we didnt sack tansey for his reputation so i cant see how it can possibly be double standards.

We've gradually weeded out the bad influences and troublemakers and results have gone from strength to strength.............oh hang on a minute!

No double standards, Tansay had 3 breaches at our club and we sacked him, Gleeson starts a fresh like everyone alse and if he beaches the rules 3 times will also be let go.

It must have really annoyed the board when we were fined for breaching it then.

Whilst Standee may not quite have got the right turn of phrase, it's easy to see the point he's making.

If you owned a shop and had recently sacked someone for stealing from you, you would have to be a total idiot to hire someone who had just been sacked from another shop for stealing as their replacement. What would you say? That was at another shop, so it doesn't count? I'm sure you've learned your lesson, welcome aboard? Well, if you steal from me, I can just sack you?

I was hoping if we signed Gleeson he would be playing centre, no point in signing him just to work in the club shop.

It's a risk offering him a deal but as has been said he's not breached our club's rule. Providing he makes assurances that he won't and then he sticks to those assurances we shouldn't really have a problem. If he breaches the rules i'd expect him to be gone too.

Spot on imo. Each player starts a new club with a clean slate.

I can be

didn't tansey get 3 chance's though in 12 months

Evidence to prove me wrong?

Or do you believe some posters on here who have said we are the max and have been for years?

That'll be a no then

Bingo. New club, away from all his 'troubles'.

But why make (potential) trouble for ourselves? In a squad that's already struggling to achieve what it is capable of, adding a potentially disruptive influence to the mix is a very risky strategy.

2004 and 2005?

6 years ago then, the last time we had a good team