Roos officially announced as Melbourne Demons

[Untamed Snark]

This is getting ugly and is very depressing. How long till Roos starts complaining about Sydney's COLA??

The first time we beat them.

[Dosser]

Colless is right. At some stage the Swans have to stand up and say to Roos that you cant keep plundering our academy and coaching staff. If he has been sniffing around in the ear of players and coaches then the Swans are within their rights to deny access due to contract.

[Industrial Fan]

Well Stella, that really lightened the mood!

No wonder the swans have been hard on him.

[chammond]

Colless is right. At some stage the Swans have to stand up and say to Roos that you cant keep plundering our academy and coaching staff. If he has been sniffing around in the ear of players and coaches then the Swans are within their rights to deny access due to contract.

Colless was wrong to go public with this issue. There was no need to go to the media and create a public rift between two of the Swans' favourite sons; it was always going to be a lose:lose outcome.
Colless' one flaw as a manager has always been his tendency to shoot from the hip when he perceives a threat to the Swans. He ought to have talked to Roos in-camera and amicably laid down some ground rules. Now he will be remembered as the man who alienated the Club's greatest coach. A sad day for all true bloods.

[BillyRayCypress]

I missed the original programme last night. Well the last 15 minutes as my daughter changed the channel and I didn't realise it. So I IQ'd the next time it was on which was 8 am this morning.

So to summarise:

Mike asks Roos about Cordy's article from Saturday whereby it stated that Colless said it was a 'breach of protocol" for trying to take players from the Academy.

Roos said: He was devastated by the article and it was factually incorrect. "To have the Chairman come out and say that yeah...............its hard for me to read it still:" This was Roos exact words and note that he refers to Colless as "the chairman" and not Richard.

He said he sent an email off and demanded a apology on the Club website. Which he said Colless won't do.

Spoke about Perris and said that he could choose not to play for the Swans, to go into the draft and was eligible to be picked up by anybody.

Gerard said that he spoke to Colless about whether roos statue would be gold, silver or bronze and Gerard then inferred that Colless would not make that comment if there had not been some truth to it. He asked roos if he would be talking to Colless so that it didn't build into something worse.

Roos said that if he gets the apology then they will talk otherwise they will move on.

Mike said a month ago there was no animosity a month ago. he said Swans believe that Roos is after Stone and Dew

Spoke about Dew applying for the job a week after he got the position. The Swans won't let him interview for the position.

Mike said there is an enormous amount of anger towards Roos from the Swans.

Roos said immediately - I don't know why but they obviously have moved on so I have to moved on. He doesn't know why there is an enormous of anger towards him and maybe its a message to him that things don't pan out the way you want to.

Roos then said he was hoping to walk out of the Club with respecting the Club and getting the respect in return, that hasn't happened and won't happen.

At this point Gerard interrupted and said "roosy but that respect was evident a few weeks back, We saw that".

Roos said that he is the Melbourne coach and that he is not with the Swans.

Mike said will you back away from Dew? Roos said that the Swans won't allow him to interview and whats backing away?

He said- Paul Armstrong on behalf of the Coaches association.

My observations from last night:

1. The Colless' remarks are easily viewed as being accusations against Roos' character. Colless has made some very serious remarks that Roos can view as being slanderous. Roos has asked for a public apology and not received it. The next step would be through the Courts. That is unless there is some truth to it;

2. Roos showed no emotion what so ever during the discussion if not to give the impression that he can't understand why the Swans hate him.

[Matt80]

It's a sad day to hear Colless and Roos at each! Who do you think at the Swans can mediate this conflict - John Longmire, Adam Goodes, etc ?

[Dosser]

Barry Hall?

[BillyRayCypress]

Hands off Dew!!

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/...924-2uca0.html

To quote Caroline Wilson in the article:

Roos' latest attempt to plunder his old club has seen the intervention of Swans chief executive Andrew Ireland, who communicated the club's determination to hold on to to Dew to Melbourne counterpart Peter Jackson

What she wrote also contradicts what Roos said last night about Dew's application being independent and unrelated to his appointment.

That statue's nose keeps growing longer and longer by the day.

[Matt80]

The Swans should let Roos take whoever he wants i'e Dew, Tudor Perris or Stone! Once they have indicated they want to leave, they have emotionally left the
Building.

Let them all go and wish them all well!

The Swans will find talented and committed people to take their places.

This will be challenging for Ireland and Longmire, but I think they are up to the task of regeneration!

[Melbournehammer]

At the risk of adding fuel to the fire, it did seem to me odd that roos had a conversation with armstrong about whether someone was free to leave prior to the expiry of the contract while dew was spontaneously contacting roos. i think it more likely that roos asked armstrong and having got the answer he wanted sounded dew out without offering him anything per se. dew has sounded longmire out and the club has come down hard on roos.

the whole on the couch thing causes problems when you have james hird denying repeatedly that he wants the essendon job and roos being able to give his side of the story without the club having a right of reply. that is how jounralism is supposed to work - you are supposed to get both sides of the story and then allow the viewer/reader make their mind up and or where you call out one party do so. on the couch struggles with that.

[BillyRayCypress]

the whole on the couch thing causes problems when you have james hird denying repeatedly that he wants the essendon job and roos being able to give his side of the story without the club having a right of reply. that is how jounralism is supposed to work - you are supposed to get both sides of the story and then allow the viewer/reader make their mind up and or where you call out one party do so. on the couch struggles with that.

Agree with you completely. Unfortunately journalists create stories these days rather thyan report them.

You make a very valid point about there being no right to reply on behalf of the Club. The difference with roos is that both Sheehan and Healey did challenge Roos, albeit softly regarding what was happening.

Certainly my impression of Roos from last night was that the Swans were all at fault and he was just an innocent past loyal dedicated employee who was being victimised.

I suppose a lie detector would be out of the question. Come on Richard, challenge him with a lie detector.

[Dosser]

Roos, Colless and Hall all in the ring to sort it out like real men.

[jono2707]

Roos, Colless and Hall all in the ring to sort it out like real men.

Real men talk things over and sort things out amicably and even apologise when they're in the wrong.

[Matt80]

Come on Dosser, this is a serious discussion! We don't want Paul feeling bitter towards the club like a Kevin Bartlett did towards Richmond for all those years!

Someone needs to mediate this situation!

[Dosser]

Sorry, I will resume with appropriate gravitas as I know how important this discussion is to the outcome.