Dutchy wrote:I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
.
They all come around eventually

by bennymacca » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:35 am
Dutchy wrote:I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
.
by bennymacca » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:35 am
Dutchy wrote:I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
.
by Booney » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:35 am
bennymacca wrote:Do you think that sort of public comment would be acceptable in a business setting?
And if not why is it appropriate here when Koch's role is purely on the corporate side and not a football role?
by bennymacca » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:36 am
Booney wrote: other than his quip at selection.
by Dutchy » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:40 am
bennymacca wrote:Dutchy wrote:I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
.
They all come around eventually
by Jim05 » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:42 am
by JK » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:42 am
by bennymacca » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:43 am
Dutchy wrote:bennymacca wrote:Dutchy wrote:I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
.
They all come around eventually
It took a mutual hate of Port to bring us together....![]()
Now lets find the Crows thread...
by morell » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:44 am
You're both posting under the assumption that Port are desperate to keep Hinkley.Dutchy wrote:bennymacca wrote:morell wrote:bennymacca wrote:Well done kochie you dickhead
notsureifsrs.jpg
Definitely serious
Why would Hinkley stay at a club whose chairman publicly undermines him and his selection policies minutes after a heartbreaking loss.
For a man who prides himself on his business acumen trusts either mindblowingly stupid, or maybe it was designed to push him out?
I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
Koch just needs to let the footy department be the footy department, look at how united the Western Bulldogs President and Beveridge were last year.
by Booney » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:45 am
JK wrote:Looks like Sportsbet and Crownbet have taken down their next Port coach markets
by Dutchy » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:46 am
by Booney » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:47 am
Dutchy wrote:Can only go on what they have said publicly and Port have said they want Ken to stay.
by The Bedge » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:51 am
Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Can only go on what they have said publicly and Port have said they want Ken to stay.
Why wouldn't they?
Developed some kids quickly this year, played finals, looks to have great relationships with the players and is contracted.
Or, go with a rookie coach.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
by morell » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:52 am
hahahah cmon Dutchy. What are they going to say? You know you're dead as a coach when the CEO or Chairman comes out with the old "he is our coach and we're fully supportive of him". It's akin to a player saying "they're focused on football and finals" when negotiating a contract.Dutchy wrote:Can only go on what they have said publicly and Port have said they want Ken to stay.
by bennymacca » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:52 am
You're both posting under the assumption that Port are desperate to keep Hinkley.morell wrote:Dutchy wrote:bennymacca wrote:morell wrote:[quote="bennymacca"]Well done kochie you dickhead
notsureifsrs.jpg
Definitely serious
Why would Hinkley stay at a club whose chairman publicly undermines him and his selection policies minutes after a heartbreaking loss.
For a man who prides himself on his business acumen trusts either mindblowingly stupid, or maybe it was designed to push him out?
I can't believe I'm agreeing with Benny![]()
![]()
Koch just needs to let the footy department be the footy department, look at how united the Western Bulldogs President and Beveridge were last year.
by morell » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:54 am
Because unlike you, they can see his inherent flaws and think to take the next step might mean getting someone tactically superior.Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Can only go on what they have said publicly and Port have said they want Ken to stay.
Why wouldn't they?
Developed some kids quickly this year, played finals, looks to have great relationships with the players and is contracted.
Or, go with a rookie coach.
by JK » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:55 am
Booney wrote:JK wrote:Looks like Sportsbet and Crownbet have taken down their next Port coach markets
What do they know then?
by Dutchy » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:56 am
Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Can only go on what they have said publicly and Port have said they want Ken to stay.
Why wouldn't they?
Developed some kids quickly this year, played finals, looks to have great relationships with the players and is contracted.
Or, go with a rookie coach.
by The Bedge » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:57 am
bennymacca wrote:He was definitely criticising ken too - selection policies has nothing to do with the players
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
by Booney » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:58 am
The Bedge wrote:Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Can only go on what they have said publicly and Port have said they want Ken to stay.
Why wouldn't they?
Developed some kids quickly this year, played finals, looks to have great relationships with the players and is contracted.
Or, go with a rookie coach.
Sometimes a coach can only have a certain level of impact and then they plateau. Hinkley has done a great job in his time, and yes developed some young pups, but maybe the time is right to bring in someone whose going to take that developed group and progress them a little bit further forward.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |