If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
That means seven weeks of adjusting to a new team structure, which may just pay dividends and may be difficult to unwind so soon after it sets in.
Don't be deluded into thinking that the presence of Hall has gotten us to 3-1. Yes, he draws the opposition's best defenders but outside that, his contribution last season and this year has been reasonable but not exceptional. He has been improving but whether this would have continued we will not know.
I honestly believe that Roos will be in no great hurry to bring him back in. He has a proven track record of managing these issues in a very unconventional way.
I'm surprised that you don't at least see that there is potential for this outcome?
Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sector
Coming from someone in Melbourne matey I can tell you this isn't an us versus them deal or a Melb vs Syd trip.
No club in Melbourne would have been treated any better.
The media would have been just as exploitive, the player would have been dehumanised and supporters of opposing clubs would have been foaming at the mouth.
Why would the Swans fight for a fair and reasonable outcome and then bring him back later to appease the hysterics. He will be back as soon as he is ready.
The Swans didn't fight for any outcome - they outright stated this would not be contested.
And I'm not saying they would delay to appease anyone but themselves. Round 15 vs Hawks is the biggest challenge we will face when Hall's suspension ends. Why bring him in earlier, particularly if we find that the team is cranking without him?
The team is renowned for managing its image as well as managing players.
Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sector
Coming from someone in Melbourne matey I can tell you this isn't an us versus them deal or a Melb vs Syd trip.
No club in Melbourne would have been treated any better.
The media would have been just as exploitive, the player would have been dehumanised and supporters of opposing clubs would have been foaming at the mouth.
I agree. It would've been the same with any player, especially one with a similarly high profile.
It's like a circus down here. Almost as big as the 2005 PF tribunal.
A few posts have been going down the Us vs Them line, inferring another club (particularly in Melb) would have been treated differently.
Ya couldn't be further from the truth.
A Melb club probably would have been hammered more.
This has probably been said before but Sydney is the 'second club' for many in Melbourne. Several generations know the SM roots, many watched us every second Sunday when we were all that was on.
All this talk about a 'violent man'... please, give me a break! The man has a five second brain-snap and now, all of a sudden he is a menace... what a crock!
It is better to be silent, and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Don't be surprised to see the leadership group meet this week and give him a club imposed ban for an extra week or two, just to let him know how much he has let down the team.
The 7 weeks, gives them the room to do it.
DST
"Looking forward to a rebuilt, new, fast and exciting Swans model in 2010"
Don't be surprised to see the leadership group meet this week and give him a club imposed ban for an extra week or two, just to let him know how much he has let down the team.
The 7 weeks, gives them the room to do it.
DST
A distinct possibility
Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sector
Comment