I reckon Kath had more input on that side of things.Rule was more or less just a front for kath.

So lots of people claim yet no one has ever produced any evidence

What would be appropriate "evidence", in your opinion?

Dunno, I'm open to seeing anything that proves this urban myth

So you honestly think Rule was brought in not just for his financial acumen, /marketing prowess & organisational skills but also his extensive knowledge/understanding of RL that would change things on the pitch?

That despite these wide ranging RL credentials he has failed miserably and we've been playing poop for god knows how long and it's all down to him and Agar?

I suppose you blame kath then? Was it her fault when we won the CC and got to a GF having finished 2nd?

I guess some form of evidence would be the improvement in on field activities, so far we have seen 2 games since the departure of Kath and yet we've seen little change if any to what we've seen for the last 3 years or so. Can't fault the effort and commitment of the players but still not an 80min team, still have brain explosions, take wrong options, strange interchanges, very little 2nd Phase etc. If Kath really was the one pulling the strings on team affairs as much as the rumour goes then surely we would have seen a significant change in the team but sadly we haven't, still very much the same old same old.

You are always asking for other posters to produce evidence of points they make but you never produce any to support your own position Jake.

Agar must be a right fairy if he's the coach and is taking direction on the tactics and playing staff from the CEO. We need a coach with balls to say and do what he feels is in the best interest of the TEAM!



Get shut and get shut now!

I suppose you've got evidence to back this up?

How do you prove a negative?

Develop it???

Ok I'll get my coat