There was no point in time where Terry wasnt the coach of richmond

[rockstar_tiger]

i'm hoping the "crisis meeting" was confirming the footy department's decision to tank the rest of the season and get pick 3.

We can still get pick 2, the same way how we got Cotchin.

#1 - Melb (PP)
#2 - Rich
#3 - Melb

 

[craig]

Cameron on today's situation: "There was no point in time where Terry wasnt the coach of Richmond."

I Disagree.

 

[Massai]

Ian4, who knows how long Wallace will coach the Tigers for now. I tend to go along with what Sky News AFL reporter Jim Wilson said at lunch time, there are a considerable number of Richmond people who are angry at the way the club is performing hence they tapped March on the shoulder yesterday and told him to ditch Wallace.

The problem is it leaked (intentionally or otherwise) and after todays absolute shambles at Punt Road, Cameron doing the press conference, whilst he said that Wallace will stay, that is the official party line and that is always subject to change.

Look if they give Wallace another month in the job, and things do not improve dramatically and by that the Tigers win at least 3 out of the next 4 games, then I'd say Wallace will be gone. The mid year will be upon us, it will still leave 11 games for a stand in coach to do, plus it gives enough time for a new senior coach, staff etc to be found for next season.

We'll have to wait and see what happen's next, but I for one will not be surprised if Wallace is gone by the mid year and no I don't think Richmond would be seen to be a laughing stock for sacking him then, as this would be seen as his very last gasp opportunity to turn things around to get thru to season's end, forget any 2010.

 

[the golden]

It would be pointless in sacking Terry mid-year imo.

i hate any one getting the sack mid yr that should not happen

 

[Mr T.]

We are a joke!

 

[Backbone]

My theory on this is that Wallace offered to walk based on a prior arrangement between him and March.

March couldn't accept it given that we had lost so narrowly and that Wallace was let down by a lack of leadership on the field in the dying minutes of the game. It also would have been a PR nightmare given that the team played well and that it could have been positioned by the media as Richmond going back to their old ways.

March then called in the senior leaders to advise them that Wallace had offered to walk, however he (March) thinks that the senior leaders in the club need to stand up and that Terry would remain as coach. I think the leak came from either one of the playing group or some office staff member and the HUN/SEN interpreted the meeting as meaning that TW had been given the sack.

This story fits in with the line that "there was no point in time where Terry wasnt the coach of richmond". If Wallace had been given the sack and reinstated, the response would have been "Terry Wallace did not offer his resignation, nor has he been sacked" (both true).

 

[the golden]

My theory on this is that Wallace offered to walk based on a prior arrangement between him and March.

March couldn't accept it given that we had lost so narrowly and that Wallace was let down by a lack of leadership on the field in the dying minutes of the game. It also would have been a PR nightmare given that the team played well and that it could have been positioned by the media as Richmond going back to their old ways.

March then called in the senior leaders to advise them that Wallace had offered to walk, however he (March) thinks that the senior leaders in the club need to stand up and that Terry would remain as coach. I think the leak came from either one of the playing group or some office staff member and the HUN/SEN interpreted the meeting as meaning that TW had been given the sack.

This story fits in with the line that "there was no point in time where Terry wasnt the coach of richmond". If Wallace had been given the sack and reinstated, the response would have been "Terry Wallace did not offer his resignation, nor has he been sacked" (both true).

to me this sounds like something that may have happened i agree .
you know the media they smell a drop of possible blood they will try and rabbit it out or make a bigger story out of a speck of dust !

 

[Backbone]

It could also be Wallace that leaked it (intentionally or not) based on the impression that March would have accepted his resignation and hence his rumoured expectation that he was going to be out of a job.

 

[Ian4]

i hate any one getting the sack mid yr that should not happen

disagree. if the message is not getting through to the playes it could do more harm than good. spud the dud admitted 4 years ago he made the wrong decision staying on. your peter schwab on the other hand did the right thing.

i would rather a caretaker coach take the reigns, and instruct him to play kids at all costs.

My theory on this is that Wallace offered to walk based on a prior arrangement between him and March.

March couldn't accept it given that we had lost so narrowly and that Wallace was let down by a lack of leadership on the field in the dying minutes of the game. It also would have been a PR nightmare given that the team played well and that it could have been positioned by the media as Richmond going back to their old ways.

March then called in the senior leaders to advise them that Wallace had offered to walk, however he (March) thinks that the senior leaders in the club need to stand up and that Terry would remain as coach. I think the leak came from either one of the playing group or some office staff member and the HUN/SEN interpreted the meeting as meaning that TW had been given the sack.

This story fits in with the line that "there was no point in time where Terry wasnt the coach of richmond". If Wallace had been given the sack and reinstated, the response would have been "Terry Wallace did not offer his resignation, nor has he been sacked" (both true).

i have read many theories today... this one isn't bad.

It could also be Wallace that leaked it (intentionally or not) based on the impression that March would have accepted his resignation and hence his rumoured expectation that he was going to be out of a job.

haha, yeah thats one of my theories ;D

 

[the golden]

disagree. if the message is not getting through to the playes it could do more harm than good. spud the dud admitted 4 years ago he made the wrong decision staying on. your peter schwab on the other hand did the right thing.

i would rather a caretaker coach take the reigns, and instruct him to play kids at all costs.


haha, yeah thats one of my theories ;D

fair enough but still hate it unless players want him gone then yeah best for the coach to go but if not then that sacking will make it worse i think .

when peter went and yes i do agree best he did step down rather then try and coach those last few games i reckon the hawks played better when he left no offense to him but they did under donald mcdonald .
as they say hindsight is a wonderful thing .

terry could have leaked it i am sure we will find out one day