Grant Thomas the parasite

[saint66au]

A provision of $270,000 is also understood to have been set aside for the contested claim Thomas has against the club for what he maintains are unpaid entitlements.

Not quite $700,000 Barks..and it all might still come to naught..lets hope so eh??:-)

[plugger66]

Spinner has been warned for abuse and his coment deleted

Unfortunately the topic of GT is relevant at the moment. Its been stated by the Club that they are putting money aside in case its needed to pay him out later. The discussion of this is therefore totally acceptable on the ForumHowever, as most people know, the topic of Grant Thomas raises more hackles and causes more tears than any other subject raised here. More posts have been locked on him than every other subject combined I reckon. All we ask is that you show some respect to your fellow posters when discussing it..or this thread will be locked too.

Yes Barks drives many many people crazy on here, but he's as entitled to his opinion as anyone. Have a look around. every Forum on the Internet with our kind of traffic has a Barks on it. Passionate about the cause but cant quite help himself when it comes to a pet topic to bang on about.

Please, discuss the topic with passion but a modicum of common sense. Allow others their opinion (Yes Barks AND St Fid this means you both ) without calling them names. Play the ball not the man

Excatly, well said

If this scum sucking leech and bloodsucking parasite wasn't eroding the St.Kilda Football Cub's bottomline then this thread would not exist

Fact is, he is

Q. Why is $700,000 dissapearing off the club's bottomline for 2007?

A. Grant Thomas

One word sums up you on this topic. Loser.

[barks4eva]

A provision of $270,000 is also understood to have been set aside for the contested claim Thomas has against the club for what he maintains are unpaid entitlements.

Not quite $700,000 Barks..and it all might still come to naught..lets hope so eh??:-)

Thomas was responsible for signing Hamill to a long term deal which has cost the club $400,000 off the bottomline for 2007

Already the club had to pay out Penny when he went cactus after two years of a five year deal which Thomas was also responsible for

If Grant Thomas feels that he's been hard done by when he was on $500,000 from the get go, straight up without any previous AFL coaching experience and by his own admission was appointed through a flawed process, and all up was paid over 2.5 million dollars, then FAIR DINKUM how greedy can this pissant be?

Of the $270,000, $167,000 is for holiday pay, which he's even signed a stat dec stating that he's already been paid, in full

I do mean FAIR DINKUM

At least we now have a professionally run football department with Matthew Drain, who Thomas refused to work with, instead preferring to give even more tasks to his boy wonder bundy

We all saw how much of a c**k up Rendell made at the draft today when he called out the wrong number

Rendell was responsible for the decision to recruit Brooks and both he and Thomas gave up pick 6 and 31 for him

What a fair dinkum bunch of drop kicks

[plugger66]

A provision of $270,000 is also understood to have been set aside for the contested claim Thomas has against the club for what he maintains are unpaid entitlements.

Not quite $700,000 Barks..and it all might still come to naught..lets hope so eh??:-)

Thomas was responsible for signing Hamill to a long term deal which has cost the club $400,000 off the bottomline for 2007

Already the club had to pay out Penny when he went cactus after two years of a five year deal which Thomas was also responsible for

If Grant Thomas feels that he's been hard done by when he was on $500,000 from the get go, straight up without any previous AFL coaching experience and by his own admission was appointed through a flawed process, and all up was paid over 2.5 million dollars, then FAIR DINKUM how greedy can this pissant be?

Of the $270,000, $167,000 is for holiday pay, which he's even signed a stat dec stating that he's already been paid, in full

I do mean FAIR DINKUM

At least we now have a professionally run football department with Matthew Drain, who Thomas refused to work with, instead preferring to give even more tasks to his boy wonder bundy

We all saw how much of a c**k up Rendell made at the draft today when he called out the wrong number

Rendell was responsible for the decision to recruit Brooks and both he and Thomas gave up pick 6 and 31 for him

What a fair dinkum bunch of drop kicks

You have to get some sort of life and quickly before the rest of us go insane like yourself.

[St Fidelius]

and you are so great with the benefit of hindsight aren't you...

I suppose you are going to tell everyone that you predicted that Hamill and Penny will get injured...

