WireWireWire wrote: I'm saying the best we're gonna get is top 4. Which is useless, we've been there, done that, most seasons.

WireWireWire wrote:Once again, its not my job to figure that out. It doesn't mean I can't have a negative opinion on a decision made, based on the facts at hand. Which is - Burgess' personal success never did anything for those around him, because aside from 1 solitary year, all Souths were, were nearly men. We've had that ad nauseum.

WireWireWire wrote:Once again, its not my job to figure that out. It doesn't mean I can't have a negative opinion on a decision made, based on the facts at hand. Which is - Burgess' personal success never did anything for those around him, because aside from 1 solitary year, all Souths were, were nearly men. We've had that ad nauseum.

morleys_deckchair wrote:you're the one brining his playing career into it.. saying he isn't a winner.

It just makes you look a bit silly tbh.

Sure, you can question the appointment, but referring back to his playing career as a yardstick? come on now.

WireWireWire wrote:You called him a born winner. By saying that, YOU brought his playing career into it. I was just saying that if he couldn't get the rest of his playing mates to perform to a trophy winning standard consistently, then why believe he would as a coach.

karetaker wrote:Still no news on the other assistant then.

Or thane wrote:Not heard any rumours, though i would like us to Keep Gleeson on for longer than just this year.
He's massively experienced and hopefully can sharpen our attack and take us up a gear.