He knew enough about Mark Harvey's 'arrangement' to no include his management team due to conflict of interest!SaintPav wrote:He was headhunted and he said he did not know about the Freo/Mark Harvey arrangement. Anyone could see that.saintly wrote:in may in the newspaper he emphatically states that he is contracted for 2012 and he would stay for the contract.
ROSS DIDN'T DECEIVE US
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
I'd doubt any club that needs members and to rebuild a young list would be interested.SainterK wrote:I just don't get a vibe any of them were even interested.SaintPav wrote:Dogs have Leon Cameron. Dees may have respected the process or RL wasn't interested and Freo got their man.SainterK wrote:Wonder why didn't the other clubs go for him?
Melbourne, Freo, Dogs?
I'm guessing.
Why would they?
I think every club would be interested if they new he was available.Johnny Member wrote:I'd doubt any club that needs members and to rebuild a young list would be interested.SainterK wrote:I just don't get a vibe any of them were even interested.SaintPav wrote:Dogs have Leon Cameron. Dees may have respected the process or RL wasn't interested and Freo got their man.SainterK wrote:Wonder why didn't the other clubs go for him?
Melbourne, Freo, Dogs?
I'm guessing.
Why would they?
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
How come Freo was the only club who knew? Were they the only ones who read the papers?plugger66 wrote:I think every club would be interested if they new he was available.Johnny Member wrote:I'd doubt any club that needs members and to rebuild a young list would be interested.SainterK wrote:I just don't get a vibe any of them were even interested.SaintPav wrote:Dogs have Leon Cameron. Dees may have respected the process or RL wasn't interested and Freo got their man.SainterK wrote:Wonder why didn't the other clubs go for him?
Melbourne, Freo, Dogs?
I'm guessing.
Why would they?
I dont know all the coaching dicussions going on with RL or his management. Can you tell us about them.degruch wrote:How come Freo was the only club who knew? Were they the only ones who read the papers?plugger66 wrote:I think every club would be interested if they new he was available.Johnny Member wrote:I'd doubt any club that needs members and to rebuild a young list would be interested.SainterK wrote:I just don't get a vibe any of them were even interested.SaintPav wrote:Dogs have Leon Cameron. Dees may have respected the process or RL wasn't interested and Freo got their man.SainterK wrote:Wonder why didn't the other clubs go for him?
Melbourne, Freo, Dogs?
I'm guessing.
Why would they?
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Are you and B4E the same, really stupid, person?plugger66 wrote:I dont know all the coaching dicussions going on with RL or his management. Can you tell us about them.degruch wrote:How come Freo was the only club who knew? Were they the only ones who read the papers?plugger66 wrote:I think every club would be interested if they new he was available.Johnny Member wrote:I'd doubt any club that needs members and to rebuild a young list would be interested.SainterK wrote:I just don't get a vibe any of them were even interested.SaintPav wrote:Dogs have Leon Cameron. Dees may have respected the process or RL wasn't interested and Freo got their man.SainterK wrote:Wonder why didn't the other clubs go for him?
Melbourne, Freo, Dogs?
I'm guessing.
Why would they?
You really do come up with excellent answers sometimes.degruch wrote:Are you and B4E the same, really stupid, person?plugger66 wrote:I dont know all the coaching dicussions going on with RL or his management. Can you tell us about them.degruch wrote:How come Freo was the only club who knew? Were they the only ones who read the papers?plugger66 wrote:I think every club would be interested if they new he was available.Johnny Member wrote:I'd doubt any club that needs members and to rebuild a young list would be interested.SainterK wrote:I just don't get a vibe any of them were even interested.SaintPav wrote:Dogs have Leon Cameron. Dees may have respected the process or RL wasn't interested and Freo got their man.SainterK wrote:Wonder why didn't the other clubs go for him?
Melbourne, Freo, Dogs?
I'm guessing.
Why would they?
- barks4eva
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10748
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:39pm
- Has thanked: 190 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
markp wrote:We've lost a great coach that we should've had contractually locked up, it seems he didn't technically break his contract, rather he exercised a (club inserted) get-out clause, yes he walked away and it was ugly and nasty, and seemingly unethical and mercenary in its execution, but there was obviously some serious friction between him and the board....Riewoldt conceded that, in hindsight, it would have been ''great'' if the club had acted sooner to re-sign Lyon
Teammate Brendon Goddard said he did not have a bad word to say about Lyon
''I just think it's quite disappointing that it had to get to this stage … it's just sad that we had to get to this point and lose a quality coach and a quality person,'' he said on Channel Nine's Sunday Footy Show.
