: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:30 am  

scarrie Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:20 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's it I'm never going on holiday again.
I go way for a few months and we haven't won since I left and now all this. Too bad I'm not back until the middle of June!

Stop being selfish and get your rear back here!!!!

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:49 am  

Wollagong Way wrote:

Stop being selfish and get your rear back here!!!!

Sorry, you'll all just have to learn to get along without me.
If we still haven't won by the 16th June when I board by homeward flight I might not bother!

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:56 am  

Kosh wrote:

Just a couple of points amongst all the hysteria.

Reardon's contract was contingent upon two conditions...

1. His full recovery from his achilles injury
2. Getting a non-custodial sentence

Clearly, he's failed on the first condition. I doubt he'll have been paid, because until he met the first condition he didn't have an actual contract with us - hence how he can be released swiftly and easily now.

Carry on.

Sorry Kosh, you'll have to slag the board off or put some emoticons on to be taken seriously.

I mean, posting common sense, what were you thinking.

FWIW, The board were in a no win situation. A Player becomes available in a position its clear we are poor in and they don't go for him, result a slating. They do go for him and some get the moral highground stance for the players past, result, a slating.

Well, lets face it, there are a high number of RL players, past and present who have felt the long arm of the law (Cooke, Raynor, Crocker), yet there was no real issue at the time to some on here.

As kosh has stated, his contract was contingent based on two unknown things, he has failed one of them.

I also find it odd there are so many doctors and medical professionals that post on here. Especially the ones that think a medical involves a couple of laps round the pitch and seeing how much you can bench press. The results of an indepth examination take a matter of weeks to be analysed and returned.

But why let common sense get in the way of an opportunity to have a go at the board.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:11 am  

Mild mannered Janitor wrote:

Sorry Kosh, you'll have to slag the board off or put some emoticons on to be taken seriously.

I mean, posting common sense, what were you thinking.

FWIW, The board were in a no win situation. A Player becomes available in a position its clear we are poor in and they don't go for him, result a slating. They do go for him and some get the moral highground stance for the players past, result, a slating.

Well, lets face it, there are a high number of RL players, past and present who have felt the long arm of the law (Cooke, Raynor, Crocker), yet there was no real issue at the time to some on here.

As kosh has stated, his contract was contingent based on two unknown things, he has failed one of them.

I also find it odd there are so many doctors and medical professionals that post on here. Especially the ones that think a medical involves a couple of laps round the pitch and seeing how much you can bench press. The results of an indepth examination take a matter of weeks to be analysed and returned.

But why let common sense get in the way of an opportunity to have a go at the board.

Why not have the full in depth medical before announcing his signing and making your club look like fools in the rugby league world. You could have saved all this embarrasment

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:19 am  

Mild mannered Janitor wrote:

I also find it odd there are so many doctors and medical professionals that post on here. Especially the ones that think a medical involves a couple of laps round the pitch and seeing how much you can bench press. The results of an indepth examination take a matter of weeks to be analysed and returned.

One would imagine that he was under the ongoing care of a medical professional given that he has been carrying the injury since last May. Didn't they have any information that could help?

We could talk about the ins and outs of the matter all day, and, whilst there's no doubt that some of the foamy mouthed indignation on this thread is a little extreme, there also seems to be little doubt that the handling of the whole affair - particularly the media elements - could have been better.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:24 am  

Staffs FC wrote:

Don't really give one to be honest. Yes there was an understandable 'debate' about his being signed in the first place due to the court case. Seems that others were interested in signing him so we got in first. Subsequently the guy has failed a medical and not therefore been given a contract. Rule didn't know that on the radio otherwise he would have said so there can have been no reason not to.

Funniest thing about it is not Rule on the radio but all the Mr Angrys on here being poked with a sharp stick and running around waving arms and shouting liar/disgrace etc. Fooking hilarious.

Good post.
The hysteria on this forum is hilarious you're right.

[Kosh]

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:31 am  

Staffs FC wrote:

Don't really give one to be honest. Yes there was an understandable 'debate' about his being signed in the first place due to the court case. Seems that others were interested in signing him so we got in first. Subsequently the guy has failed a medical and not therefore been given a contract. Rule didn't know that on the radio otherwise he would have said so there can have been no reason not to.

Funniest thing about it is not Rule on the radio but all the Mr Angrys on here being poked with a sharp stick and running around waving arms and shouting liar/disgrace etc. Fooking hilarious.

Spot on in all respects.

The only thing I would say is that the club could have made it clearer that Reardon was still undergoing a medical examination. That way maybe the announcement would have been less of a surprise to those who hadn't read the small print about the conditional nature of his offer.

That and the fact that I don't think we should have signed him in the first place, although I guess I can understand why we did even though I don't agree with it.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:40 am  

Whilst I understand people's reaction's on here I do think come of the posts are way over the top.

We needed some cover in the backs, specifically at fullback and we took a gamble on Reardon. Okay it has not turned out the way the club would have liked but it has not cost us anything financially.

Rovers fans will jump up and down no doubt but thats their sad nature and obsession with us but the way I see it is why tried to bring a player in and it didn't work out.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:41 am  

Failed a medical my ars3. The club got rid because there is a strong chance of a custodial sentence and I think the board have made monkies of themselves far to often. I also read that the club are looking for a replacement. Why don't they try and poach Ronald McDonald or Hamburglar.

[Kosh]

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:43 am  

Monko wrote:

Failed a medical my ars3. The club got rid because there is a strong chance of a custodial sentence and I think the board have made monkies of themselves far to often. I also read that the club are looking for a replacement. Why don't they try and poach Ronald McDonald or Hamburglar.

He failed the medical. Fact.