Spida pursued us, insists Roos

[ugg]

Realfooty

Oh what a tangled web (pun intended).

In extraordinary revelations by Roos, it has emerged that Everitt was the architect of his own departure from the Hawks, and that he initiated talks with the reigning premiers, rather than the other way around.

[swantastic]

Re: Spida pursued us, insists Roos

Originally posted by ugg
Realfooty

Oh what a tangled web (pun intended).

Very interesting,i like every one thought that we chased after him.

[ROK Lobster]

Re: Spida pursued us, insists Roos

Originally posted by ugg
Realfooty

Oh what a tangled web (pun intended).

Indeed ugg, I think it is very tangled, and highly strategic.

Again this shows one of the more unique "qualities" of Roos. It seems that he has some compulsion to make sure that nothing that may, because of misunderstanding, rumour, ineundo etc, reflect poorly upon him is publicly "cleared up". I cannot see Spida coming to the club now - not that I think that it is a great loss anyway. Surely when Everitt approached the club he would have done so expecting that what he had to say would have been said in confidence. Not only did Roos go and dob him in to his coach - which is to some extent fair enough - but then to go public is a little off. It certainly shows Everitt in a bad light.

More importantly, and perhaps this is the bigger point, it says to Spida that if he does come here now, it is not as a superstar, it is as a naughty little boy who will do as he is told. Has Roos' statement been released for that reason - to knock the Spida down a peg or two, let him know exactly who is boss at Sydney, and see if he is still prepared to come to the club, slightly humiliated and knowing that there will be no special treatment, regardless of how many tatoos he has.

That it will deflect some attention away from the preparations for the PF probably has not been ignored by ROos either.

[royboy42]

ROK said: More importantly, and perhaps this is the bigger point, it says to Spida that if he does come here now, it is not as a superstar, it is as a naughty little boy who will do as he is told. Has Roos' statement been released for that reason - to knock the Spida down a peg or two, let him know exactly who is boss at Sydney, and see if he is still prepared to come to the club, slightly humiliated and knowing that there will be no special treatment, regardless of how many tatoos he has.

That it will deflect some attention away from the preparations for the PF probably has not been ignored by ROos either.


__________________
I agree that Roos' intention, if Everitt does come here, is to let him know his place in the pecking order.

I agree that Roos was almost obliged to let Clarkson know he had been approached by one of his players.

But I do not agrre that Roos has some problem with having anything not reflecting glory on him personally come into the public arena.. Sometimes ROK, you allow this tiresome prejudice against Roos to colour and affect your every opinion..I don't think it reflects well on your judgement!

[Captain]

Re: Re: Spida pursued us, insists Roos

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
I cannot see Spida coming to the club now - not that I think that it is a great loss anyway. Surely when Everitt approached the club he would have done so expecting that what he had to say would have been said in confidence. Not only did Roos go and dob him in to his coach - which is to some extent fair enough - but then to go public is a little off. It certainly shows Everitt in a bad light.

Couldn't agree more.

Surely the club had a responsibility to maintain confidentiality. If I went for a job interview I certainly hope my boss wouldn't get a call. This isn't any different.

[Legs Akimbo]

I think it is pretty obvious that Spida will not be at the swans last year. I expect that Spida ia now talking to other Melbourne clubs, possibly St Kilda, and Roos decided now was the appropriate time to set the record straight. End of story. End of Spida for Sydney.

[timthefish]

Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
I think it is pretty obvious that Spida will not be at the swans last year. I expect that Spida ia now talking to other Melbourne clubs, possibly St Kilda, and Roos decided now was the appropriate time to set the record straight. End of story. End of Spida for Sydney.

agreed. roos was right to clear up any misconception that the swans behaved improperly. i was wondering how long the anti-roos set would take to hammer this straightforward peg into their spaghetti-shaped hole of labyrinthine conspiracy theory.

oh, and very glad spida isn't coming.

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by royboy42

But I do not agrre that Roos has some problem with having anything not reflecting glory on him personally come into the public arena.. Sometimes ROK, you allow this tiresome prejudice against Roos to colour and affect your every opinion..I don't think it reflects well on your judgement!