Have another look into your crystal ball...

[Saints43]

Repetitive rubbish

Why don't you just answer Solar's questions?

It's a forum. Not a soapbox.


1) Was signing hamill to a lower per annum contract at the time (with no injury background and a important leadership position) not a important part of the resigning of all our young stars?

2) Was it Grant Thomas's fault that hamill did his knee so many times and thus was never able to fully get back to full fitness? I would argue that perhaps slightly with the employment of bad fitness staff.

3) Did Grant Thomas decide to work out a payout with hamill when he retired this year? Did he decide to place that payout in this years balance sheet?

4) What is the actual claimate from Grant Thomas and what actually happened with the signing of documents upon termination of his coaching contract.

5) Did he start the slanging match in the media (I would answer no) and then why did he not get the agreed payout.

6) Why is no one on the current board or club employee's critical of Grant Thomas or his claim. Why are they putting aside money to sort this out?

[Buckets]

Spinner has been warned for abuse and his coment deleted

Unfortunately the topic of GT is relevant at the moment. Its been stated by the Club that they are putting money aside in case its needed to pay him out later. The discussion of this is therefore totally acceptable on the Forum

However, as most people know, the topic of Grant Thomas raises more hackles and causes more tears than any other subject raised here. More posts have been locked on him than every other subject combined I reckon. All we ask is that you show some respect to your fellow posters when discussing it..or this thread will be locked too.

Yes Barks drives many many people crazy on here, but he's as entitled to his opinion as anyone. Have a look around. every Forum on the Internet with our kind of traffic has a Barks on it. Passionate about the cause but cant quite help himself when it comes to a pet topic to bang on about.

Please, discuss the topic with passion but a modicum of common sense. Allow others their opinion (Yes Barks AND St Fid this means you both ) without calling them names. Play the ball not the man

That is the sticking point for everyone. However if they have put this aside does it suggest that the board think that there is not going to be a favourable outcome to the litigation and if this is the case then the blame does not fall on to the current board or GT for that matter. It would suggest that the RB led board did not cross all the t's and dot the i's when this clause was signed! As for hamill most on here were happy that he retired and seemed content with giving him a payout so there was a free spot on the list.

[Solar]

thanks saint43, just re-reading those again, god their good questions

I'm waiting for a response b4e

[St Fidelius]

thanks saint43, just re-reading those again, god their good questions

I'm waiting for a response b4e

Wont be long

He's just entered his local area.......



and his consulting his crystal ball...



Please be patient for his next words of wisdom

Gee, I cant wait

[bigred]

Three pages of horse $hit.

[bigcarl]

lol

[skeptic]

Andrew . . . can I ask, why do you bother?

Even if 100% of people on this site agreed with you *shudders* - what would you like us to do about GT?

Just grandstanding Jeff... thats all B4e is doing here and thats y he keeps this up... just wants attention

[St Fidelius]

Andrew . . . can I ask, why do you bother?

Even if 100% of people on this site agreed with you *shudders* - what would you like us to do about GT?

Just grandstanding Jeff... thats all B4e is doing here and thats y he keeps this up... just wants attention

Yep...

I asked the same question

WHY BOTHER????

NOT

DON'T BOTHER

Only to be told to go away and it's not about my silly ego and point scoring, and that this is not communist Russia and that I wont silence a posters opinion...

and that I make everything personal...

Yeah righto...

This poster got personal first and has now sooked off

GO FIGURE!

[bob__71]

I think the news story puts a highlight on just how flimsy the RB led boards profits were. that he was willing to stiff employees out of their entitlements just so he could paint himself as some kind of urban hero....

It is a joke that he has left this mess for the new board to sort out...things started going down hill when he wouldnt supply training equipment so that he could bask in his million dollar profits. His jobs for the boys style he wasnt taking a wage he was just using stkilda to build business for himself and his mates.....

Anyone who cant see that RB was bleeding the club dry and hiding it behind his snake in the grass accounting practices is a MORON....left the club with no sponsors....hadnt activly recruited any for years.....


