[Pumpetypump]

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:38 pm  

Aunt Agatha? That old Stoat. She made Tabitha's corsage out of the blackout curtains. And as for Jeeves. The man is infuriation personified when it comes to our delightfully neuvo code of Rugby. Not a real mans game, not enough players, hardly the done thing. Just not...right.

"Nothing wrong with checkers old boy, but I prefer chess". Personally, when it comes to Union I don't give a flying rook.

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:44 pm  

Shaggoth wrote:

If everyone with unwavering support were to shout oob, would it cancel it out?

nope we'd just have lots of boooob

boo + oob = boooob

Not exactly going to be appropriate for families now is it

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:11 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Sarcasm eh? The last refuge of a shaky argument. Who said anything about planning permission? The OSV was always about a combination of finances and political backing and will.

To re-iterate - what sort of an impression do you think it gave on Sunday to one of the most important individuals we need behind us? He's not been known as the biggest Bulls supporter in the past. Would YOU have felt more or less inclined to throw your substantial political clout behind the club's role in the project after seeing and hearing the crowd on Sunday?

And its not just the boo-boys; many, even most of us (me included) are as guilty for not providing more vocal support and showing we really really want this club and team here.

And thats before the torrent of negativity that anyone can read across the media and anywhere the club is being discussed.

I really don't care what impression he got of the fans. To me a fan who boos is more passionate than one who stands there in silence. We could use a bit more passion on the terraces imo. Or at least something to fight the appathy

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:13 pm  

Northern Lad wrote:

nope we'd just have lots of boooob

boo + oob = boooob

Not exactly going to be appropriate for families now is it

maybe not but how funny would it be for the players if boobs were being shouted at them.

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:09 pm  

Shaggoth wrote:

As the article points out again, we just don't have the financial clout of our competition. And yet I don't think that impression filters out more widely. When I tell people why we aren't the force we used to be they react with incredulity.

I suppose this is a testament to how fantastically well we've done in the past without a sugar-daddy and with a millstone of a ground. I can't feel suicidal about NOW because at the back of my mind is always the fact that we've probably been punching above our weight in the past.

What has changed (in terms of financial clout) with you and the competition since 2005?

Serious question since whatever it was it certainly didn't hold you back between 1996 and 2005.

I think you had some great people behind the scenes at the beginning of SL and no doubt you were the flag bearers. Somewhere, someone took their eye of the ball in terms of junior development and that has led to the current malaise. Players emerge and leave, it happens at all clubs, even Leeds but look at who you have had to replace the likes of Vainakolo, Hape, Pryce, reardon and Peacock with? Journeymen, at best.

I have absolutely no idea what you have coming through the ranks but we managed to fabricate a half decent team from 1997-2001 whilst we were waiting for the current crop. We were lucky that we had a coach like Murray who could get players playing above themselves. We won league games with Marvin Golden in the centres and he made Andy Hay an international, for example.

I think you guys have been very fortunate and enjoyed a golden period of success. Its' over and you have to try and prepare for the next one. That is not an easy sell to spectators especially when we're just down the road enjoying our golden era.

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:29 pm  

G1 wrote:

I have absolutely no idea what you have coming through the ranks but we managed to fabricate a half decent team from 1997-2001 whilst we were waiting for the current crop. We were lucky that we had a coach like Murray who could get players playing above themselves. We won league games with Marvin Golden in the centres and he made Andy Hay an international, for example.
.

Question asked and answered.

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:01 pm  

Roofaldo wrote:

I really don't care what impression he got of the fans. To me a fan who boos is more passionate than one who stands there in silence. We could use a bit more passion on the terraces imo. Or at least something to fight the appathy

And that's precisely my point.

Booing the coach or the team might make you feel a bit better in the short term.

But if a guy who is in a position to significantly influence the development on which the future of the club rests goes away thinking "I don't need to bother here...the crowd are not behind them so why do I need to be?" then all you have done is jeopardised the long term.

But never mind; you feel happier right now, and that's what matters.

And for the avoidance of doubt - fans are entitled to boo (I did it once, in 1998 was heartily ashamed of myself and will never do it again), and I agree your point regarding passion, but my point was that the consequences may be not quite what you expect.

And as for Sutcliffe... he'll never get my vote - unless, maybe, he tangibly helps to bring the OSV about. That would be a service worth voting for.

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:07 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

But if a guy who is in a position to significantly influence the development on which the future of the club rests goes away thinking "I don't need to bother here...the crowd are not behind them so why do I need to be?" then all you have done is jeopardised the long term.

Do you really think that one game where a few fans showed what they thought would influence a decision like that, I'm sorry but it's not going to sway him one way or another. The club would use the stadium for 30+ years in that time, SM and his players will have been and gone...the decision is not based on the here and now but the future

I agree not the best thing for him to see/hear but neither is a half empty stadium.

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:15 pm  

Northern Lad wrote:

Do you really think that one game where a few fans showed what they thought would influence a decision like that, I'm sorry but it's not going to sway him one way or another. The club would use the stadium for 30+ years in that time, SM and his players will have been and gone...the decision is not based on the here and now but the future

I agree not the best thing for him to see/hear but neither is a half empty stadium.

Hence my reference also to the "Stay-aways".

Yes of course, that one experience won't be the be-all and end-all. But as to whether it could be the thing that swayed him if he was unsure which way to go, well who knows?

And he's a politician ffs, and politicians take decisions for the here and now! Thats where the votes are...

: Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:24 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

And he's a politician ffs, and politicians take decisions for the here and now! Thats where the votes are...

To an extent I don't disagree but I'm not sure how that sways the debate on what he witnessed on Sunday and how that effects the decision.

I'm sure if he asked anybody there on Sunday if they thought OSV was a good idea, every single person would have said yes....however if that was at the footy match I'm sure it would have been reversed.