@diedpretty said in [Signing Suggestions & Rumours](/post/1105956) said:
I think its getting to the stage where one has to decide whether to post anything on this forum anymore. There are a few self righteous self opinionated people on here who bag anything , everything and anyone that puts forward something they don't agree with. If you don't like someones opinion just say you disagree with it instead of belittling people as though they are idiots and behaving as though you are the anointed ones.
That's how forums work mate.
A few people bag the club, a few people bag the people who bag the club. A few people bag those people.
Most people don't react strongly unless the posts are themselves strong. So strong "opinions" bring strong responses, I think.
And this is not to pick on you, but I want you to understand what I am seeing when you posted today.
>@diedpretty We really made a mess of the Matterson saga. We must have been in talks with Utoikamanu while the matterson mess was happening. Why didn’t we just seal the deal and tell the slime we would release matterson when they release Stefano. We may have had to pay matterson 1 month of his contract but would have had the young kid for this year.
(1) Your opinion is we made a mess of handling Matterson. OK. Based on what? Based on (2) an assumption we must have already being talking to Stefano.
But we all know officially we couldn't have spoken to Stefano before 1st Nov, and given that he reportedly signed at the end of November, there's no facts to indicate that we spoke to him before we released Matto.
Then (3) "Why didn't we just seal the deal with Stefano and hold Matterson?" Very many potential reasons and nobody can say, truly, that Tigers could simply have held Matterson for another month on suspicion of signing Stefano, as leverage. We have no idea what was going on between the club and Matto at the time; we don't even have any indicator that Tigers would have known that Eels were coming to the Matto party.
Then (4) "we would have had the kid for this year". No, you don't know that. That's a guess on your part, you have no idea what would have really happened if we held Matto as a bargaining chip for any further discussions with other clubs about other players. Eels may have still held Stefano regardless, for exactly the same reasons they are holding him now, and maybe Matterson goes somewhere else.
So I see too much commentary with guesswork or hindsight and I feel that opens you for warranted criticism. Your argument is pretty speculative and wobbly, no offense to you personally.
THEN your next post is
>@diedpretty just an observation of maybe we stuffed up
Your first post is "we really made a mess". Second post "maybe we stuffed up". Probably second post is less inflammatory to other folks, but then you are softening your stance at the same time.
Again this is not a criticism of you personally, that's just how it can read to other folks, and there's nothing to this forum beyond than how things read.
Also, frankly, I think a lot of people are tired of rehashing old discussions like what we should have done with Matto. There's been a thousand posts on it already, it's well and truly over, might argue it's pointless to keep revisiting it.