FAIR DINKUM

[firthy]

Oh tool4eva I'm so concerned for your well being ---

[asiu]

I think the news story puts a highlight on just how flimsy the RB led boards profits were. that he was willing to stiff employees out of their entitlements just so he could paint himself as some kind of urban hero....

It is a joke that he has left this mess for the new board to sort out...things started going down hill when he wouldnt supply training equipment so that he could bask in his million dollar profits. His jobs for the boys style he wasnt taking a wage he was just using stkilda to build business for himself and his mates.....

Anyone who cant see that RB was bleeding the club dry and hiding it behind his snake in the grass accounting practices is a MORON....left the club with no sponsors....hadnt activly recruited any for years.....

this has got legs .....happy spamming bob__71

[stinger]

I think the news story puts a highlight on just how flimsy the RB led boards profits were. that he was willing to stiff employees out of their entitlements just so he could paint himself as some kind of urban hero....

It is a joke that he has left this mess for the new board to sort out...things started going down hill when he wouldnt supply training equipment so that he could bask in his million dollar profits. His jobs for the boys style he wasnt taking a wage he was just using stkilda to build business for himself and his mates.....

Anyone who cant see that RB was bleeding the club dry and hiding it behind his snake in the grass accounting practices is a MORON....left the club with no sponsors....hadnt activly recruited any for years.....


FAIR DINKUM

certainly a viable stance to take.......

[barks4eva]

It does not surprise in the least that $700,000 is stripped off OUR football club's bottomline through sheer buffoonery and greed, if this pissant gets his way and all the muppets fall into line, like the apologist flogs that they are

Grant Thomas suing the club which contains a figure of $167,000 for holiday pay even though he'd previously signed a stat dec stating he was paid all holiday pay and annual leave entitlements owing to him already

I mean Fair Dinkum, talk about two bites at the cherry

Given what we witnessed yesterday at the National Draft with boy wonder bundy reading out the wrong player code number, why does this also not surprise me

The club paid or should that be overpaid Thomas Maximus over 2.5 million all up, $500,000 a year after he was appointed in what he has admitted was a flawed process to begin with, with no previous AFL coaching experience and still he's not happy

Thomas said that he would never do anything to hurt the club

$700,000 off the club's bottomline for 2007 alone, isn't exactly helpful

Thomas should be happy with the over 2.5 MILLION DOLLARS this football club has already paid him and considering the circumstances should fade off into the sunset and drop all legal action against the St.Kilda Football Club


That the muppets on here still apologise for this pissant is quite astonishing, IMHO

[bob__71]

It does not surprise in the least that $700,000 is stripped off OUR football club's bottomline through sheer buffoonery and greed, if this pissant gets his way and all the muppets fall into line, like the apologist flogs that they are

Grant Thomas suing the club which contains a figure of $167,000 for holiday pay even though he'd previously signed a stat dec stating he was paid all holiday pay and annual leave entitlements owing to him already

I mean Fair Dinkum, talk about two bites at the cherry

Given what we witnessed yesterday at the National Draft with boy wonder bundy reading out the wrong player code number, why does this also not surprise me

The club paid or should that be overpaid Thomas Maximus over 2.5 million all up, $500,000 a year after he was appointed in what he has admitted was a flawed process to begin with, with no previous AFL coaching experience and still he's not happy

Thomas said that he would never do anything to hurt the club

$700,000 off the club's bottomline for 2007 alone, isn't exactly helpful

Thomas should be happy with the over 2.5 MILLION DOLLARS this football club has already paid him and considering the circumstances should fade off into the sunset and drop all legal action against the St.Kilda Football Club


That the muppets on here still apologise for this pissant is quite astonishing, IMHO

I think the news story puts a highlight on just how flimsy the RB led boards profits were. that he was willing to stiff employees out of their entitlements just so he could paint himself as some kind of urban hero....

It is a joke that he has left this mess for the new board to sort out...things started going down hill when he wouldnt supply training equipment so that he could bask in his million dollar profits. His jobs for the boys style he wasnt taking a wage he was just using stkilda to build business for himself and his mates.....

Anyone who cant see that RB was bleeding the club dry and hiding it behind his snake in the grass accounting practices is a MORON....left the club with no sponsors....hadnt activly recruited any for years.....


