Leoncelli steps down

[Sir Why You Little 36,761]

It wasnt the answer that was given. Any reason why Hazy may have re quoted his section at the bottom of the post? Take your time. Hmmmmm....

Yes Yes i read that last Quote, nothing more than a deflection which is what Hazy often gives when asked a direct question.

I was actually after a direct answer this time-if he wishes to nominate a thread i will be waiting, and i certainly do not need you to hold my hand RR.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Yes Yes i read that last Quote, nothing more than a deflection which is what Hazy often gives when asked a direct question.

I was actually after a direct answer this time-if he wishes to nominate a thread i will be waiting, and i certainly do not need you to hold my hand RR.

I thought he addressed it clearly with the repeated quote. And for someone who hides in the shadows when asked a direct (and simple) question you are a curious one to expect it from others.

And FWIW, I am sure Hazy must be shaking in his boots awaiting one of your tepid grillings. And I'm sure your big enough to bury yourself once more in another factless performance.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

I said i would let it go but you keep taking swipes and self promoting.....

Actually, far from "self promoting" I am simply trying to address the many posts directed at me without making myself the topic. It is tedious to have the same arguments every time I contribute to a topic involving the Gardner Board.

Here are the facts:

- You said Leoncelli put the "previous administration" to shame.

- Leoncelli was part of the "previous administration".

- You praised Leoncelli's contribution to the club.

- You criticised the Gardner Board for spiralling debt.

- Gardner oversaw profits from 2004-2007 (his first year as Chairman was 2003).

- Leoncelli was on the Gardner board for the 2008 debt.

Your criticism does not stack up. Sling as much mud at the previous Board as you like, Leoncelli was still part of it and you still look stupid for saying that he put the "previous administration" to shame. Furthermore, the credibility of your accusations against the "previous administration" is undermined by your obvious ignorance and willingness to take not just irrelevant but utterly nonsensical shots at them. Arguing that Leoncelli doesn't count as part of the previous Board because he has since spent more time under the current Chairman makes about as much sense as blaming Leoncelli for single-handedly bringing the club into debt, that is, none.

I am not going to enter into a broader debate about the merits of the Gardner board in this thread. Feel free to start a new one and I may even bring myself to rehash that argument yet again.

[daisycutter 29,451]

I thought he addressed it clearly with the repeated quote. And for someone who hides in the shadows when asked a direct (and simple) question you are a curious one to expect it from others.

And FWIW, I am sure Hazy must be shaking in his boots awaiting one of your tepid grillings. And I'm sure your big enough to bury yourself once more in another factless performance.

So Rhino, is WYL your whipping boy, or are you just bullying

Just curious

[Grandson of a gun 276]

It is tedious to have the same arguments every time I contribute to a topic involving the Gardner Board.

Now why would there be so many topics involving the Gardner Board, why do they need defending, they were fantastic, right?????

You still can't escape the facts laid out at the end of that administration.

So, how about we move on???

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

I am not going to enter into a broader debate about the merits of the Gardner board in this thread. Feel free to start a new one and I may even bring myself to rehash that argument yet again.

[45HG 1,539]

[Hannabal 4]

.....

Is that you Billy ?

[Vagg 2,437]

Yes, I loved him as a player. He came on board as part of a group of kids with funny sounding names. (Well, funny sounding to me! Apologies to them, 'cos I don't mean to insult anyone!) Leoncelli, Woewodin, Yze, Rigoni & Grgic all started playing around the same time, if my memory serves me correctly. I had a soft spot for them all. Only Grgic disappointed.

[H_T 3,042]

Thanks to some ideal work by the Ox.

[e25 5]

Thanks to some ideal work by the Ox.

He'd have to be the best forward I've ever seen taking a ruck contest.

Except for Salmon, but he was a ruckman that played forward.

[45HG 1,539]

Thanks to some ideal work by the Ox.

...and Adelaide's defensive "match-ups."

[H_T 3,042]

...and Adelaide's defensive "match-ups."

Yeah, he was left alone free, wasn't he ?! Went straight down Leoncelli's throat though.