That is hardly what I said - in fact it is not even close. I chose my words fairly carefully to try and avoid that sort of reaction but it seems that I misjudged the ignorance of the audience. Sometimes I think that it is your prejudice against me that colours how you read what I have to say, and perhaps reflects poorly on your lack of judgment.

[liz]

Originally posted by timthefish
agreed. roos was right to clear up any misconception that the swans behaved improperly. i was wondering how long the anti-roos set would take to hammer this straightforward peg into their spaghetti-shaped hole of labyrinthine conspiracy theory.

oh, and very glad spida isn't coming.

It is possible he was doing more than just clearing up misconception. He may have been defending the club against an official complaint that it acted improperly. It is strictly against the rules for one club to approach a player midway through a season with the intention of luring him to a new club. I think they're allowed to enquire of the player manager about how a player may be thinking with regards to his future playing career, but may not actively pursue the player.

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by timthefish
agreed. roos was right to clear up any misconception that the swans behaved improperly i was wondering how long the anti-roos set would take to hammer this straightforward peg into their spaghetti-shaped hole of labyrinthine conspiracy theory.

oh, and very glad spida isn't coming.

There is no conspiracy theory as far as I am concerned. I think it shows a wierd paranoia that there is some theory of a conspiracy theory. Is there a public misconception that the Swans behaved poorly? If there is, surely the most sensible way to deal with it is to say that there were talks between player and club, the other club was informed, both player and club were interested in making it happen but it did not. There never was any feeling of ill will between the club and the player or between the clubs. There is no need, if the intention is only to "clear up any misconception" by going into details. I wonder how selectively the details that were released were chosen. This now has the potential to escalate, with a response from Everitt. but I expect that that has been calculated too. Everitt's response, or lack of, is surely part of the interview process, whether he knows it or not.

EDIT: Just a response to Liz, if there was an official complaint to be defended, is a newspaper the most appropriate place to respond to the complaint?

[timthefish]

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
That is hardly what I said - in fact it is not even close. I chose my words fairly carefully to try and avoid that sort of reaction but it seems that I misjudged the ignorance of the audience. Sometimes I think that it is your prejudice against me that colours how you read what I have to say, and perhaps reflects poorly on your lack of judgment.

rubbish. this bit -

Again this shows one of the more unique "qualities" of Roos. It seems that he has some compulsion to make sure that nothing that may, because of misunderstanding, rumour, ineundo etc, reflect poorly upon him is publicly "cleared up".

clearly contains innuendo and the euphemisms contained in quotes highlight your agenda. your initial focus was what this tells us about roos' psyche, personality and self-interest. a secondary consideration of the post was what roos' may have been trying to achieve in terms of spider.

[timthefish]

Originally posted by liz
It is possible he was doing more than just clearing up misconception. He may have been defending the club against an official complaint that it acted improperly. It is strictly against the rules for one club to approach a player midway through a season with the intention of luring him to a new club. I think they're allowed to enquire of the player manager about how a player may be thinking with regards to his future playing career, but may not actively pursue the player.

i was actually thinking along the same lines, misconception was not strong enough a word.

[timthefish]

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
There is no conspiracy theory as far as I am concerned.

maybe not, but it does seem that most of roos' actions over the past month have been given a "roos is an arrogant self-important bully" reading or analysis. i think he deserves a lot more respect and an assumption that he is acting in the best interest of the club.

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by timthefish
rubbish.

Yes, the comment was intended to make a comment on Roos, and then go on to the 'more important, bigger point' (or words to that effect) about Spider coming to the club. I made no mention of Roos 'personal glory' and quite plainly spelt out that it was misconception, rumour and ineundo etc that Roos wanted to clear up. RB42's response indicated that his reading of what I had to saywent much further than that. Others, and not just in football, are prepared to let thing lie, slide off their back, consider things not worthy of a response. Roos is not like that. That he would betray a confidence to 'clear things up' shows that pretty clearly.

[timthefish]

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
That he would betray a confidence to 'clear things up' shows that pretty clearly.

not necessarily. if the club was receiving heat or if spider had since acted in a poor fashion (gee, what are the chances) which had the potential to cause trouble then it may well have been for the club alone that he did it.