Fans forum

[tigerburnie]

http://www.leicestertigers.com/news/22165.php

So Smudge,4071, BILLW(or which ever nom de plume you are using just now,can ask the question and get the answers straight from the horses mouth , so to speak, or are you washing your hair that day..........................

[kornboy130]

This is a pretty pathetic call out Burnie.

You know me well enough as a poster and I tend to call it how I see it - mostly optimistic (look at our success - why wouldn't I be?) but with critiques of particular parts of how we're run when I feel it appropriate.

People sit on either end of those scales and in most cases that's absolutely fine - but getting on to people's cases when they provide facts for their opinions or interpretation isn't really on.

But hey, I'm not a mod - so who am I to comment.

[MurphysLaw]

quote="kornboy130"]This is a pretty pathetic call out Burnie.

You know me well enough as a poster and I tend to call it how I see it - mostly optimistic (look at our success - why wouldn't I be?) but with critiques of particular parts of how we're run when I feel it appropriate.

People sit on either end of those scales and in most cases that's absolutely fine - but getting on to people's cases when they provide facts for their opinions or interpretation isn't really on.

But hey, I'm not a mod - so who am I to comment.[/quote]


OK, so Tb is having a little swipe at the usual suspects, but surely the point of his post is right. Here is the opportunity for all, particularly the keyboard critics, to put their points directly to those in charge. Credit to Club, and particularly Cockers and Cohen, for setting it up.

[Tigerbeat]

There is nothing that is offensive in the OP from Tigerburnie. It is an opportunity for any fans to attend the forum and ask questions directly to Simon Cohen and Richard Cockerill.

[biffer]

This is a pretty pathetic call out Burnie.

You know me well enough as a poster and I tend to call it how I see it - mostly optimistic (look at our success - why wouldn't I be?) but with critiques of particular parts of how we're run when I feel it appropriate.

People sit on either end of those scales and in most cases that's absolutely fine - but getting on to people's cases when they provide facts for their opinions or interpretation isn't really on.

But hey, I'm not a mod - so who am I to comment.

He didn't actually mention you - unless you're admitting you're Bill in disguise....

[jgriffin]

This is a pretty pathetic call out Burnie.

You know me well enough as a poster and I tend to call it how I see it - mostly optimistic (look at our success - why wouldn't I be?) but with critiques of particular parts of how we're run when I feel it appropriate.

People sit on either end of those scales and in most cases that's absolutely fine - but getting on to people's cases when they provide facts for their opinions or interpretation isn't really on.

But hey, I'm not a mod - so who am I to comment.

He didn't actually mention you - unless you're admitting you're Bill in disguise....

Not unless Bill is the true subject of this:
http://tinyurl.com/pp5xtmc

[johnthegriff]

To all those attending the open forum please for the sake of the rest of us ask your question and listen to the answer, last year one gentleman asked his question did not listen to the reply and asked the same thing in a different way and continued to do so for some time. It did not matter what Cocker said nothing was going to change the questioners opinion on the subject any way, certainly not facts!

[Phil B]

To all those attending the open forum please for the sake of the rest of us ask your question and listen to the answer, last year one gentleman asked his question did not listen to the reply and asked the same thing in a different way and continued to do so for some time. It did not matter what Cocker said nothing was going to change the questioners opinion on the subject any way, certainly not facts!

Clearly a Politician.

[tigerburnie]

Well I was being devils advocate and jerking a couple of chains(humorously rather than cynically), flushed out some surprising replies. Smudge and I have been having some goodish banter going on for some time now and I know he will seek to return the compliment when he sees the opportunity.

[kornboy130]

This is a pretty pathetic call out Burnie.

You know me well enough as a poster and I tend to call it how I see it - mostly optimistic (look at our success - why wouldn't I be?) but with critiques of particular parts of how we're run when I feel it appropriate.

People sit on either end of those scales and in most cases that's absolutely fine - but getting on to people's cases when they provide facts for their opinions or interpretation isn't really on.

But hey, I'm not a mod - so who am I to comment.

He didn't actually mention you - unless you're admitting you're Bill in disguise....

I didn't think he was nor would he - we agree on most things. Just felt calling posters out by name is a bit off when implying they aren't man enough to ask the points directly - when they may have a variety of different reasonsfor not wishing to/being able to attend.

[Smudge]

Like you TB I live a very long way from Leicester and I spend a small fortune
attending the home games and the away games that take place south of Leicester.
As the fans forum is on a Wednesday I am no more likely than you to attend one.
However, several of my former playing colleagues and friends, have and do attend.
As we share our opinions pretty much universally, I am sure that my point of view
will be well represented. Assuming they can attract the chairmans' attention , that is.

[mike]

If Peter Tom was to be there I would certainly make the effort to attend and air my views . Organ grinders and monkeys come to mind !

[MurphysLaw]

[quote="mike"]If Peter Tom was to be there I would certainly make the effort to attend and air my views . Organ grinders and monkeys come to mind ![/quote]

Director of Rugby, and Head of Rugby Operations/Ceo; they know nowt.

[Phil B]

If Peter Tom was to be there I would certainly make the effort to attend and air my views . Organ grinders and monkeys come to mind !

Director of Rugby, and Head of Rugby Operations/Ceo; they know nowt.

Mike may well have wanted to ask PT for the Board's view on.....

In which case The Director of Rugby and Head of Rugby operations may well not be the best people to answer, - not that they would know nowt, of course.

[MurphysLaw]

[quote="Phil B"][quote="MurphysLaw"][quote="mike"]If Peter Tom was to be there I would certainly make the effort to attend and air my views . Organ grinders and monkeys come to mind ![/quote]

Director of Rugby, and Head of Rugby Operations/Ceo; they know nowt. [/quote]

Mike may well have wanted to ask PT for the Board's view on.....

In which case The Director of Rugby and Head of Rugby operations may well not be the best people to answer, - not that they would know nowt, of course.[/quote]

I don't much care who goes or doesn't. Those who seem continually unhappy about aspects of the club will undoubtedly find things to whinge on about anyway. However, why couldn't Simon Cohen give the Board's view?
I am not sure that he,or anyone, would want to speak for the whole of the Board, but as CEO , he can certainly give a Board member's view. Furthermore, with Cockers responsible for the on field, and Cohen for the off field rugby operations then neither can be considered the 'monkeys' in the operation, as alluded.