Geoff Walsh

[Scollop]

Geoff Walsh was officially appointed as the boss of St Kilda’s football department in October 2022 (before Ratts was sacked and before Lyon became senior coach)

viewtopic.php?t=105122

I think the key thing people are missing is that there can only be one ‘boss’…

Otherwise he would have come out and told us that he doesn’t want everyone calling him RTB

[Vortex]

Less than 12 months later,

So for example his wife was ill and recovered?

Or one of his parents needed help but no longer does. etc



Or his wife just could not handle him still be fulltime employed which she perhaps wanted to enjoy her "golden years" more?

takes on another role higher up the chain

The role is only part time and is actually a "lesser/lower" role than his gig at the Saints was.

So he is lower down the chain now.

All plausible reasons granted.

HOWEVER!

Why not return to your role at the Saints after said "family reaons" are no longer a reason?

[Vortex]

Nothing to see here, fact is that Geoff Walsh is one of the highest regarded AFL officials in the business. He did what he was required to do in the massive overhaul of St Kilda football operations last October which resulted in the termination of Brett Ratten and return of Ross Lyon to the love of his life....

His role at AFL House is part-time so it's far less demanding or stressful than bei gg involved with a club.

The only thought I had when I heard the news is to wonder how he'll get along with his new boss Laura Kane as he's a very driven individual and she's a relatuve new chum as the supremo of AFL's football operations.

Not so sure about that, “family reasons” was the the reason given for departing our club in a very swift manner.


Less than 12 months later, takes on another role higher up the chain almost directly after the club announced Misson was taking over his old role on a permanent basis.

Lyon moved him on.

Yourself and BM have a terrible habit of stating (incorrect) opinion as fact.

Then using repetition to try and convince people.

They say you should never go into battle with an unarmed man, so I'll go gently. But before we kick off can you put something down that attempts to demonstrate your persuasive argument skills?

The sort of humour my year 6 math teacher led with.

There is no argument needed from my end. Your conspiracy on the other hand....

A maths teacher with a sense of humour?

Sounds like (incorrect) opinion dressed up as fact.

Damn right there is no argument from your end.

[Vortex]

couldn't work with Ross is what I heard

You just made that up

How can you be sure?

[saintsRrising]

Less than 12 months later,

So for example his wife was ill and recovered?

Or one of his parents needed help but no longer does. etc



Or his wife just could not handle him still be fulltime employed which she perhaps wanted to enjoy her "golden years" more?

takes on another role higher up the chain

The role is only part time and is actually a "lesser/lower" role than his gig at the Saints was.

So he is lower down the chain now.

All plausible reasons granted.

HOWEVER!

Why not return to your role at the Saints after said "family reaons" are no longer a reason?

1/ Who said that "family reasons" are no longer at all a factor? Perhaps they have lessened enough to allow for a much easier role that he had at the Saints?


2/ Do your not understand the vast difference between a part-time and low pressure role, and a full-time PLUS high pressure, and highly scrutinised senior management role? Family reasons could well still be a factor.

Especially when such a full-time role is actually more than full-time in terms of hours required?

[perfectionist]

Family matter now resolved - or should I say - is "in remission". Move on.

[CQ SAINT]

Less than 12 months later,

So for example his wife was ill and recovered?

Or one of his parents needed help but no longer does. etc



Or his wife just could not handle him still be fulltime employed which she perhaps wanted to enjoy her "golden years" more?

takes on another role higher up the chain

The role is only part time and is actually a "lesser/lower" role than his gig at the Saints was.

So he is lower down the chain now.

All plausible reasons granted.

HOWEVER!

Why not return to your role at the Saints after said "family reaons" are no longer a reason?

Because he has been in retirement mode for some time.

Although clearly, given his part in our process of reviewing our football program and a restructure across a number of position of football staff since, his job was never managing those changes.
Making himself redundant utilitising the skills of those hired to fill positions is what his role was always going to be.
Ross Lyon was hired, had a plan and was clearly given what he wanted and thought needed to pursue the plan. Hayes and Enright were here.
Most other prominent roles have been restaffed or restructured.
It has led to very little other than overstated criticism and understated success and there is a little under 12 months sample size in a season where one team played more consistently than most of those behind them.
We, were consistent.
We only need 12 more months of the same consistency and it will be clear.


