Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 12:18:01 GMT
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2014 12:18:01 GMT
Wonder how Simmsey, Smith and O'Connor would feel if it was roles reversed. This is why smith should run one or the other, for me he should quit as league chairman and let someone else run the league. It's just too fishy and makes the league look stupid. Or just let GM or NB run the league, see how they like that in the land of Steel It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Errr yes it is. He could influence decisions with discipline hearings etc. Our owner is trying to expand the league as he has the resources to run 2 teams, at least braehead won't hit money problems! what has smith done to try and make the league bigger and better?
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 12:20:14 GMT
Post by ted logan on Dec 11, 2014 12:20:14 GMT
Wonder how Simmsey, Smith and O'Connor would feel if it was roles reversed. This is why smith should run one or the other, for me he should quit as league chairman and let someone else run the league. It's just too fishy and makes the league look stupid. Or just let GM or NB run the league, see how they like that in the land of Steel It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Seriously? Your first few posts on here suggested a well balanced, informed, unbiased approach. Might want to go back there - you did ok then
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Shirt on Dec 11, 2014 12:45:11 GMT
Wonder how Simmsey, Smith and O'Connor would feel if it was roles reversed. This is why smith should run one or the other, for me he should quit as league chairman and let someone else run the league. It's just too fishy and makes the league look stupid. Or just let GM or NB run the league, see how they like that in the land of Steel It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. I agree but without the league can come up with a car load of Roman Abramovich's that's how it will always be. At the moment you have bigger teams supporting the smaller teams, bigger clubs artificially building squads to keep the league "competitive" and the league going forwards far too slowly if you have plans for the likes of the CHL. It's all a bit too in-house for the longer term development of the sport here.
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by Warren on Dec 11, 2014 13:05:47 GMT
It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. I agree but without the league can come up with a car load of Roman Abramovich's that's how it will always be. At the moment you have bigger teams supporting the smaller teams, bigger clubs artificially building squads to keep the league "competitive" and the league going forwards far too slowly if you have plans for the likes of the CHL. It's all a bit too in-house for the longer term development of the sport here. Look at Football and the Mike Ashley - Newcastle / Rangers thing. They are not even in the same league Internet Article and UEFA have already made a ruling (Arguments and court proceedings aside) This league will always be Micky mouse while any of the following still apply: - Multiple Clubs can have Majority (or Controlling) stakeholders who are the same person
- The Chairman and board of the League are the Members of the clubs themselves
- The DOPS system is cloak and dagger
- Clubs can pay for 2 Refs if they want, but it might be a lino with armbands on.
- People within the Clubs continue to talk about goings on at other clubs.
|
|
|
Post by Stargazer on Dec 11, 2014 13:06:47 GMT
Wonder how Simmsey, Smith and O'Connor would feel if it was roles reversed. This is why smith should run one or the other, for me he should quit as league chairman and let someone else run the league. It's just too fishy and makes the league look stupid. Or just let GM or NB run the league, see how they like that in the land of Steel It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. That is a very strange and non-comparable comment Forney. Braehead are a massive success in terms of what this league needs. An 'arena' club with healthy attendances which will eventually become a success on the ice as it has off the ice. For this League to grow it needs more Clubs with a 'Braehead blueprint', and I find it amazing that Neil Black should face any kind of flack for what he's done there.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 13:22:54 GMT
via mobile
Post by panthersdave on Dec 11, 2014 13:22:54 GMT
Wonder how Simmsey, Smith and O'Connor would feel if it was roles reversed. This is why smith should run one or the other, for me he should quit as league chairman and let someone else run the league. It's just too fishy and makes the league look stupid. Or just let GM or NB run the league, see how they like that in the land of Steel It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. It's totally different. For one Neil Black doesn't own the Clan, it's a league wide venture. Secondly, there is no suggestion of dodgy results due to any conflict of interest. I always felt that DOPS safety was doing a good job but it seems certain decisions, or non decisions lately have been very strange and if the shoe was on the other foot the Steelers would be screaming blue murder.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 13:28:33 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 13:28:33 GMT
It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. It's totally different. For one Neil Black doesn't own the Clan, it's a league wide venture. Secondly, there is no suggestion of dodgy results due to any conflict of interest. I always felt that DOPS safety was doing a good job but it seems certain decisions, or non decisions lately have been very strange and if the shoe was on the other foot the Steelers would be screaming blue murder. It's the first I've heard that NB doesn't own the Clan??
