Search results for query: *

Thanks for the opportunity to, once again, laugh at someone who thinks Koch is 'woke'.

Southern Power, when?

I didn’t write this but it is very good and reflects my views on the Board and member control. As I have said before, member control is the core issue and is the only way to address the club's problems. https://theblackandwhitenoise.com/index.php/2024/10/31/the-facts-about-member-control/

If that rumoured contract with Carr is, in fact, there, it sounds like there is a real risk to be unenforceable for uncertainty. I'm not saying there aren't ways to draft a contract of that type which has the potential to be binding. It's just that it would take a fair amount of work. Of...

Somehow we need one of the influential AFL reporters to ask Koch that. It obviously won't happen though.

Those of you in Adelaide need to make sure he knows what we think of him when he makes his appearances at Port games

And so, it comes back to a lack of accountability to members and supporters. I know I’m preaching to the choir on this.

Genuine question: what is the point of this (marginal) financial gain if it is not being used to properly fund the football department? At the moment, we are a social club with a couple of football teams tacked on. You get the impression this board would get rid of them too if they could get...

LOL

At least it isn't as bad as Visma Lease-a-Bike flogging Wout van Aert's aerosuit he was wearing when he suffered a bad accident.

I realised, I should have signaled that I was not being earnest.

I am hopeful, as long as we adjust our forward structure and delivery.

It's a pity Fitzroy aren't still around. Otherwise, he could have covered three contiguous suburbs in the definition, five, if he was willing to look to North and Melbourne.

This was a warning sign

In relation to the latter par, I come back to my view that the list is not the main problem. That we have continued to make it into the top-4, despite the coach and the dogshit game plan he implements, demonstrates that both our top-end and depth is fine (yes, even Jed). To be able to capitalise...

I would have made him stay but then pay him to not be anywhere near the (or any) playing group. But I am vindictive (and don't have a salary cap to worry about).

Not only that, he will hold a grudge against us because we made him work. There was only benefit in staying strong against his pressure if we actually stayed strong and got something from it. This way, we ****ed ourselves.

FTFY

Seriously, do we know what to feed him?

It is a rookie move to have answered the summons to Connors' office.

The only reason to do it today is to be able to do other trades. I wouldn't hang your hopes on us using pick 13.

Do we even have an enclosure for him?

See you at the footy!

Just ****ing insane

Perhaps the deal got to the board (if that is true) because Cripps and CD needed cover for rejecting it.

And just as close (perhaps closer - I can't be arsed measuring) to the Melbourne GPO as Collingwood.

I don't have much faith in most levels of the club at the moment but I do not think they thought taking Atkins was anything other than necessary to get the GC part of the deal through. On the other hand, if we trade him in, I firmly believe Hinkley will play him at the expense of a younger player.

Don't read too much into "the Houston camp" stuff. Dan is likely disengaged from the negotiation, apart from telling his management his preference and signing off on the personal terms of any deal. "The Houston camp" is Connors posturing and signalling. That posture may have an effect after this...

Maybe if someone stands up to Connors, his influence will wane. But we will never know, will we?

Hinkley has a taste for those