I

[Vortex]

Less than 12 months later,

So for example his wife was ill and recovered?

Or one of his parents needed help but no longer does. etc



Or his wife just could not handle him still be fulltime employed which she perhaps wanted to enjoy her "golden years" more?

takes on another role higher up the chain

The role is only part time and is actually a "lesser/lower" role than his gig at the Saints was.

So he is lower down the chain now.

All plausible reasons granted.

HOWEVER!

Why not return to your role at the Saints after said "family reaons" are no longer a reason?

Because he has been in retirement mode for some time.

Although clearly, given his part in our process of reviewing our football program and a restructure across a number of position of football staff since, his job was never managing those changes.
Making himself redundant utilitising the skills of those hired to fill positions is what his role was always going to be.
Ross Lyon was hired, had a plan and was clearly given what he wanted and thought needed to pursue the plan. Hayes and Enright were here.
Most other prominent roles have been restaffed or restructured.
It has led to very little other than overstated criticism and understated success and there is a little under 12 months sample size in a season where one team played more consistently than most of those behind them.
We, were consistent.
We only need 12 more months of the same consistency and it will be clear.


I

Agree, moreover Ross was very strong in his first presser after signing on that he firmly believed the key to a successful club was what he called the "four pillars".

It's the kind of messaging you'd expect from the top down but this was a message bejng sent up the chain of command by Ross only ours after re joining the club.

Pretty clear Walsh was done in clubland when he left Collingwood by telling the industry he was cooked and looking forward to retirement. Not suggesting he didn't create any value in his 12 weeks at the club but his appointment did have a little bit of a Malcom Blight feel to it with days of dreaming about improving one's handicap on the golf coarse.

With all that in mind and Walsh being one of Ross's four pillars it was never going to work with part time application. Could you imagine Ross accepting that?

Yes also agree re the very small sample size by the new regime, next 2 seasons will reveal all.

[Sanctorum]

If Geoff Walsh's thoughtless and insensitive comments about the club when he first started are any indication, he comes across as an overrated administrator with a big ego and someone who has poor media and communication skills. His comments, although potentially true, showed a lack of humility and respect for the hardworking staff who bust a gut to improve the club. It is likely that these negative and poorly articulated remarks didn’t go down well with the staff. Perhaps Tony can provide further insight and confirmation on this.

I think you misinterpreted Geoff Walsh's comments SaintPav when he said, in response to a question from the media about his perception of St Kilda in the past, words to the effect that "St Kilda was considered irrelevant in the competition for a long time".

That was entirely a question of the team's on-field performance and did not, as I see it, necessarily imply a reflection on the "hardworking" staff. There's little doubt in my mind that if Walsh had been connected with St Kilda in 2011 the still-born, costly and wasteful move to Seaford would never have happened - this was the fault of the club's Board and CEO during that period, not the employees down the line!

I don't think Walsh has ever displayed an 'ego', in fact he's always kept a very low profile in the media. He has simply been a very successful hard nut administrator, a troubeshooter who has worked at a number of clubs and sought out by many others to review where clubs have gone wrong and what they should do to get back on track.

The AFL obviously believes that as a part-time consultant he will utilise his sharp 'no BS' analytical skills to help improve the game.

[SaintPav]

If Geoff Walsh's thoughtless and insensitive comments about the club when he first started are any indication, he comes across as an overrated administrator with a big ego and someone who has poor media and communication skills. His comments, although potentially true, showed a lack of humility and respect for the hardworking staff who bust a gut to improve the club. It is likely that these negative and poorly articulated remarks didn’t go down well with the staff. Perhaps Tony can provide further insight and confirmation on this.

I think you misinterpreted Geoff Walsh's comments SaintPav when he said, in response to a question from the media about his perception of St Kilda in the past, words to the effect that "St Kilda was considered irrelevant in the competition for a long time".

