Smorgon swipe at 'mercenary' Brown

[southerncross]

This should be good for the Dogs vs Tiges game

Smorgon swipe at 'mercenary' Brown (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21488017%255E20322,00.html)

WESTERN Bulldogs president David Smorgon has fired a salvo at his former champion player Nathan Brown, saying the star forward joined Richmond for the dollars.

Smorgon said the Bulldogs were a better club without Brown, who he said could not look him in the eye and commit to the Bulldogs. Speaking before yesterday's game against Geelong at Telstra Dome, Smorgon said Brown was the only player in recent years of any note who had opted out of the club.
"The only fellow that left our club, I would say for the wrong reason, was Nathan Brown," Smorgon said on 3AW.
"He went for dollars.
"And he went because he could not look me in the eye and say, 'I'm committed to do what I need to do for this footy club'.
"Why was Browny the only one who would never go to community groups? He would never go and do the things and was always handpassing to someone else to go and do it."
Smorgon said that while he hoped Brown recovered from his leg injury quickly, the Bulldogs were a better club when he left.
"We took a stand and that's why we are a better club and it had nothing to do with Nathan Brown per se," he said.
"We were a stronger club because someone that fundamentally didn't want to be there was out of there and we made a statement with Nathan.
"And it could have been anyone else that we made a statement with at that time but he left because of his reasons. He didn't want to be there. And, frankly, when he left everyone else knew they had to be there for the right reasons and that's why we are stronger."
Brown responded yesterday by saying Smorgon was right that Richmond and other clubs were prepared to pay him more money and at the time the Western Bulldogs were on the bottom.
"They are playing good footy and they are probably a better club than when I was there, but I don't know whether they are a better club without me," he said on Triple M.
"David is entitled to his opinions and he certainly has a few of them, and good for him, and I'm not going to get into a slanging match with him."
Brown, who quit the Bulldogs at the end of 2003, said people who didn't know much about football made comments which had to be taken with a grain of salt.

[alwaysadog]

I thought we were over Wallace, Brown et al. This is distraction big time and not forward looking. I guess Smorgo was just getting rid of some residual angst, but it would be better if we were a bit more focussed and gracious.

This is not the sort of media we want or need. Take a leaf from the Eagles, but not an illicit one, and let our football do the talking. If others want to try to catch a ride on our coat tails then remind them of the closest part of the anatomy.

[firstdogonthemoon]

I am really not sure about this one. Caroline said on that new 9 classified thing that smorgo is trying to be a harder/tougher president.

He is normally a polished media performer so......

what was he thinking?

If it was on purpose then he clearly wanted a public stoush with Richmond.

If it was an accident then it was out of character.

hmmmm

Can someone else tell me what is going on here?

[W W Biscuit]

Take a leaf from the Eagles, but not an illicit one

:D Working beautifully there AAD.

[GVGjr]

Can someone else tell me what is going on here?

I see Smorgo was on SEN this morning replying to the Tiger president comments on his initial comments. Very intriguing why they are trading shots at each other.

[alwaysadog]

I see Smorgo was on SEN this morning replying to the Tiger president comments on his initial comments. Very intriguing why they are trading shots at each other.

I've got no idea why Smorgo is distracting attention from the good state of our Football and letting the Tiges hide the poor quality of there's. But in the end it will be all pain for no gain for us. We need this like we need a hole in the head.

[The Coon Dog]

This needs to be put into context re: Nathan Brown. Smorgo was responding to a question from Tony Shaw about the 'go home' factor at the end of the season, specicically what was the club doing to ensure Griffen, Cooney & Ray all remained Bulldogs.

Smorgo replied by stating that we are creating a culture whereby players would rather stay than leave & then highlighted the only one that this didn't apply to; Nathan Brown.

He didn't just come out & 'pot' Brown, it was in response to a question.

[W W Biscuit]

I see Smorgo was on SEN this morning replying to the Tiger president comments on his initial comments. Very intriguing why they are trading shots at each other.

The SEN boys were fishing for a bigger story and sounded a bit flat when Smorgan failed to say anything inflammatory. Smorgo's basic line was - 'that's footy.' A president's duty is to promote and defend his club, and he was happy to do the pre-match interview from which his Brown comments arose. However, he was responding to a line of questioning apropos being able to re-sign some of our young stars, and had volunteered his remarks in this context.

Smorgan said that he would phone Gary March this morning to talk about the issue. He did not directly respond to March's swipe at the Bulldogs - only that they have some differences of opinion and that they facts will sort themselves out over time. Indeed, in pushing the line that part of a president's role is to defend his team, he was giving tacit approval to some of what March said ("I can't remember the last time they made a profit and they are having a crack at us and our players, I just won't cop that)." Smorgan added that is was fair enough that personnel changed clubs for whatever reason, but that as soon as they pulled on a rival guernsey they were fair game, just like any other opposition player or coach (a reference both Brown and Terry Wallace).

Basically, it was a bit of a non-interview insofar as Smorgan delivered a bland, rational and non-emotive response to Gary March's attack. SEN (and the media in general) will find little or no mileage here, although it was interesting that in a newsbreak later in the SEN breakfast program, they ran with the headline "Smorgan refuses to back down from his comments about Nathan Brown." You've got to love how the media works! Do they have Martin di Stasio writing their scripts?

[GVGjr]

I've got no idea why Smorgo is distracting attention from the good state of our Football and letting the Tiges hide the poor quality of there's. But in the end it will be all pain for no gain for us. We need this like we need a hole in the head.

They wouldn't be trying to create a blockbuster type game between the two sides for later in the season by trading barbs now are they?

Other than that it does not appear to be productive.

[alwaysadog]

Wallace has a green stripe of envy so wide he can't see through it. He left what has turned out to be close to the winning formula, that must really hurt.

Seems to me Smorgo was less than his usual controlled self initially: so it still rankles the way Brown deserted us, and he wants him to know it and to rub his nose in it. Brown was quite muted in his response.

Now it sounds like their President and Greg Miller have got the envy bug too. There are ways of going about defending things that don't display your weaknesses. This is a Smorgo strength, as for what's is name the Tiges president (mad as a March hatter) and Miller well they just look less substantial every day.

[alwaysadog]

Do they have Martin di Stasio writing their scripts?

Ah if only they did, many a dreary fill in would be funny. I don't wish SEN any harm but they do take themselves far too seriously. Bring back Martin di Stasio, I say.