Bluemour Melting Pot XXII

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Given that they’ve obviously known that they were sacking SOS for quite some time, why haven’t they already been appointed?
There's no rush. All the trading and drafts have been completed, and anyone worth chasing would have still been involved at their current club.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If the board thought Liddle was "more" in the wrong then he would have gone and SOS would have stayed. Its sad to see SOS go, but i believe there is alot more to this story than meets the eye.

That's the thing, it's not about who is 'more wrong', just that there is so much wrong that Liddle should go too.
 
We might have.
It could be that we want the dust to settle on SOS leaving before we make an announcement. We owe SOS that much at least.

I think it looks worse for SOS, given that we, and he, have known for sometime that he was going.

We need to make a change for legitimate reasons and this is the direction we're going VS sack SOS and we'll sort it our later.
 
Which quality list managers do you think would have been actively interviewing at an opposition club in the lead-up to to draft?

We've known about this for a long-time. If we're going to accept that COI is the reason, then a year. And from that fox article, we're not getting a List Manager in, we're after player agents or a recruiter.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Well it's not like they've only just worked out that Jack & Ben are sons of Steve....

Really?

Gee, thanks for pointing that out...

My point is that concerns about a CoI may have escalated during the course of this year, culminating in the review that took place. It's possible the club thought everything was being handled fine, but staff raised concerns about how Jack and Ben would be treated with the list becoming more competitive and the salary cap becoming tighter.
 
Really?

Gee, thanks for pointing that out...

My point is that concerns about a CoI may have escalated during the course of this year, culminating in the review that took place. It's possible the club thought everything was being handled fine, but staff raised concerns about how Jack and Ben would be treated with the list becoming more competitive and the salary cap becoming tighter.

You surely don't believe that?
 
You surely don't believe that?

You think it's impossible that, during the year, someone at the club in either the selection or list management teams may have spoken with a new-ish CEO about the fact that they felt uncomfortable making "hard decisions" or discussing contract terms with the son(s) of the GM of List Management?

The conflict of interest began the moment JSOS nominated for the draft. People commented on it at the time. SOS had to come out publicly to state that he would step back from any decisions on drafting his son. 4 years on he now has two sons at the club, and the salary cap management is starting to become more about fitting players in than throwing money at someone so we meet the minimum. It is entirely reasonable to think that people in a number of positions might have started feeling uncomfortable about what the conflict of interest would mean should they go against the wishes (or interests - real or perceived) of their boss. Not only that, but there are new people at the club, who may have been unwilling to raise concerns until recently.

Why are you so adamant that your narrative is 100% correct?
 
Last edited:
You think it's impossible that, during the year, someone at the club in either the selection or list management teams may have spoken with a new-ish CEO about the fact that they felt uncomfortable making "hard decisions" or discussing contract terms with the son(s) of the GM of List Management?

The conflict of interest began the moment JSOS nominated for the draft. People commented on it at the time. SOS had to come out publicly to state that he would step back from any decisions on drafting his son. 4 years on he now has two sons at the club, and the salary cap management is starting to become more about fitting players in than throwing money at someone so we meet the minimum. It is entirely reasonable to think that people in a number of positions might have started feeling uncomfortable about what the conflict of interest would mean should they go against the wishes of their boss. Not only that, but there are new people at the club, who may have been unwilling to raise concerns until recently.

Why are you so adamant that your narrative is 100% correct?

So how is Liddle immune from that if he recruited Ellis? If Ellis did come over wouldn’t these soft workers who are too unprofessional to forge a professional decision going to feel exactly the same about him? What about Teague bringing in Eddie? A wise man one said there are conflicts everywhere in football.
 
Partly agree/partly disagree.

FWIW I’ve made my share of f*** ups over the years.

But for Liddle to be offering Ellis big $ behind his highly respected & successful List Managers back is a serious screw up.

To then force the List Manager out (for “conflict of interest” reasons) rather than apologise and get on with life seems unforgivable.

I may change my view over time but at the moment it seems Liddle’s ego is over riding his brain.

Possibly to Carlton’s serious detriment.

PS - hope I’m wrong.

So now the offer for Ellis was on big $$$$$? What was our offer that we offered him? One man, didn’t force out anybody out.

I think you’re wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top