That was entirely a question of the team's on-field performance and did not, as I see it, necessarily imply a reflection on the "hardworking" staff. There's little doubt in my mind that if Walsh had been connected with St Kilda in 2011 the still-born, costly and wasteful move to Seaford would never have happened - this was the fault of the club's Board and CEO during that period, not the employees down the line!

I don't think Walsh has ever displayed an 'ego', in fact he's always kept a very low profile in the media. He has simply been a very successful hard nut administrator, a troubeshooter who has worked at a number of clubs and sought out by many others to review where clubs have gone wrong and what they should do to get back on track.

The AFL obviously believes that as a part-time consultant he will utilise his sharp 'no BS' analytical skills to help improve the game.

I disagree.

He could have phrased it differently. It was very negative and spoke like he wasn’t part of the club and then he left for whatever reason. There was no positive spin whatsoever.

It was a poor choice of words and showed a lack of tact and leadership.

If I was Bassset, I would have called him to express my disappointment in his negativity.

What’s with the Geoff Walsh appreciation society?

[Vortex]

If Geoff Walsh's thoughtless and insensitive comments about the club when he first started are any indication, he comes across as an overrated administrator with a big ego and someone who has poor media and communication skills. His comments, although potentially true, showed a lack of humility and respect for the hardworking staff who bust a gut to improve the club. It is likely that these negative and poorly articulated remarks didn’t go down well with the staff. Perhaps Tony can provide further insight and confirmation on this.

I think you misinterpreted Geoff Walsh's comments SaintPav when he said, in response to a question from the media about his perception of St Kilda in the past, words to the effect that "St Kilda was considered irrelevant in the competition for a long time".

That was entirely a question of the team's on-field performance and did not, as I see it, necessarily imply a reflection on the "hardworking" staff. There's little doubt in my mind that if Walsh had been connected with St Kilda in 2011 the still-born, costly and wasteful move to Seaford would never have happened - this was the fault of the club's Board and CEO during that period, not the employees down the line!

I don't think Walsh has ever displayed an 'ego', in fact he's always kept a very low profile in the media. He has simply been a very successful hard nut administrator, a troubeshooter who has worked at a number of clubs and sought out by many others to review where clubs have gone wrong and what they should do to get back on track.

The AFL obviously believes that as a part-time consultant he will utilise his sharp 'no BS' analytical skills to help improve the game.

I disagree.

He could have phrased it differently. It was very negative and spoke like he wasn’t part of the club and then he left for whatever reason. There was no positive spin whatsoever.

It was a poor choice of words and showed a lack of tact and leadership.

If I was Bassset, I would have called him to express my disappointment in his negativity.

What’s with the Geoff Walsh appreciation society?

Unfortunately the AFL media is controlled to within a millimetre of it's very existence, more so than the mainstream media in a pandemic, and as such you only find the type of accountability you present in your post right here on highly credible boards like SS.

"Family reasons" my arse.

[SaintPav]

If Geoff Walsh's thoughtless and insensitive comments about the club when he first started are any indication, he comes across as an overrated administrator with a big ego and someone who has poor media and communication skills. His comments, although potentially true, showed a lack of humility and respect for the hardworking staff who bust a gut to improve the club. It is likely that these negative and poorly articulated remarks didn’t go down well with the staff. Perhaps Tony can provide further insight and confirmation on this.

I think you misinterpreted Geoff Walsh's comments SaintPav when he said, in response to a question from the media about his perception of St Kilda in the past, words to the effect that "St Kilda was considered irrelevant in the competition for a long time".

That was entirely a question of the team's on-field performance and did not, as I see it, necessarily imply a reflection on the "hardworking" staff. There's little doubt in my mind that if Walsh had been connected with St Kilda in 2011 the still-born, costly and wasteful move to Seaford would never have happened - this was the fault of the club's Board and CEO during that period, not the employees down the line!

I don't think Walsh has ever displayed an 'ego', in fact he's always kept a very low profile in the media. He has simply been a very successful hard nut administrator, a troubeshooter who has worked at a number of clubs and sought out by many others to review where clubs have gone wrong and what they should do to get back on track.

