose to suck up the the AFL and by doing this has angered many of us. I fully understand why he did it, and respect the man, but it does not mean for one second that I or many of us like it.
Absolute ■■■■■■■ rank cop out, that’s what that is.
Hird and Co wanted the program to be better than the rest of the competition and you’re content with EFC having made some mistakes.
The gate was left wide open for the scapegoaters to do their thing.It’s been well established that the program was implemented to catch up to the rest of the comp. Fair to say other clubs already had established supplement programs.
And it’s important to put it into context: there were half a dozen other clubs with equally poorly run programs.
So don’t give us that bullshit that ours was especially bad and especially ambitious.
Bullshit.
The only context you need to be concerned about is the EFC program.
The program was earmarked to be better than “them”. Dank walking through the corridors of Windy Hill unfettered and clueless about who received an injection on any particular day is especially bad. The boundaries were pushed and that’s ambitious.What boundaries and what exactly were we guilty of doing again?
What boundaries?
Seriously if you have to ask then you need to be better informed.
Legal, illegal, it does not change the fact that we left the door wide open by not keeping decent enough records or kept a closer eye what was going on, we let rogues go behind the back of the club doctor. Pretty much leaving the next 3 years as a wide open target for anyone associated to the club in any fashion, sure other clubs may have done the same but we were dumb enough to have our pants pulled down by it.
DKP, please - after all these years, I can't take it any more.It is not “persay”. It is “per se”.
I would like to say i’ll remember that, alas i’ll sadly probably forget by the time i try to use it again.
If you really want to remember, you could write a note & put it in your purse, eh?
bomber5au, I don't doubt your sincerity or discount your concerns. That your Emails have not been acknowledged does not surprise me-I have sent some over the years about membership issues that have been completely ignored. I take this as meaning that the Email addresses generally available to the public are meaningless and I think it's a very poor way for the Club to operate. However, I do believe that if you sent them a hard copy, receipted communication outlining your concerns, especially if addressed to the equivalent to a company secretary, you might get a better outcome. I hope you do. I still believe though, that everyone involved in the running of the Club are doing their best and are not trying to subvert what we the members want-an open and transparent management set up that is working towards the success we had gotten used to. The last few years of reading almost everything in and around the Saga has convinced me that there are no answers on BB. If everyone that posts on here were to have an actual same place meeting over a beer or two, then I think we could definitely solve all the problems the Club seems to have.I think you would be bitterly disappointed with the truth. If what you believe was remotely true Hird would still be coach.
Not so. We will not know the entire ins and outs of the whole mess for quite some time to come. You have no facts to back up your assertion that the people at the Club are not there for the club. You have an opinion, looking in from the outside. The reasons for decisions that have been made will not be found in the media.I believe James Hird will one day, before too long, give us, his supporters, his take on what went down as far as his tenure is concerned. He will not abandon the club. That is not how I perceive his character to be.
Benfti likes to keep it simplje and just blame dank. Obliviously he also thinks the punishment we received was of course to much. But the fact is benfti, the matter is far more complex then that. The so called conspiracy theory's are fact.The AFL made the EFC a scapegoat when the federal government and ASADA came knocking. Sure the EFC made some mistakes but they did no more, or no less then the rest of the competition. The EFC where isolated for brand management.
All the evidence exists the EFC where conspired against, for those of us who have followed this very closely read every minuet of the court case etc. know this.
Little has done the best he possibly thought he could, but he was between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately he chose to suck up the the AFL and by doing this has angered many of us. I fully understand why he did it, and respect the man, but it does not mean for one second that I or many of us like it.
Absolute ■■■■■■■ rank cop out, that’s what that is.
Hird and Co wanted the program to be better than the rest of the competition and you’re content with EFC having made some mistakes.
The gate was left wide open for the scapegoaters to do their thing.It’s been well established that the program was implemented to catch up to the rest of the comp. Fair to say other clubs already had established supplement programs.
And it’s important to put it into context: there were half a dozen other clubs with equally poorly run programs.
So don’t give us that bullshit that ours was especially bad and especially ambitious.
Bullshit.
The only context you need to be concerned about is the EFC program.
The program was earmarked to be better than “them”. Dank walking through the corridors of Windy Hill unfettered and clueless about who received an injection on any particular day is especially bad. The boundaries were pushed and that’s ambitious.What boundaries and what exactly were we guilty of doing again?
What boundaries?
Seriously if you have to ask then you need to be better informed.
I’d like to think I’ve kept myself reasonably informed.
I’m aware of what boundaries the AFL were supposed to be enforcing for all clubs, but it fact weren’t.
Are those the ones you mean?
If you don’t know then I’m not telling isn’t very helpful, let alone polite.
You know those who complain that some of us have not entirely moved on, are not obliged to participate in this thread. If you have moved on, good luck to you. But don't slag off the ones- like myself - that have not.out of curiosity, what do you expect to gain from not moving on, let alone coming on here and wallowing in mutual pity party for hird ?
I’m not saying don’t do it, as you’ve gotta do what best suits you in any situation, but i am generally interested in what people expect to happen by doing it ?
Hird’s not coming back as coach. Even if it’s proved 100% that he did nothing wrong, it’s not going to change the perception of him in the eyes of people who want to see him as a bad guy in this saga.
Seems like there’s only really 2 options. Either accept and move on whether you agree with it or not, or don’t accept it and stop actively supporting the club cos of this decision.
it seems counterproductive to ones own sanity to stay in a state of limbo persay of not moving on one way or the other.
What a simplistic world you live in.
