Ben Cousins - He's back (now at Richmond) [Merged Threads]

Alec. J. Hidell · Post by **Alec. J. Hidell** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:32 am

Did the Board (for the first time ever), take a vote on Cousins?

John Wren · Post by **John Wren** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:36 am

^ so, would rather have a club to support or not? no good having all the flags in the world if your club becomes defunct.

fan4collingwood · Post by **fan4collingwood** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:39 am

There is really some rubbish on the boards at the moment. Not pointing the finger at anyone or any site, but to even think that Collingwood are not playing the game to win premierships is just silly.

All people associated with the Board and Coaching staff, along with players ARE aiming for the Premiership. We do NOT know what goes on behind closed doors, and to assume something without the facts shows the level of intelligence of some posters.

Yes, I would have loved someone with Ben cousin's ability at our club, and I would love to go for a run too, but I know the risks of me running, so don't. The club have made a decision based on facts and investigations, and have decided that the risks of having Ben at our club was too high.

Now lets move on to the next big name we may make a play for!

Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:40 am

oh well. NEXT

Alec. J. Hidell · Post by **Alec. J. Hidell** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:42 am

If a person with a drug addiction was able to take their drug of preference legally, would it still be classified as an addiction?

For instance all illegal drugs have a legal equivalent, that can be obtained on prescription.

If this happened, couldn't the player honestly say to everyone, I am no longer taking illegal drugs?

nulla · Post by **nulla** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:43 am

we make decisions that are good for the "club" and not win at all costs...

So winning is not good for the club?

nulla · Post by **nulla** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:46 am

For instance all illegal drugs have a legal equivalent, that can be obtained on prescription.

All drugs are legal if obtained by prescription.

sq3 · Post by **sq3** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:50 am

Pies board have made the correct decision due to the potential disaster that could await - if Cuz goes off the rails in 2009 (assuming he does get registered by the AFL).

Use the draft.

The Collingwood Turtle · Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:50 am

Culprit wrote:Cousins does not have AFL approval as yet so he may not be going to any club.

Culprit is on the money.

I knew 3 days ago we were going to pass on Cousins and the total reasons explained to me by the club as to why, I now accept.

The story in the HUN is a great spin piece by the club to make us look good after the Dids/Heater debacle.

Alec. J. Hidell · Post by **Alec. J. Hidell** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:50 am

nulla wrote:
For instance all illegal drugs have a legal equivalent, that can be obtained on prescription.

All drugs are legal if obtained by prescription.

Yes, I believe so

GreekLunatic · Post by **GreekLunatic** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:51 am

Does anyone get the feeling that bucks will coach us the year after next year. Didnt in his article he wrote that Collingwood shouldnt recruit Cousins. Maybe that why it happend. The club should not beat around the bush and tell us the real reason.

John Wren · Post by **John Wren** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:53 am

^ that's bordering on the absurd but in keeping with some of the content of recent days.

Alec. J. Hidell · Post by **Alec. J. Hidell** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:54 am

Drugs, is the real, and only reason

nulla · Post by **nulla** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:57 am

drugs have a legal equivalent, that can be obtained on prescription.

These drugs are also illegal if not obtained by script.

I understand your point, but what it gets down to is that he would test positive for illicit drugs even if they were prescribed to help nullify or beat an addiction.

Much the same as testing positive for nicotine because you wear the patch to stop smoking... means the habit has not gone.

Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:03 am

The Collingwood Turtle wrote:
Culprit wrote:Cousins does not have AFL approval as yet so he may not be going to any club.
Culprit is on the money.

I knew 3 days ago we were going to pass on Cousins and the total reasons explained to me by the club as to why I now accept.

The story in the HUN is a great spin piece by the club to make us look good after the Dids/Heater debacle.

If that is the case, where's the retraction and or apology for this thread? Hmm, 3 days ago?

http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=46914

The Collingwood Turtle wrote:What a crock of shite this is ........

"The Herald Sun has learned the Collingwood board is not unanimous in the view that Cousins should be pursued. While a move to draft Cousins has not been put to a vote at board level, key officials at the club are aware the topic is a delicate one."

These people at board level are obviously concerned with the brand rather than winning a flag !

Instead of getting good blokes who can't play like Andrew Williams, Shane Woewodin and Chad Morrison how about acquiring some REAL talent like Cousins.

Now I'm really hoping the HUN is on the wrong tram but knowing some of the people on the board it comes as no surprise they're more worried damaging the "brand" rather than acquiring quality players.

How many times in our history have we overlooked opposition players to only rue being a kick away from a premiership because of a lack of true class. That's not bad luck, it's bad management.

I am sick of being second best or having the most fans.

Premierships are the ONLY barometer of success !

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

Ben Cousins - He's back (now at Richmond) [Merged Threads]