The AFL obviously believes that as a part-time consultant he will utilise his sharp 'no BS' analytical skills to help improve the game.

I disagree.

He could have phrased it differently. It was very negative and spoke like he wasn’t part of the club and then he left for whatever reason. There was no positive spin whatsoever.

It was a poor choice of words and showed a lack of tact and leadership.

If I was Bassset, I would have called him to express my disappointment in his negativity.

What’s with the Geoff Walsh appreciation society?

Unfortunately the AFL media is controlled to within a millimetre of it's very existence, more so than the mainstream media in a pandemic, and as such you only find the type of accountability you present in your post right here on highly credible boards like SS.

"Family reasons" my arse.

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

[nostalgicsaint]

Nothing to see here, fact is that Geoff Walsh is one of the highest regarded AFL officials in the business. He did what he was required to do in the massive overhaul of St Kilda football operations last October which resulted in the termination of Brett Ratten and return of Ross Lyon to the love of his life....

His role at AFL House is part-time so it's far less demanding or stressful than bei gg involved with a club.

The only thought I had when I heard the news is to wonder how he'll get along with his new boss Laura Kane as he's a very driven individual and she's a relatuve new chum as the supremo of AFL's football operations.

Not so sure about that, “family reasons” was the the reason given for departing our club in a very swift manner.


Less than 12 months later, takes on another role higher up the chain almost directly after the club announced Misson was taking over his old role on a permanent basis.

Lyon moved him on.

Yourself and BM have a terrible habit of stating (incorrect) opinion as fact.

Then using repetition to try and convince people.

They say you should never go into battle with an unarmed man, so I'll go gently. But before we kick off can you put something down that attempts to demonstrate your persuasive argument skills?

The sort of humour my year 6 math teacher led with.

There is no argument needed from my end. Your conspiracy on the other hand....

A maths teacher with a sense of humour?

Sounds like (incorrect) opinion dressed up as fact.

Damn right there is no argument from your end.

You are asking me to produce an argument where one isn't needed.

You have a (baseless) conspiracy theory. Until there is any evidence there is no need to produce a counter argument.

[Vortex]

Nothing to see here, fact is that Geoff Walsh is one of the highest regarded AFL officials in the business. He did what he was required to do in the massive overhaul of St Kilda football operations last October which resulted in the termination of Brett Ratten and return of Ross Lyon to the love of his life....

His role at AFL House is part-time so it's far less demanding or stressful than bei gg involved with a club.

The only thought I had when I heard the news is to wonder how he'll get along with his new boss Laura Kane as he's a very driven individual and she's a relatuve new chum as the supremo of AFL's football operations.

Not so sure about that, “family reasons” was the the reason given for departing our club in a very swift manner.


Less than 12 months later, takes on another role higher up the chain almost directly after the club announced Misson was taking over his old role on a permanent basis.

Lyon moved him on.

Yourself and BM have a terrible habit of stating (incorrect) opinion as fact.

Then using repetition to try and convince people.

They say you should never go into battle with an unarmed man, so I'll go gently. But before we kick off can you put something down that attempts to demonstrate your persuasive argument skills?

The sort of humour my year 6 math teacher led with.

There is no argument needed from my end. Your conspiracy on the other hand....

A maths teacher with a sense of humour?

Sounds like (incorrect) opinion dressed up as fact.

Damn right there is no argument from your end.

You are asking me to produce an argument where one isn't needed.

You have a (baseless) conspiracy theory. Until there is any evidence there is no need to produce a counter argument.

OK we can take it slowly then if it helps you build your skills, I agree once again there is no argument and for a beginner you are doing very well presenting that point of view strongly, keep up the good work and keep practising.

[Vortex]

If Geoff Walsh's thoughtless and insensitive comments about the club when he first started are any indication, he comes across as an overrated administrator with a big ego and someone who has poor media and communication skills. His comments, although potentially true, showed a lack of humility and respect for the hardworking staff who bust a gut to improve the club. It is likely that these negative and poorly articulated remarks didn’t go down well with the staff. Perhaps Tony can provide further insight and confirmation on this.

