Bombertalk

To all the idiots forming groups to challenge the board read the topic.

Why is it a bad thing to challenge the board ???... im confused lol

I`ll second that

Because they are challenging the Board based on a decision that the Board made simply because they did not like the outcome.

They are not in a position to know how Sheedy is performing, what his plans for the future development of the list were, how his list management and development were progressing etc etc. The Board do, the Board were in the best position and had all the information available to them that they needed to make this decision.

This other group has no knowledge or information about the factors that lead to this decision and are basically challenging the Board on the basis that they like Kevin Sheedy and believe he should still be coach, but have nothing to back up why this should be the case, other than his past record.

It reeks of Richmond or St Kilda where groups chuck tanties and make Board challenges all the time because decisions are made that they don't like.

jayden1990 wrote:Why is it a bad thing to challenge the board ???... im confused lol

Because challenges to the board always end up like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?search=&mo ... eI0R8_zREk

From what I understood the first step after getting the petition signed was to get an explaination. SO basically we will find he truth as to why Sheed's was sacked.
It is no guarantee it will destroy Essendon. Essendon grew as a succesfull club before the currect board. However they have done a good job off the field.

Essendon4eva wrote:From what I understood the first step after getting the petition signed was to get an explaination. SO basically we will find he truth as to why Sheed's was sacked.
It is no guarantee it will destroy Essendon. Essendon grew as a succesfull club before the currect board. However they have done a good job off the field.

Why do you assume that this will lead to further explanations?

What I see happening is that these morons force an EGM, are massively outvoted when push comes to shove and then the issue is over.

On a slightly different note, why do you assume there is more to explain?

The want an explanation why Sheeds was sacked?

Maybe have a look at the game against Hawthorn again. No structure, no game plan, clearly the players arent playing for him.

Would they like more? Perhaps if these f***sticks actually went to the games and watched the shit we dish up most weeks of the season, they would have a clear understanding of why we sacked sheedy.

SMB.

sheeds rocks and the board are fools.

we have been flogged before, I believe these floggings have been a catalyst to drive success in the future.

the EFC is ok under sheeds rule.

living legend.

tom9779 wrote:the board are fools.

I know you live in Sydney, but is there a particular rock under which you reside?

Rossoneri wrote:The want an explanation why Sheeds was sacked?

Maybe have a look at the game against Hawthorn again. No structure, no game plan, clearly the players arent playing for him.

Would they like more? Perhaps if these f***sticks actually went to the games and watched the shit we dish up most weeks of the season, they would have a clear understanding of why we sacked sheedy.

And maybe they also saw the Adelaide game, where we beat a team known for following their game plan and structure. If Sheed's can be judged in a negative light after one game, he can be judged in a positive light aswelll. It is not like we are a team in our prime at a .500 winning ratio.

Essendon4eva wrote:

Rossoneri wrote:The want an explanation why Sheeds was sacked?

Maybe have a look at the game against Hawthorn again. No structure, no game plan, clearly the players arent playing for him.

Would they like more? Perhaps if these f***sticks actually went to the games and watched the shit we dish up most weeks of the season, they would have a clear understanding of why we sacked sheedy.

And maybe they also saw the Adelaide game, where we beat a team known for following their game plan and structure. If Sheed's can be judged in a negative light after one game, he can be judged in a positive light aswelll. It is not like we are a team in our prime at a .500 winning ratio.

I was at the Adelaide game, I'm not sure it was more our tactics then their lousy disposal and MJ's sheer desperation late in the game that got us over the line.

For the most part I view our Board as bag men for the Liberal Party - however in this instance the decision was right - even if the delivery was awkward.

This decision is no basis to challenge.