I've also not suggested at all that there has been any dodgy results, there hasn't. But, one person owning two clubs shouldn't be allowed in the same league. Just as TS shouldn't be chairman.
For what it's worth NB has done a great job in Glasgow.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 13:31:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by panthersdave on Dec 11, 2014 13:31:52 GMT
It's my understanding that NB's company is the holding company but each owner in the league has a steak in the Clan.
I'm happy to be corrected if that's not right but I'm sure that's how it was announced when the Clan were formed.
I agree it's still not ideal but it's not as bad as if NB was the sole owner of both.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 15:10:31 GMT
via mobile
Post by tootootrain on Dec 11, 2014 15:10:31 GMT
I did read what you put and your suggestion, between the lines, was that TS has some influence over these decisions. Having been witness to somebody very nearly losing their house and their job over comments on a public forum regarding a certain chairman of a football club, you have to be very careful what is written these days on places like this. That was my point. Reading between the lines? Sounds like seeing what you want to see. Courts use the balance of probability and facts, not individual interpretation and hunches.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 15:56:12 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 15:56:12 GMT
It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Errr yes it is. He could influence decisions with discipline hearings etc. Our owner is trying to expand the league as he has the resources to run 2 teams, at least braehead won't hit money problems! what has smith done to try and make the league bigger and better? Don't agree Pidge. Smith has nothing to do with disciplinary hearings.
Never say never about money problems. In the mid 90's, you'd have said Sheffield would never have money problems when playing in front of 8,000 every weekend. How wrong would that have been!!
As for Smith not doing anything to make the league better. I'd say his work in Sheffield to make the club stable off the ice is very good work both for the club and the league as a whole.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 15:59:29 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 15:59:29 GMT
It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Seriously? Your first few posts on here suggested a well balanced, informed, unbiased approach. Might want to go back there - you did ok then I try and be balanced Ted. Not always easy!!
With regard to one man owning two clubs I'm sure you can see that it shouldn't really happen. I know the reasons why it has and to be honest we should all thank NB for making our league bigger and better. But, going forward, if we are to be taken seriously as a professional league and attract proper money into the game we can't have the situation with NB or TS.
Hoping that is a bit more balanced for you.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 16:03:10 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 16:03:10 GMT
I did read what you put and your suggestion, between the lines, was that TS has some influence over these decisions. Having been witness to somebody very nearly losing their house and their job over comments on a public forum regarding a certain chairman of a football club, you have to be very careful what is written these days on places like this. That was my point. Reading between the lines? Sounds like seeing what you want to see. Courts use the balance of probability and facts, not individual interpretation and hunches. I agree but I saw what happened after similar comments on a football forum. Those comments were not direct either but the person involved ended up nearly out of home and a job along with his sanity. If you are going to make veiled comments about somebody's integrity then, through past knowledge, it's always best you can have something to back up your view.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 16:05:14 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 16:05:14 GMT
It's my understanding that NB's company is the holding company but each owner in the league has a steak in the Clan. I'm happy to be corrected if that's not right but I'm sure that's how it was announced when the Clan were formed. I agree it's still not ideal but it's not as bad as if NB was the sole owner of both. I don't believe the Sheffield Steelers have any involvement with the ownership of the Clan.
