that was you incorrect interpretation of that exchangeNope. Not what I have read. Mark Robinson reported at the end of 2012 that Dean Robinson was taken off from under Hird to be put under Bomber Thompson.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
that was you incorrect interpretation of that exchangeNope. Not what I have read. Mark Robinson reported at the end of 2012 that Dean Robinson was taken off from under Hird to be put under Bomber Thompson.
Yeah that Danny C... the same bloke who took his whack and is no longer at the club. I dont think Danny had sold his story or sued the club for unfair dismissal...Danny C , the bloke who was warned about Dank by players while at the Melbourne rebels when he was going to hire him. That Danny C
Of course they did.... because the media told us so...
They also told us of the thousands of injections... WRONG...
What exchange? It was a 2012 article by Mark Robinson that said Dean Robinson would no longer be under Hird.that was you incorrect interpretation of that exchange
Ummm, change that name to Hird and the description fits exactly the same, weird hey?Ummmmm because Hird and the club respected the process... get Dank, Robinson and Charters were not restricted by the club or AFL. Robinson also spoke out for cash. He has also received a massive payout from the AFL and ESS. So here is a bloke who is happy to make $$$ off the back of loss by all other parties in the sad affair. Quality individual we have there.... then again probably what you would expect from a bloke who was happy to inject players, support staff and his own family with suppliments! Oh and then of course lets not forget selling CJC to AFL footballers and instructing them on how to administer.
I'm not a betting guy, but if I was I'd be putting my house on him not even mentioning Charter.I guess by now it was always going to be a slim chance that Hird would actually have a bomb to drop. His article today seems and exercise in passing the buck and the most notable thing about it is the absence of any mention of Shane Carter. Be interesting to see if he turns up in Part 2.
he was never under Hird. Why would you make the sports science department responsible to the coach??What exchange? It was a 2012 article by Mark Robinson that said Dean Robinson would no longer be under Hird.
He has been very free with his threats. It will be interesting to see if he takes aim at Hird now that Hird has claimed he failed to follow instructionAny news this morning that Dank is suing Hird? Or retaliating with his own tell all interview with Large Fries?
Robinson asking for more money now he has been disparaged by an ex-EFC employee? as I'm pretty sure both him and EFC would have had no disparagement clauses in their settlement? Or will he retaliate with another Darcy special!
/popcorn
rubbish. That crowd is way too big
C'mon mixxy, you can't be seriously comparing your work with the football department of an AFL club.I work with 100 other people in one department yet I might not see some for a month, other than passing in the corridor
"I'm shocked to be sitting here" yet less than a year before that, he had tried to unsuccessfully fire dank because he knew something stuffed up was happening. The guy is lying.
Except, again, both parties at the CAS agreed the fact that Robinson reported to Hamilton and Hird. Or are barristers for the players lying?he was never under Hird. Why would you make the sports science department responsible to the coach??
he was never under Hird. Why would you make the sports science department responsible to the coach??
Hopefully Tracey Holmes asks him that on SundayExcept, again, both parties at the CAS agreed the fact that Robinson reported to Hamilton and Hird. Or are barristers for the players lying?
It never says he went from Hird to Thompson though.In fact, Dean Robinson ended up under an assistant coach:
THE significant stoush between James Hird and Mark Thompson late last year came after a re-classification of their roles at Essendon.
The pair disagreed about the future of high performance manager Dean Robinson, with Thompson keen to retain him and Hird intent on having the position reviewed.
Thompson won the argument because under the new arrangement Robinson came under Thompson's jurisdiction.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...hompson-prepares/story-e6frf9jf-1226578204272
I suppose, if it suited your agenda, you could say that he went from Hamilton to an assistant coach (Thompson). But that would be a bit of a stretch, and a bit transparent.
He went from under Hird to Bomber. Hard not to conclude that.
PreciselyIf they weren't doing anything wrong, why did they need to be sacked?
Except, again, both parties at the CAS agreed the fact that Robinson reported to Hamilton and Hird. Or are barristers for the players lying?
Plenty of reasons that the club could stand him down. He had already have his power removed at the end of 2012. Plenty of dodgy actions associate this bloke... but the AFL moved too quickly, demanded he be removed and then just needed it to go away as it was a case they didnt need at that time.
Dank was one of his direct reports... that is probably enough it itself.
Administering drugs to employees onsite is probably another
A terrible year of injuries would be enough in itself.
Hopefully Tracey Holmes asks him that on Sunday