Essendon = Entitlement | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Essendon = Entitlement

Essendon is at a crossroads. They have dumped their coach and CEO. Just changed their board president. By all reports Brad Scott spoke at their B&F called for unity.

But how can a club be unified when its run by a religious zealot? Dead set… their AFLW team will walk out in the coming weeks and his position will be untenable. I give him 6 months at most. This is just nuts. If i was an Essendon listed player, i would be contemplating a trade myself.

call me binmandamus :rotfl2
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Based on exposed form, I'm not sure Barham should be the one doing the picking.
Seriously, if I’m an Essendon member I’m asking for a complete spill of the board and an election to re fill all positions.

Given events of the last 6 weeks, several, if not all current board reps have shown themselves to have big question marks around their suitability and capability, especially Barham and Sheedy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Seriously, if I’m an Essendon member I’m asking for a complete spill of the board and an election to re fill all positions.

Given events of the last 6 weeks, several, if not all current board reps have shown themselves to have big question marks around their suitability and capability, especially Barham and Sheedy.

murmurings are afoot
 
Easington board is basically the meme with the dog saying everything is fine whilst everything in flames.
 
As an aside, Essendon people kept saying Barham is an astute operator. I've seen no evidence of this so far.

I liked Barham when he was in the media But yeah he's now either going senile or he's just out of his depth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Sorry, I evidently wasn’t clear here. I was trying to distinguish between having an opinion against abortion and one against homosexuals. One is an act people don’t have to do (ie they can control), one is something people are and cannot control. By “choice”, I did not mean the general abortion debate “choice” position.
If you're against abortion, don't have one. You don't have a right to harass and intimidate anyone else about what they choose to do with their body any more than I have a right to stand outside your church with a placard screaming at you as you walk in that you're complicit in boy-rape and genocide, or follow you home insisting you sleep with me, or kill yourself, or sell Amway. (And don't say having an opinion against abortion is not the same as standing outside clinics threatening those going in, or bombing them, because it's all on a scale and the opinion supports the action.)

I won't speak for anyone else but I'm against organised religions because they're about control and power through carrot-and-stick exploitation of the masses' ignorance and fear of the void. The religions and the people who fund them claim the moral high ground despite having been responsible for some of the worst atrocities in human history. Despite being based on deluded, ignorant, tall tales that have grown from illiterate desert-dwelling zealots thousands of years ago seeking explanations for things they didn't understand. Moses was almost certainly high on DMT fumes coming from the burning bush when 'God' spoke to him. Muhammad too. The Gospels telling us that Jesus walked on water, and healed the sick, and made loaves and fishes from nothing, and turned water into wine, and rose from the dead, and was the son of 'God' but also one-third of that entity, implanted in a woman's womb by an angel, are exaggerations and fairy-stories made up and embellished decades after Jesus the charismatic, controversial carpenter with delusions of grandeur lived and died, spread by the force of the Roman empire and Anglo/European colonisers.

I'm against happy-clapper religions because they cynically use sing-song hypnosis and mass hysteria to build grotesque wealth for liars who believe in nothing but will happily exploit and foster others' prejudices and hatred for their own gain. I'm against anyone who interferes in anyone else's business unasked, like some crusading Mrs Kravitz constantly peering through the curtains, shrieking, "Abner! Abner! I told you! She's having an abortion, Abner! It's an abomination!" I particularly despise the hypocrisy of those who constantly seek to remove specks from others' eyes while never considering the log in their own.

Women have been terminating unwanted or inconvenient pregnancies forever, and will forever. It's no one else's business, other than to ensure it's done safely. If you don't agree with it, who gives a *smile*. Mind your own business. Attend to your own log.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 17 users
I say all this while acknowledging that my own moral compass was influenced by a childhood listening to the Gospels and the letters of St Paul to the Corinthians, etc. And that religions have played a role in moving us away from savagery and moral nihilism, as well as the aforementioned atrocities - it's not black and white. However, they have mostly now outlived their use in that regard. The best you can say for them is they give solace and/or a sense of belonging in an indifferent universe based on physics and entropy rather than grandpa-on-a-cloud.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Essendon is the gift that just keeps on giving.

How bad an operator must Barham be to either not know the CEO he was appointing was Chair of a Church for with those sort of beliefs, or that he thought the best time to ask him which he was prepared to give up (the Church or the club) was AFTER they had appointed him and told everyone in the footy world.

How embarassing yet again for that footy club.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Essendon is the gift that just keeps on giving.