I'm sure somebody more knowledgeable can jump in here and clear it up though.
|
|
5+game
Terry Kurtenbach
Posts: 2,974
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 16:09:06 GMT
jd likes this
Post by 5+game on Dec 11, 2014 16:09:06 GMT
Wonder how Simmsey, Smith and O'Connor would feel if it was roles reversed. This is why smith should run one or the other, for me he should quit as league chairman and let someone else run the league. It's just too fishy and makes the league look stupid. Or just let GM or NB run the league, see how they like that in the land of Steel It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Now didn't Paul Regan own both Cardiff and Sheffield at the same time Forney but im sure it was fine to have two teams then.
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 16:23:47 GMT
Post by Warren on Dec 11, 2014 16:23:47 GMT
It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Now didn't Paul Regan own both Cardiff and Sheffield at the same time Forney but im sure it was fine to have two teams then. in 2014 its not right for 1 guy to own 2 clubs. or be affiliated or anything. (No slight on you Forney, had to be done) Not that anyone cares, it was worse in Coventry /Hull. They were part owned by the GM and Coach of another club.
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 16:35:30 GMT
Post by Warren on Dec 11, 2014 16:35:30 GMT
Seriously? Your first few posts on here suggested a well balanced, informed, unbiased approach. Might want to go back there - you did ok then I try and be balanced Ted. Not always easy!!
With regard to one man owning two clubs I'm sure you can see that it shouldn't really happen. I know the reasons why it has and to be honest we should all thank NB for making our league bigger and better. But, going forward, if we are to be taken seriously as a professional league and attract proper money into the game we can't have the situation with NB or TS.
Hoping that is a bit more balanced for you.
But can you prove that he doesn't? As it stands, its like Schrödinger's cat. Without knowing the ins and out of the situation Smith has every level of involvement in DOPS from he makes it all up to nothing to do with it. When or should I say IF the league come out with a proper press release about DOPS not 1 GM's take on the situation (Todd Kelman) then the acusations (thinly veiled or not) will still be pushed around. Can you hand on heart Forney say that the recent decisions or lack of (Dowd's check to the head?) haven't favored Steelers? I do think its a little to conspiracy theory for me, but it does feel that the current trend does favor steelers.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 16:37:50 GMT
Post by ted logan on Dec 11, 2014 16:37:50 GMT
Seriously? Your first few posts on here suggested a well balanced, informed, unbiased approach. Might want to go back there - you did ok then I try and be balanced Ted. Not always easy!!
With regard to one man owning two clubs I'm sure you can see that it shouldn't really happen. I know the reasons why it has and to be honest we should all thank NB for making our league bigger and better. But, going forward, if we are to be taken seriously as a professional league and attract proper money into the game we can't have the situation with NB or TS.
Hoping that is a bit more balanced for you.
Much better I don't agree with the situation where one man (NB) owns more than 1 club but as you say he is helping the league grow (and there isn't a long queue of wannabe club owners) his efforts are laudable. That situation is still a whole different scenario to a club owner also being chairman of the league which is on the verge of being farcical. Some transparency on the whole DOPS set-up would be a step in the right direction. It's all way to cloak and dagger for me. Like I've said before if you replaced Smith/Dowd with Black/Clarke then the same accusations would be made and it would be expected due to the current flaws in the whole EIHL/DOPS set-up.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 17:40:04 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 17:40:04 GMT
It's no worse than one man owning two clubs in the same league. Now didn't Paul Regan own both Cardiff and Sheffield at the same time Forney but im sure it was fine to have two teams then. Not in my view it wasn't. Can't testify to others views of course.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 17:55:51 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 17:55:51 GMT
From around 6min 30 seconds on this feature. An explanation of DOPS.
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 20:00:23 GMT
jd likes this
Post by Warren on Dec 11, 2014 20:00:23 GMT
From around 6min 30 seconds on this feature. An explanation of DOPS.
Why is the that information being released via the steelers Media channel not the EIHL's? and I am saying this merely to prove a point, Thats what he wants you to believe. as i say its everyones favourite Conspiracy theory. I do however don't think that its as clean cut as its made out to be.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 20:23:12 GMT
jd likes this
Post by dp on Dec 11, 2014 20:23:12 GMT
From around 6min 30 seconds on this feature. An explanation of DOPS.