I think you misinterpreted Geoff Walsh's comments SaintPav when he said, in response to a question from the media about his perception of St Kilda in the past, words to the effect that "St Kilda was considered irrelevant in the competition for a long time".

That was entirely a question of the team's on-field performance and did not, as I see it, necessarily imply a reflection on the "hardworking" staff. There's little doubt in my mind that if Walsh had been connected with St Kilda in 2011 the still-born, costly and wasteful move to Seaford would never have happened - this was the fault of the club's Board and CEO during that period, not the employees down the line!

I don't think Walsh has ever displayed an 'ego', in fact he's always kept a very low profile in the media. He has simply been a very successful hard nut administrator, a troubeshooter who has worked at a number of clubs and sought out by many others to review where clubs have gone wrong and what they should do to get back on track.

The AFL obviously believes that as a part-time consultant he will utilise his sharp 'no BS' analytical skills to help improve the game.

I disagree.

He could have phrased it differently. It was very negative and spoke like he wasn’t part of the club and then he left for whatever reason. There was no positive spin whatsoever.

It was a poor choice of words and showed a lack of tact and leadership.

If I was Bassset, I would have called him to express my disappointment in his negativity.

What’s with the Geoff Walsh appreciation society?

Unfortunately the AFL media is controlled to within a millimetre of it's very existence, more so than the mainstream media in a pandemic, and as such you only find the type of accountability you present in your post right here on highly credible boards like SS.

"Family reasons" my arse.

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

Totally and I'd suggest one way of turning a negative into a positive would have been to return to the postion after he'd dealt with his "family reasons". That is if he was fair dinkum in the first place.

[nostalgicsaint]

Nothing to see here, fact is that Geoff Walsh is one of the highest regarded AFL officials in the business. He did what he was required to do in the massive overhaul of St Kilda football operations last October which resulted in the termination of Brett Ratten and return of Ross Lyon to the love of his life....

His role at AFL House is part-time so it's far less demanding or stressful than bei gg involved with a club.

The only thought I had when I heard the news is to wonder how he'll get along with his new boss Laura Kane as he's a very driven individual and she's a relatuve new chum as the supremo of AFL's football operations.

Not so sure about that, “family reasons” was the the reason given for departing our club in a very swift manner.


Less than 12 months later, takes on another role higher up the chain almost directly after the club announced Misson was taking over his old role on a permanent basis.

Lyon moved him on.

Yourself and BM have a terrible habit of stating (incorrect) opinion as fact.

Then using repetition to try and convince people.

They say you should never go into battle with an unarmed man, so I'll go gently. But before we kick off can you put something down that attempts to demonstrate your persuasive argument skills?

The sort of humour my year 6 math teacher led with.

There is no argument needed from my end. Your conspiracy on the other hand....

A maths teacher with a sense of humour?

Sounds like (incorrect) opinion dressed up as fact.

Damn right there is no argument from your end.

You are asking me to produce an argument where one isn't needed.

You have a (baseless) conspiracy theory. Until there is any evidence there is no need to produce a counter argument.

OK we can take it slowly then if it helps you build your skills, I agree once again there is no argument and for a beginner you are doing very well presenting that point of view strongly, keep up the good work and keep practising.

[Sanctorum]

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

Geoff Walsh has never, nor is likely to ever, get into spin, he speaks plainly and his message is all the more credible as a result, a refreshing change from what we hear from club officials and the AFL.

It's a matter of opinion whether or not one accepts the sincerity of his stated reasons for quitting his job as EGM of St Kilda football, I believe him, you and others don't. But I'm quite sure that without Walsh's input the massive overhaul in October 2022 would not have happened, or had the same outcomes that occurred this year and that most supporters have acknowledged.

[SaintPav]

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

Geoff Walsh has never, nor is likely to ever, get into spin, he speaks plainly and his message is all the more credible as a result, a refreshing change from what we hear from club officials and the AFL.

It's a matter of opinion whether or not one accepts the sincerity of his stated reasons for quitting his job as EGM of St Kilda football, I believe him, you and others don't. But I'm quite sure that without Walsh's input the massive overhaul in October 2022 would not have happened, or had the same outcomes that occurred this year and that most supporters have acknowledged.