How bad an operator must Barham be to either not know the CEO he was appointing was Chair of a Church for with those sort of beliefs, or that he thought the best time to ask him which he was prepared to give up (the Church or the club) was AFTER they had appointed him and told everyone in the footy world.

How embarassing yet again for that footy club.
Barham is an absolute lightweight. Completely out of his depth. He has been a total disaster since the day he forced Brasher out. How about the sham "thorough recruitment process" that lasted weeks and ended with one chat with Brad Scott who was then duly appointed the next day :rotfl2 :rotfl2

As Dennis Pagan used to say; "Don't p!ss down my back and tell me it's raining".

I would be furious if I was an Essendon supporter. But as I am a Richmond supporter I hope Barham is Chairman until the day he dies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Sorry, I evidently wasn’t clear here. I was trying to distinguish between having an opinion against abortion and one against homosexuals. One is an act people don’t have to do (ie they can control), one is something people are and cannot control. By “choice”, I did not mean the general abortion debate “choice” position.

Your point was clear, but my point stands - if someone is pregnant from forced incest or rape, sure, they have a "choice" to carry the pregancy to term - that's not a really a choice, though is it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If you're against abortion, don't have one. You don't have a right to harass and intimidate anyone else about what they choose to do with their body any more than I have a right to stand outside your church with a placard screaming at you as you walk in that you're complicit in boy-rape and genocide, or follow you home insisting you sleep with me, or kill yourself, or sell Amway. (And don't say having an opinion against abortion is not the same as standing outside clinics threatening those going in, or bombing them, because it's all on a scale and the opinion supports the action.)

I won't speak for anyone else but I'm against organised religions because they're about control and power through carrot-and-stick exploitation of the masses' ignorance and fear of the void. The religions and the people who fund them claim the moral high ground despite having been responsible for some of the worst atrocities in human history. Despite being based on deluded, ignorant, tall tales that have grown from illiterate desert-dwelling zealots thousands of years ago seeking explanations for things they didn't understand. Moses was almost certainly high on DMT fumes coming from the burning bush when 'God' spoke to him. Muhammad too. The Gospels telling us that Jesus walked on water, and healed the sick, and made loaves and fishes from nothing, and turned water into wine, and rose from the dead, and was the son of 'God' but also one-third of that entity, implanted in a woman's womb by an angel, are exaggerations and fairy-stories made up and embellished decades after Jesus the charismatic, controversial carpenter with delusions of grandeur lived and died, spread by the force of the Roman empire and Anglo/European colonisers.

I'm against happy-clapper religions because they cynically use sing-song hypnosis and mass hysteria to build grotesque wealth for liars who believe in nothing but will happily exploit and foster others' prejudices and hatred for their own gain. I'm against anyone who interferes in anyone else's business unasked, like some crusading Mrs Kravitz constantly peering through the curtains, shrieking, "Abner! Abner! I told you! She's having an abortion, Abner! It's an abomination!" I particularly despise the hypocrisy of those who constantly seek to remove specks from others' eyes while never considering the log in their own.

Women have been terminating unwanted or inconvenient pregnancies forever, and will forever. It's no one else's business, other than to ensure it's done safely. If you don't agree with it, who gives a *smile*. Mind your own business. Attend to your own log.
Let’s not have this argument here; it’s fruitless. Everyone’s heard each other’s points, but no one’s listening. At the end of the day, this is a football forum. We have serious trading to do, and Essendon to laugh at.

But if you follow the “If you’re against X, just don’t do X” argument, we’d still have slavery/*smile*-fighting/littering etc etc. As someone else quoted above, evil persists where good people do nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Thorburn's lawyer reckons he's got a discrimination case to bring forward.

The hole's getting bigger at the Bummers.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Geez, England must be f*cked . . . hmm, Liz Truss, yep England and Essendon are both massive clusterfucks.

DS
Liz folded like a deck of cards on the tax cuts. Doing what’s right and what will keep u in your job aren’t the same
 
Barham is an absolute lightweight. Completely out of his depth. He has been a total disaster since the day he forced Brasher out. How about the sham "thorough recruitment process" that lasted weeks and ended with one chat with Brad Scott who was then duly appointed the next day :rotfl2 :rotfl2

As Dennis Pagan used to say; "Don't p!ss down my back and tell me it's raining".

I would be furious if I was an Essendon supporter. But as I am a Richmond supporter I hope Barham is Chairman until the day he dies.
.... while wishing him a long life!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user