Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:08 am  

Jake the Peg wrote:

It was widely reported that peacock came in and imposed a wage structure similar to that which leeds operate(d) in the belief players would sign for rovers on similar wages to which they had signed for leeds.

I've been to a talk he gave where he was asked some questions about rovers and he said that prior to him going in, agents and players had "taken the pi$$" out of hudgel with contract demands (which hudgel had agreed to) and he would make sure it didn't happen again.

He is probably one of the dullest speakers I've ever had the misfortune to listen to BTW. It's like he rehearses everything in his head before saying it.

Anyway, no $hit chat from me sherlock

Claiming that something is “widely reported” and that you “heard responses to a Q&A” session is not tangible evidence. It’s chatting $h!t, can you can actually support your claims with evidence? Y’know, links to these “widely reported” facts? I’m sure the HDM would have transcribed the Q&A if it actually happened (though that paper is as reliable as wiki as a source of evidence). Back to you

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:45 am  

REDEOD wrote:

Claiming that something is “widely reported” and that you “heard responses to a Q&A” session is not tangible evidence. It’s chatting $h!t, can you can actually support your claims with evidence? Y’know, links to these “widely reported” facts? I’m sure the HDM would have transcribed the Q&A if it actually happened (though that paper is as reliable as wiki as a source of evidence). Back to you

I'm sure it ill be somewhere if you look but I'm not interested. the fact you've sign no one of note since peacock came in is evidence enough IMO but I don't care enough to bother looking. The more of the half decent players who are available that sign for your competitors the better for me

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:18 am  

REDEOD wrote:

Claiming that something is “widely reported” and that you “heard responses to a Q&A” session is not tangible evidence. It’s chatting $h!t, can you can actually support your claims with evidence? Y’know, links to these “widely reported” facts? I’m sure the HDM would have transcribed the Q&A if it actually happened (though that paper is as reliable as wiki as a source of evidence). Back to you

Don't baffle him.Hes made his mind up and no well presented facts will dissuade him. Comprehensively owned there Jakey...

[Mild Rover]

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:40 am  

Jake the Peg wrote: I'm sure it ill be somewhere if you look but I'm not interested, the fact you've sign no one of note since peacock came in is evidence enough IMO but I don't care enough to bother looking. Well, thank you Mr President. Having done a quick search, and this thread being the third hit, I think ‘widely reported’ is overstating it if we’re looking for something that matches the specifics of Jake’s claim. However, it isn’t completely implausible imo. I’ve seen similar speculations and my feeling is that Peacock thinks Leeds are a good model (obvs) and thought that model could be applied to Hull KR (hmmm...). Here’s what he said on joining Rovers, so you can decide for yourself. Although, if you are a Rovers fan and you’ve woken up this morning feeling a bit low for any reason, and come on here to lighten your mood, maybe skip it. http://www.hullkr.co.uk/insight-into-th ... e-peacock/

Jake the Peg wrote: I'm sure it ill be somewhere if you look but I'm not interested, the fact you've sign no one of note since peacock came in is evidence enough IMO but I don't care enough to bother looking. Well, thank you Mr President. Having done a quick search, and this thread being the third hit, I think ‘widely reported’ is overstating it if we’re looking for something that matches the specifics of Jake’s claim. However, it isn’t completely implausible imo. I’ve seen similar speculations and my feeling is that Peacock thinks Leeds are a good model (obvs) and thought that model could be applied to Hull KR (hmmm...). Here’s what he said on joining Rovers, so you can decide for yourself. Although, if you are a Rovers fan and you’ve woken up this morning feeling a bit low for any reason, and come on here to lighten your mood, maybe skip it. http://www.hullkr.co.uk/insight-into-th ... e-peacock/

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:52 am  

I don't think Peacock has done much for you guys, other than take his salary.

Hopefully Hudgell & Pearson can work with fellow SL OWNERS (so that doesn't include Hetherington) for a bright future.

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:29 am  

Thanks for your input Standee.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:31 am  

Sandro II Terrorista wrote:

Anyone who knows nothing knows that Peacock has only ever had a part time role at Rovers.

As a point of pedantry, and having wasted most of my Saturday morning looking back at Peacock’s old interviews, he did intend to be full-time, and I think he was, for a while at least.

He stepped back down to part-time when he’d set up some of things he wanted to do in the rugby department - and possibly because we’d become a Championship team, I imagine.

Sheens has talked in interviews about discussing players and recruitment with the board, so I’d like to think that recruitment is back in the head coach’s purview. Though maybe the signing of McGuire and rumours about Keinhorst suggest Peacock still has some input.

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 11:29 am  

Leigh_Manning wrote:

I don't think Peacock has done much for you guys, other than take his salary.

Hopefully Hudgell & Pearson can work with fellow SL OWNERS (so that doesn't include Hetherington) for a bright future.

so Bernard you know that he has brought no sponsorship to the club do you, whats the chin done for you lot this year on a far bigger budget,

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:55 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

As a point of pedantry, and having wasted most of my Saturday morning looking back at Peacock’s old interviews, he did intend to be full-time, and I think he was, for a while at least.

He stepped back down to part-time when he’d set up some of things he wanted to do in the rugby department - and possibly because we’d become a Championship team, I imagine.

Sheens has talked in interviews about discussing players and recruitment with the board, so I’d like to think that recruitment is back in the head coach’s purview. Though maybe the signing of McGuire and rumours about Keinhorst suggest Peacock still has some input.

Are you trying to suggest that people should post things that are based in reality and not just post any old knackers that suits their entrenched view and agenda?

Really?

That'll never catch on.

How on earth are my rare early nineties Berlin deep house vinyls going to alphabetically organise themselves if i have to do research and post facts?

I really don't understand how any one can think that someone who's played in a couple of champion teams, has connections all over the rugby league world and has studied sports management to a decent level can bring anything at all to Rovers.

There's no evidence to suggest he might bring anything at all.

Nope.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Missing out ? : Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:43 pm  

Sandro II Terrorista wrote:

Are you trying to suggest that people should post things that are based in reality and not just post any old knackers that suits their entrenched view and agenda?

Really?

That'll never catch on.

How on earth are my rare early nineties Berlin deep house vinyls going to alphabetically organise themselves if i have to do research and post facts?

I really don't understand how any one can think that someone who's played in a couple of champion teams, has connections all over the rugby league world and has studied sports management to a decent level can bring anything at all to Rovers.

There's no evidence to suggest he might bring anything at all.

Nope.

As we’re avoiding facts and posting knackers, my theory is that his previous experiences were not a particularly good preparation for the challenge he faced on joining Rovers, and in some ways could even have been a hindrance.

Just felt like he came in and tried to fit Rovers to his vision, rather than vice versa. All the 5-year plan, patience needed, slow-burning process stuff was alarming even before stuff went so badly on the pitch.

He may have learned from it, but we’ve got Sheens now.