You have totally misunderstood or perhaps underestimated just how much this saga has affected many supporters. As others have mentioned this is not just about James Hird. Personally Hird’s sacking was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
The list of “individuals” in this saga with the stench of guilt is a very long one. If people are prepared to admit that what the AFL, ASADA, the Labor Govt. the media, did to ruin brand Essendon, and the players, coaches and footy staff, is acceptable then, if you are happy with that, fine.
However, when the CAS result goes our way then maybe someone will ask the question WTF was the last three years all about. How much money was spent all up in the pursuit of the truth that was never the object of the exercise. How could the elected government get it so wrong (they are out of power now so good riddance)? What about the incompetencies and corruption of ASADA, the breaches of confidentiality, the lies and manipulation by the AFL, and the actions of Evans, Little and the Board.
The big question that us, who will never forgive or forget what happened, is who is going to be held accountable for what our club has endured. Those in power who abuse that power must be held to account. I think it is called justice.
Benfti likes to keep it simplje and just blame dank. Obliviously he also thinks the punishment we received was of course to much. But the fact is benfti, the matter is far more complex then that. The so called conspiracy theory's are fact.The AFL made the EFC a scapegoat when the federal government and ASADA came knocking. Sure the EFC made some mistakes but they did no more, or no less then the rest of the competition. The EFC where isolated for brand management.
All the evidence exists the EFC where conspired against, for those of us who have followed this very closely read every minuet of the court case etc. know this.
Little has done the best he possibly thought he could, but he was between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately he chose to suck up the the AFL and by doing this has angered many of us. I fully understand why he did it, and respect the man, but it does not mean for one second that I or many of us like it.
Absolute ■■■■■■■ rank cop out, that’s what that is.
Hird and Co wanted the program to be better than the rest of the competition and you’re content with EFC having made some mistakes.
The gate was left wide open for the scapegoaters to do their thing.It’s been well established that the program was implemented to catch up to the rest of the comp. Fair to say other clubs already had established supplement programs.
And it’s important to put it into context: there were half a dozen other clubs with equally poorly run programs.
So don’t give us that bullshit that ours was especially bad and especially ambitious.
Bullshit.
The only context you need to be concerned about is the EFC program.
The program was earmarked to be better than “them”. Dank walking through the corridors of Windy Hill unfettered and clueless about who received an injection on any particular day is especially bad. The boundaries were pushed and that’s ambitious.What boundaries and what exactly were we guilty of doing again?
What boundaries?
Seriously if you have to ask then you need to be better informed.
I am very well informed but I am curious as to what boundaries RE was referring to in his post. Are these the boundaries that were in place in 2012 when Clothier stated that “all peptides are banned” when asked by Hird. Or are they the boundaries that were in place when neither the AFL nor ASADA could give a straight answer on the legality of AOD9604, or what about the boundaries that were established around the WADA group of unnamed peptides of unproven efficacy that were placed in S0 during the saga period (which includes TB4). Are the boundaries defined by what is on the WADA list or what ASADA says in on the WADA list?
It would be an interesting exercise to read exactly what rules and regulations Clothier has worked under for the past 4-5 years. Could be lots of redacted stuff and updates. Then, he always has that doyen of sports medicine Harcourt to help him out.
Benfti likes to keep it simplje and just blame dank. Obliviously he also thinks the punishment we received was of course to much. But the fact is benfti, the matter is far more complex then that. The so called conspiracy theory's are fact.The AFL made the EFC a scapegoat when the federal government and ASADA came knocking. Sure the EFC made some mistakes but they did no more, or no less then the rest of the competition. The EFC where isolated for brand management.
All the evidence exists the EFC where conspired against, for those of us who have followed this very closely read every minuet of the court case etc. know this.
Little has done the best he possibly thought he could, but he was between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately he chose to suck up the the AFL and by doing this has angered many of us. I fully understand why he did it, and respect the man, but it does not mean for one second that I or many of us like it.
Absolute ■■■■■■■ rank cop out, that’s what that is.
Hird and Co wanted the program to be better than the rest of the competition and you’re content with EFC having made some mistakes.
The gate was left wide open for the scapegoaters to do their thing.It’s been well established that the program was implemented to catch up to the rest of the comp. Fair to say other clubs already had established supplement programs.
And it’s important to put it into context: there were half a dozen other clubs with equally poorly run programs.
So don’t give us that bullshit that ours was especially bad and especially ambitious.
Bullshit.
The only context you need to be concerned about is the EFC program.
The program was earmarked to be better than “them”. Dank walking through the corridors of Windy Hill unfettered and clueless about who received an injection on any particular day is especially bad. The boundaries were pushed and that’s ambitious.What boundaries and what exactly were we guilty of doing again?
What boundaries?
Seriously if you have to ask then you need to be better informed.
I am very well informed but I am curious as to what boundaries RE was referring to in his post. Are these the boundaries that were in place in 2012 when Clothier stated that “all peptides are banned” when asked by Hird. Or are they the boundaries that were in place when neither the AFL nor ASADA could give a straight answer on the legality of AOD9604, or what about the boundaries that were established around the WADA group of unnamed peptides of unproven efficacy that were placed in S0 during the saga period (which includes TB4). Are the boundaries defined by what is on the WADA list or what ASADA says in on the WADA list?
It would be an interesting exercise to read exactly what rules and regulations Clothier has worked under for the past 4-5 years. Could be lots of redacted stuff and updates. Then, he always has that doyen of sports medicine Harcourt to help him out.
Hopefully JT gets him on the stand and asks him.