It's done, we move on... but let's not pretend this is a good outcome and we're well rid of him, or we couldn't/shouldn't have prevented it. It's a f**k up, plain and simple. Hope we don't follow it with another.
EXACTLY!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
Seems there are a lot of people who live in the heads of the people involved.
How?
I don't see a f*** up of any kind. I can't. I don't know what was said to whom. None of us on here do (except for Barks, that is. He appears to know everything except how to assemble his own ticket to overthrow the existing board.)
At 1.5 and 8 what Board at what club would even CONTEMPLATE offering a 4 year deal to any coach?
At 1.5 and 8 what kind of coach could be so full of his own poo odour to possibly even think a four year deal was a remote possibility?
I see an unpredictable set of circumstances in the end driven to fruition by the mercenary act of a disgruntled egoist. I also see a Board simply doing what it thought was understandably correct at the time.
How?
I don't see a f*** up of any kind. I can't. I don't know what was said to whom. None of us on here do (except for Barks, that is. He appears to know everything except how to assemble his own ticket to overthrow the existing board.)
At 1.5 and 8 what Board at what club would even CONTEMPLATE offering a 4 year deal to any coach?
At 1.5 and 8 what kind of coach could be so full of his own poo odour to possibly even think a four year deal was a remote possibility?
I see an unpredictable set of circumstances in the end driven to fruition by the mercenary act of a disgruntled egoist. I also see a Board simply doing what it thought was understandably correct at the time.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
I can't agree with you there Markp.markp wrote: We've lost a great coach that we should've had contractually locked up, it seems he didn't technically break his contract, rather he exercised a (club inserted) get-out clause, yes he walked away and it was ugly and nasty, and seemingly unethical and mercenary in its execution, but there was obviously some serious friction between him and the board....
It's done, we move on... but let's not pretend this is a good outcome and we're well rid of him, or we couldn't/shouldn't have prevented it. It's a f**k up, plain and simple. Hope we don't follow it with another.
I don't think it was a f*** up for a start. I don't think he is a great coach secondly, and thirdly I'm personally really pleased with the outcome!
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 567 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
I think Ross made up his mind the day Chris Pelchen was appointed. I don't think the idea of having a boss sat too well with someone seeking an unconditional contract.
Life goes on. Only us and Adelaide in the race and there seem to be a number of worthy candidates. No need to rush. Talk to everyone, interview the best of them and pick the best of the best applicants.
Life goes on. Only us and Adelaide in the race and there seem to be a number of worthy candidates. No need to rush. Talk to everyone, interview the best of them and pick the best of the best applicants.
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got one.
- markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15549
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 81 times
Looks to me like we offered the guy exactly what he asked for 6 months earlier, but as we gave him a get out clause and a reason he was headhunted by another club who believe he's worth about $1.5 million a year, not bad for a not great coach, and probably twice as much as we could've got him to stay for earlier.Johnny Member wrote:I can't agree with you there Markp.markp wrote: We've lost a great coach that we should've had contractually locked up, it seems he didn't technically break his contract, rather he exercised a (club inserted) get-out clause, yes he walked away and it was ugly and nasty, and seemingly unethical and mercenary in its execution, but there was obviously some serious friction between him and the board....
It's done, we move on... but let's not pretend this is a good outcome and we're well rid of him, or we couldn't/shouldn't have prevented it. It's a f**k up, plain and simple. Hope we don't follow it with another.
I don't think it was a f*** up for a start. I don't think he is a great coach secondly, and thirdly I'm personally really pleased with the outcome!
Now we're joining the crowded hunt for a new coach totally on the hop and well behind the rest, as we head towards preseason, trading and draft periods....
If that doesn't at least resemble a f**k up, I'm buggered if I know what would.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18580
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
markp wrote: Looks to me like we offered the guy exactly what he asked for 6 months earlier, but as we gave him a get out clause and a reason he was headhunted by another club who believe he's worth about $1.5 million a year, not bad for a not great coach, and probably twice as much as we could've got him to stay for earlier.
We didn't offer him exactly what he wanted at all. I strongly doubted he wanted Pelchin looking over his shoulder.
It's my opinion that he's not a great coach. Clearly, the Freo board disagree though!
Time will tell.
That happened to us last time too though, and we were in the Grand Final 2 years later. So it's not the end of the world.markp wrote: Now we're joining the crowded hunt for a new coach totally on the hop and well behind the rest, as we head towards preseason, trading and draft periods....
And we have Pelchen to look after this stuff anyway so not having the senior coach there isn't as bad as it seems.
Having said that, would you trust Lyon during another trade week? His track record wasn't exactly good!
- markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15549
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 81 times
'No intention ever'?.... so what was his request 6 months ago about?... was he bluffing?SainterK wrote:I don't agree Mark.
IMO, Ross had no intention ever of staying beyond this year.
You can't persuade a guy to stay that doesn't want to.
I think he was open to leaving and open to staying, as time went on he obviously gravitated more to the latter...something p!ssed him off and he took a much better offer because he could.
My point is we've lost out here, we're not in a better position, or likely to be, and we blew the deal when we had a shot... now we're behind the eight ball big-time... = a f**k up.
- markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15549
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 81 times
The Pelchin thing is pure conjecture... has anyone involved even mentioned it?Johnny Member wrote:markp wrote: Looks to me like we offered the guy exactly what he asked for 6 months earlier, but as we gave him a get out clause and a reason he was headhunted by another club who believe he's worth about $1.5 million a year, not bad for a not great coach, and probably twice as much as we could've got him to stay for earlier.
We didn't offer him exactly what he wanted at all. I strongly doubted he wanted Pelchin looking over his shoulder.
It's my opinion that he's not a great coach. Clearly, the Freo board disagree though!
Time will tell.
That happened to us last time too though, and we were in the Grand Final 2 years later. So it's not the end of the world.markp wrote: Now we're joining the crowded hunt for a new coach totally on the hop and well behind the rest, as we head towards preseason, trading and draft periods....
And we have Pelchen to look after this stuff anyway so not having the senior coach there isn't as bad as it seems.
Having said that, would you trust Lyon during another trade week? His track record wasn't exactly good!
The board were obviously willing to trust him during trade week and beyond, cos they offered him a 4 year unconditional deal.
But yep, time will tell.... I hope the next guy is a worthy replacement, as it stands that's all in play and a long way from being determined.
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
My opinion, (and it's only that, nothing more) is that Lyon is a very good leader. He can get players to do what he wants them to do. This obviously, is a critical part of being a coach.markp wrote: The board were obviously willing to trust him during trade week and beyond, cos they offered him a 4 year unconditional deal.
But yep, time will tell.... I hope the next guy is a worthy replacement, as it stands that's all in play and a long way from being determined.
My opinion is that it's what he wanted them to do, that was flawed. It was ahead of the game in 09 and brilliant. In 2010 it had fallen behind, and by 2011 it was done and dusted.
My view is that the Board wanted to keep him for his leadership and the stability factor, but wanted him to change some things. Recruitment I'd guess, and his style of play I believe.
For a club to try to market that style of footy, especially when it's not winning games of footy anymore, must be incredibly difficult.
So my thoughts are that they'd have been happy to keep him if he did things differently. But I don't think he wanted to do things differently.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
If he wasn't fudging, he was certainly dreaming.barks4eva wrote:So when he wanted a four year deal in April and the board refused to sign, he was only fudging?SainterK wrote:I don't agree Mark.
IMO, Ross had no intention ever of staying beyond this year.
You can't persuade a guy to stay that doesn't want to.
Players with their wangers out, stars on the wane, GC above us on the ladder...
All in all 4 yr unconditional was a fair ask don't you think?
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
lyon was contracted for 2012.saintly wrote:in may in the newspaper he emphatically states that he is contracted for 2012 and he would stay for the contract.
keep in mind rattan and clarkson were both NOT contracted for 2012 and only made deals in the last few weeks .
So lyon was already in negotitions for 2013-2016. So saints were hardly dragging their feet - we were a full 12 months ahead of the hawks and the blues.
I believe so.markp wrote:'No intention ever'?.... so what was his request 6 months ago about?... was he bluffing?SainterK wrote:I don't agree Mark.
IMO, Ross had no intention ever of staying beyond this year.
You can't persuade a guy to stay that doesn't want to.
I think he was open to leaving and open to staying, as time went on he obviously gravitated more to the latter...something p!ssed him off and he took a much better offer because he could.
My point is we've lost out here, we're not in a better position, or likely to be, and we blew the deal when we had a shot... now we're behind the eight ball big-time... = a f**k up.
Is it so hard to fathom that he was bluffing, when he was the one that asked for the contract, yet was also the one who asked for talks to be put on hold?
I think he was strategic enough to look beyond next year, and assess his value at the end of a potential 3-4 year tenure at the Saints.
I mean, he is the one pushing the 'career coach' message an awful lot.
I don't think it would of done his career any good to stay at the Saints, and if simple old me can work that out...it's not beyond him is it?