FAIR DINKUM

[bob__71]

Barks is right this revisionist history thing is an easy way to bag the crap out of someone.....ya can make history fit any story you like.

[saintspremiers]

Do you mean Grant Thomas the great St Kilda man?

Grant Thomas is the great Grant Thomas man!

The sooner we finally see the back of him and allow people such as Barks to move on the better.

Exactly, let's hope once all is settled (and the intent looks like that's the case sooner rather than later), that b4e can move on.

Some how, I doubt it though unfortunately.

[Huzzad]

I highly doubt that Grant Thomas signed Hamill knowing that the last 2 years of his contract would be spent on the sideline. Come on mate. These things happen. You are asking Thomas to look into a crystal ball when he signs a player, expecting them to play out their contract. This is the AFL. People get injured mate. It ends careers. You never know when it is going to happen. This does not make Thomas a parasite; for it to make him one, he would have had to sign Hamill to a 5 year deal knowing that he would retire 2 years before his contract is due (seeing as he didn't play this year, he might as well have retired last year). Seeing as that is an utterly ridiculous idea to begin with, stop bitching about bad fortune and accept it is bad lack for both us and Hamill.

[GrumpyOne]

Couldn't be bothered reading the entire thread when I saw the title and the originator.

I assume its another dumpster diving epistle from the master of repetitive crap B4, venting his inexhaustable vitriol against the man who dared to speak disrespectfully to him one afternoon.

If its anything different please let me know, life is too short to waste time on reading another todger tugging tantrum from our resident banana in pyjamas.

[bozza1980]

This is ridiculous.

GT has a right, as does any employee, to seek payment of his allowances. Just because he was employed by the football club we love doesn't make it somehow wrong for him to do so.

This is the whole reason why there is a legal system, there is a dispute between the two parties and the court will decide it.

Just like all the ranting about GT negotiated the best deal for himself when he was coach, this really is an immature argument. Think of how you would react if you felt your employer had stiffed you, regardless of what your thoughts are you are going to seek the money.

As much as we all like to claim that we know the ins and outs of everything, we don't, how about we let the courts decide this and consign Grant Thomas to the past.

[barks4eva]

I highly doubt that Grant Thomas signed Hamill knowing that the last 2 years of his contract would be spent on the sideline. Come on mate. These things happen. You are asking Thomas to look into a crystal ball when he signs a player, expecting them to play out their contract. This is the AFL. People get injured mate. It ends careers. You never know when it is going to happen. This does not make Thomas a parasite; for it to make him one, he would have had to sign Hamill to a 5 year deal knowing that he would retire 2 years before his contract is due (seeing as he didn't play this year, he might as well have retired last year). Seeing as that is an utterly ridiculous idea to begin with, stop bitching about bad fortune and accept it is bad lack for both us and Hamill.

Signing Hamill and Penny to long term contracts does not make Thomas a parasite, buffoon yes, parasite no

Suing the club for $270,000 including a figure of $167,000 for holiday pay after he himself even signed a stat dec stating he'd already been paid this money in full, does

Thomas if he truly loved the club, beyond being his favourite cash cow of recent times, should be content with the more than 2.5 million he has already been overpaid as a result of, according to him, a flawed process in the first place to begin with

Thomas was on $500,000 from the get go with no previous AFL coaching experience

Any reasonble person would conclude that they've already profited quite well already, particularly when you consider that he says he would never do anything to hurt it

It must be so galling for all the truly great St.Kilda men who actually took 22.5 cents in the dollar to actually keep this club in existence, with scheme of arrangement payments, to see Thomas suing the club for $167,000 in holiday pay and even more so when he himself has already signed a stat dec stating he's already been paid all of this money in full

Truly great St.Kilda men are the one's who made the sacrifice to keep this club in existence today, not some pissant, suing the club for two bites at a cherry when he's already been more than generously rewarded for his services

It is also interesting that while all these player's made the sacrifice by taking 22.5 cents in the dollar, Grant Thomas was not one of them he took every cent owing to him and then pissed off to North

FAIR DINKUM