I haven’t commented on why he left. What are you on about?

I don’t mean to be rude but you are coming across as a little naive and misinformed.

[Yorkeys]

"Family reasons" is a well known euphemism when people step aside/leave a role and don't want to give the real or specific reason.
Therefore it can be, simultaneously: plain speaking, not spin, also misinformation by omission and naive - if the speaker expects the term to be taken at face value by the majority of people who default to skepticism. Can't it.

Anyway, good luck to him hope he can improve the mess that is the AFL administration.

[Teflon]

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

Geoff Walsh has never, nor is likely to ever, get into spin, he speaks plainly and his message is all the more credible as a result, a refreshing change from what we hear from club officials and the AFL.

It's a matter of opinion whether or not one accepts the sincerity of his stated reasons for quitting his job as EGM of St Kilda football, I believe him, you and others don't. But I'm quite sure that without Walsh's input the massive overhaul in October 2022 would not have happened, or had the same outcomes that occurred this year and that most supporters have acknowledged.

Hear hear
What’s with all the rose coloured glasses brigade didn’t like Geoff laying down a few home truths?
We’ve been irrelevant for way too long - fact
Last time we were relevant RTB was at the club
We’ll said Geoff - truth clearly hurts some…

[Sanctorum]

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

Geoff Walsh has never, nor is likely to ever, get into spin, he speaks plainly and his message is all the more credible as a result, a refreshing change from what we hear from club officials and the AFL.

It's a matter of opinion whether or not one accepts the sincerity of his stated reasons for quitting his job as EGM of St Kilda football, I believe him, you and others don't. But I'm quite sure that without Walsh's input the massive overhaul in October 2022 would not have happened, or had the same outcomes that occurred this year and that most supporters have acknowledged.

I haven’t commented on why he left. What are you on about?

I don’t mean to be rude but you are coming across as a little naive and misinformed.

Fair enough, I was mistaken to include you among those who questioned Walsh's reason for leaving, but I don't think that justifies you denigrating me by concluding that I'm either naive or misinformed, we're both expressing our respective opinions which is what this forum is all about....

[Vortex]

we're both expressing our respective opinions which is what this forum is all about....

It's good to see you're now onboard with the concept.

[SaintPav]

His first mistake was to actually answer the media question. His job was to sell the club in the media, not reinforce the negative image that’s already out there.

Everyone apart from Geoff Walsh knows that when you're asked in a job interview about a weakness, you use it to spin how you've turned a negative situation into a positive outcome.

It was so 2001 Malcolm Blight.

Geoff Walsh has never, nor is likely to ever, get into spin, he speaks plainly and his message is all the more credible as a result, a refreshing change from what we hear from club officials and the AFL.

It's a matter of opinion whether or not one accepts the sincerity of his stated reasons for quitting his job as EGM of St Kilda football, I believe him, you and others don't. But I'm quite sure that without Walsh's input the massive overhaul in October 2022 would not have happened, or had the same outcomes that occurred this year and that most supporters have acknowledged.

I haven’t commented on why he left. What are you on about?

I don’t mean to be rude but you are coming across as a little naive and misinformed.

Fair enough, I was mistaken to include you among those who questioned Walsh's reason for leaving, but I don't think that justifies you denigrating me by concluding that I'm either naive or misinformed, we're both expressing our respective opinions which is what this forum is all about....

I do when you make factual errors about what I wrote and misconceptions about people.

Ross acknowledged that we have been disrespected for too long but he was also adamant that he wanted to do something about it. I didn’t hear GW say anything positive. That’s the difference.

Geoff Walsh and a few other obtuse and ignorant types on here need to move with the times.

Thanks for acknowledging your error and don’t take it too personally.

[SaintPav]

we're both expressing our respective opinions which is what this forum is all about....

It's good to see you're now onboard with the concept.

[B.M]

We are disrespected for a reason

At times during our history we’ve been a horror show - both on field and off

Other times when we’ve almost got it right we found a way to fk it up!!!

StK.F.C is undoubtedly a tragedy… perhaps a comedy?