doggies4eva wrote:Oh! My mistake.I thought it was laughable finding 6,500 Port supporters who could sign their own name
Its done online no signing required.
by Slots It Through » Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:32 pm
doggies4eva wrote:Oh! My mistake.I thought it was laughable finding 6,500 Port supporters who could sign their own name
by doggies4eva » Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:58 pm
Slots It Through wrote:doggies4eva wrote:Oh! My mistake.I thought it was laughable finding 6,500 Port supporters who could sign their own name
Its done online no signing required.
by devilsadvocate » Thu Sep 02, 2010 5:19 pm
sjt wrote:
"Sorry, can't see why 6500 people signing something online, "shows there's a need for it", Tim Ginever. If 6,500 signed a petition against the merger would it necessarily mean there isn't a need for it? Just get these supposed supporters to contribute $100, $650,000 raised, problem solved. Move on. Time to play and compete on each teams merits, not to the detriment of, or disadvantaging other clubs. 6,500 not even Port Magpies membership and a long way from the Power's membership, (so 20,000+ don't want it?). If you thought only 1,000 to 2,000 would sign it -why would you bother. Top bloke Timmy, but wasting time and effort." posted on adelaide now
I guess what's "laughable" is clasping at straws that 6,500 online signatories actually has any real meaning or weight on such an important landscape changing decision.
I wouldn't need to see 6,500 signatures to make the assumption that probably most Port supporters would be in favour of a merger.
It's not just about what's good for Port/s, its what's best for the league and the other clubs.
If Barrie Robran started a poll to push for North to merge with the Crows and got 6,500 signatures, does that mean there's a need for it?
A I said, utmost respect for Tim Ginever, but to infer the reaction is staggering is also laughable. It could be equally argued the response has done more harm than good.
by sjt » Thu Sep 02, 2010 9:10 pm
by sjt » Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:02 pm
by Barto » Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:22 pm
sjt wrote:Another double page spread in today's paper on this previously defeated plan. More lobbying from Rucci. Surely it has to be news to be re-printed again and again. I guess that's why it's called the advertiser. Printing the same story over and over is pathetic. There is no real significant belief in the plan. Put a double page story on something interesting in the SANFL.
There's only two pages dedicated to the final four games.
How's Fiacchi's form, "Every new player drafted by the Power should get to wear that Magpie jumper in the SANFL" GET STUFFED!! I've lost all sympathy to their plight. But thanks for reminding me of one of the reasons I dislike them so much.
by holden78 » Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:54 pm
by holden78 » Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:06 pm
by Lynwood » Sat Sep 04, 2010 11:32 am
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |