ThePsychologist wrote:
emtwenty wrote:
DocSherrin wrote:
emtwenty wrote:
BF poster suggesting he left because he doesn't agree with who we want or will take with our first pick. Also noted that the timing probably does coincide with the sudden elevation of Cripps up the order.
So which one is it?
Because this version of events really sucks if true.
Em - can only go on what I was told this arvo and that was from a pretty reliable source who should know.
Thanks Doc.
It would be alarming if a recruiter left because he didn't agree with our choice of player and we still went ahead and picked that player.
It would be but there is a lot more than to it than that. Doc's source would know as would mine. I believe it's a combination of things and unfortunately we have lost someone we chased for an area that needs a lot of work.
I just hope that the club overhauls our recruiting department soon so that we can be competing with the top clubs in years to come because no matter how we spin it our record in this area is disastrous and shouldn't be tolerated.
Actually no big loss to a club
nothing to do with who we would take and who he liked.
His jjob is to write reports on players....
give his imput when asked and thats it....
e would have disagreed with stuff wells did at geelong unless he was wells himself... clearly he wasnt wells .. we know that because he doesnt look like wells.. doesnt have the same name and isnt at geelong
there is a certain standard of professionalism required at a club.. his was sub par