The “secret meeting” results 🤫

[Kelce68]

We have people that can play 5/8 for a year as long as they are with a halfback who game manages.
This kid has done nothing to gain these wraps. It is Luke Brooks all over again. If we are to pursue a 5/8, there are some with experience, likely costing less who are out there.

'We have people that can play 5/8 for a year'

Who?

You've watched one game of his, yet he's also done nothing to gain these wraps..

What exactly would a junior have to do in your eyes to earn any wraps then?

Should a junior ever come highly regarded? If not, how do you propose we obtain the signatures of highly-touted, juniors? Never pay on potential?

Do you feel the same about our homegrown talent? What's Bula ever done? What about Da Silva? Faagutu? Should we not pay them handsomely and show some faith, based upon their trajectory as juniors?

Or, cast them away and just pluck ready-made first graders from other sides for the rest of our days.

I would argue that's a key reason we're here for now..

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

I thought he said it pretty straight actually.

Didn’t mince any words at all.

Well that's pretty scary. Where do Wests Tigers go from his non mincing words?

 

[tigertuff]

This is where Scott needs to earn his moola. People saying we have all these good young kids, the challenge is to identify which 3 or 4 can help change the club.

I think that was already done before Fulton got here. 2 of them are playing first grade this weekend.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

I think that was already done before Fulton got here. 2 of them are playing first grade this weekend.

Just Benji got in the way

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Ego?

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Sheens in his ear?

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Who knows. Its a secret.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Experts on here throw names around willy nilly, the Magpies matts guys, realistically we need 4 or 5 to come up and be long time first graders. Bula is one, Tallyn also looks the goods.

No leader. No direction.

 

[StarswithStripes]

Leaders lie. That's their job to do whatever to protect their group.

The panel had to resort to deconstructing the interview and then debating it.

He offered closure of questions asked.

I think he successfully dodged the question on the whole of club review.

 

[Mighty_Tiger]

What you’ve said is the newspaper version of what happened.
Lee said last night that the club’s offer was based on advice. They didn’t consider it a fair offer, they were told it’s a fair offer by a third party. He didn’t elaborate on where this advice came from, but certainly indicated that the board felt that Luke’s management was taking advantage of the situation and that’s why they demanded an answer.

It was a poorly thought out and conducted retention process. They sought advice on what he’d take, and that’s what they offered. When it was rejected, they bumped it up apparently..again this is from Lee last night. At no stage does it appear apparent that they had any contingent plans should he reject their offer. In the end, they were way off what he ended up signing for and now are scrambling to find someone to replace him.

If you read the room and listened to what Luke has been saying about his future for over a year now, you would have been fairly certain that he was going to leave. His body language was poor, he never spoke of long term strategies and even stated on several occasions that he would likely be ‘selfish’ on his next contract negotiations. Fans assumed that meant money. It clearly meant escaping the toxic fishbowl he’d been swimming in for a decade.

I was one of many who did not want him as our halfback. I’ve been saying, as have many others, for a long long time now that he is a running 6 not an organising 7. That said, I was shocked at how low our offer reportedly was…and that was the upgraded offer! I though we obviously had someone else coming here to lowball him like that and then put a time limit on his answer.
Nope. We just stuffed it up royally. This is not the first time this has happened. The club deserves its chastising for that and Lee cannot bullshit his way out of it even though he had a decent crack at it last night.

Don’t know where you got your version of what Lee said from but via 360 he said somethings different.

Lee said we made him an offer that we believe was a fair market offer, which we believed was very attractive & initial discussions were very positive.

We made 2 offers to Brooks the initial offer then an increased one (last offer was above market value)

Brooks mgmt rejected both (Lee words).

Brooks mgmt made the demand of an initial offer being made within 24hrs then mentions the offer they viewed would be perceived very favorably (he mentions that term more than once) - he also mentions was perceived it would be received favorably also.

Things went on for days then reached the following weekend in which the club wanted an answer.

If anything it comes across Brooks mgmt was using our offer as leverage re his Manly negotiations.

 

[weststigers]

Well that's pretty scary. Where do Wests Tigers go from his non mincing words?

Who knows, but just making an isolated comment in relation to him answering questions directly.

I’m not qualified to say what is or isn’t needed at the club. It’s just sad it has come to this.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Don’t know where you got your version of what Lee said from but via 360 he said somethings different.

Lee said we made him an offer that we believe was a fair market offer, which we believed was very attractive & initial discussions were very positive.

We made 2 offers to Brooks the initial offer then an increased one (last offer was above market value)

Brooks mgmt rejected both (Lee words).

Brooks mgmt made the demand of an initial offer being made within 24hrs then mentions the offer they viewed would be perceived very favorably (he mentions that term more than once) - he also mentions was perceived it would be received favorably also.

Things went on for days then reached the following weekend in which the club wanted an answer.

If anything it comes across Brooks mgmt was using our offer as leverage re his Manly negotiations.

Who knows, but just making an isolated comment in relation to him answering questions directly.

I’m not qualified to say what is or isn’t needed at the club. It’s just sad it has come to this.

Appreciate your honesty and integrity. And you are right. You speak for all of us or most of us.

 

[innsaneink]

I think he successfully dodged the question on the whole of club review.

Yes.. A side step benji would be proud of

 

[matchball]

Joh Bailey spotted having coffee with Justin Pacoe on Burwood Rd.
The new barber might be a reality. Only the best for us.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Haig said words to the effect of "If 3 of my men die killing 2 of their's i will win the war because i have more men",a more disreputable piece of shit i could not imagine as a any military leader.How such a callous attitude was allowed to continue is a disgrace at all levels.It is not surprising he was loathed by the majority of his men and he fully earnt his tag as a "butcher".

That's true.

But what's worse is that similar tactics would probably be applied today if leaders faced a similar conundrum.

The German army was the best division for division during both wars. Eisenhower said 25 years later he needed 3 to 1 against the Germans. Ultimately they were defeated by superior numbers by the Soviets.

I suppose a leader today might just drop the A bomb today if faced with such opposition.

 

[Tucker]

Done his job then.
Probably won't hear much more regarding these questions in the media in coming days.

Why are you defending him and the board when they are causing so much heartache with your team?

 

[Magpie_Magic]

I think he successfully dodged the question on the whole of club review.

He didn't need to answer a question re a review.

Which business owners would accept a review asked by their customers even if warranted .

 

[Tucker]

Don’t know where you got your version of what Lee said from but via 360 he said somethings different.

Lee said we made him an offer that we believe was a fair market offer, which we believed was very attractive & initial discussions were very positive.

We made 2 offers to Brooks the initial offer then an increased one (last offer was above market value)

Brooks mgmt rejected both (Lee words).

Brooks mgmt made the demand of an initial offer being made within 24hrs then mentions the offer they viewed would be perceived very favorably (he mentions that term more than once) - he also mentions was perceived it would be received favorably also.

Things went on for days then reached the following weekend in which the club wanted an answer.

If anything it comes across Brooks mgmt was using our offer as leverage re his Manly negotiations.

Where did he get the information that their offer was above market value?

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Where did he get the information that their offer was above market value?

And why weren't we invited to this meeting?

 

[Tucker]

He certainly back tracked but my take on that was he had to correct himself because he realized he got the timelines muddled up.

That’s possible. As is the take we have.