Brilliant. So the Steelers chairman talks about DOPS on Steelers TV answering convenient, easy questions lined up and delivered by Steelers commentator who is also DOPS voiceover man!! And then they both go on, without a hint of irony, to say that the Elite league isn't seen as a beer league anymore!! You couldn't make this stuff up!! All I took from his explanation of DOPS is that he wanted something he could control so when the other clubs moaned about the decisions they wouldn't be able to target an individual for their abuse. In other words, DOPS is just a mechanism to allow them to make whatever decisions they want with no accountability. His words are far from convincing, and definitely not encouraging.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 20:47:30 GMT
via mobile
Post by tootootrain on Dec 11, 2014 20:47:30 GMT
If you are going to make veiled comments about somebody's integrity then, through past knowledge, it's always best you can have something to back up your view. I didn't make a veiled comment about someone's integrity, can't you read? But remember, Mr Smith (Owner of Sheffield Steelers and Chairman of the EIHL) has no influence over the DOPS decisions... Perhaps you're seeing what you want to see, which speaks more of your opinions (veiled or otherwise) of Mr Smith. To be honest I don't particularly like your accusations given I've defended Mr Smith (owner of Sheffield Steelers and Chairman of the EIHL) by categorically stating that (as far as I'm aware) he has no influence over the DOPS. Please withdraw them.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 22:57:42 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 22:57:42 GMT
If you are going to make veiled comments about somebody's integrity then, through past knowledge, it's always best you can have something to back up your view. I didn't make a veiled comment about someone's integrity, can't you read? But remember, Mr Smith (Owner of Sheffield Steelers and Chairman of the EIHL) has no influence over the DOPS decisions... Perhaps you're seeing what you want to see, which speaks more of your opinions (veiled or otherwise) of Mr Smith. To be honest I don't particularly like your accusations given I've defended Mr Smith (owner of Sheffield Steelers and Chairman of the EIHL) by categorically stating that (as far as I'm aware) he has no influence over the DOPS. Please withdraw them. Whatever......
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
DOPS
Dec 11, 2014 23:06:53 GMT
Post by Mozzy on Dec 11, 2014 23:06:53 GMT
Questions again from people who don't understand or don't want to understand. DoPS only reviews game misconducts / match pens, a club can ask for an investigation into other matters should they wish. Nottingham didn't on Dowd. I'm guessing they didn't, on the Coventry hit either. If they did then it would be reviewed. NO club owner has a say on DoPS, in fact until the penalty / suspension is made public they aren't even advised, Tony Smith included. So these comments are just simply wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above isn't my words, but the question is, if the hit was as bad from Dowd as some people are making out (not just on here), then why didn't your club ask for a review?
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Dec 12, 2014 3:23:21 GMT
Questions again from people who don't understand or don't want to understand. DoPS only reviews game misconducts / match pens, a club can ask for an investigation into other matters should they wish. Nottingham didn't on Dowd. I'm guessing they didn't, on the Coventry hit either. If they did then it would be reviewed. NO club owner has a say on DoPS, in fact until the penalty / suspension is made public they aren't even advised, Tony Smith included. So these comments are just simply wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above isn't my words, but the question is, if the hit was as bad from Dowd as some people are making out (not just on here), then why didn't your club ask for a review?
The issue I have is that it is well known that Oakford left the game injured and has missed two games in addition to that. It is also well known that a checking yo the head penalty was assessed at the time. The rules state that the minimum penalty for a check to the head that causes injury is a game misconduct, the Panthers shouldn't have to ASK for the rules to be applied. Some say that it wasn't a check to the head (on Steeltalk anyway) but on the NHL I saw two hits identical to this where the shoulder was driven up into the players face, neither causing injury but both incurring a ban. Oakford head wasn't particularly low in this case either. I think Forney you have to admit the Steelers dodged a bullet on this one.
|
|