Campbell Rose - PR Flunky

[Jasper]

I know there is another thread on the footy show...but

The decision by the Western Bulldogs to appear with Jason Akermanis on the footy show and not realise they would be put in a position of conducting a humiliating (for club and player) performance management session in public on national television was a massive error.

That Rose freely admitted his responsibility for PR shows he has nearly as much lack of insight about the media and performance management as Jason. Extremely disappointing that the club allowed itself to be put in the position of having Jason question them. They should have made Jason's exitfrom the set a condition of interview. The fact that the more media savvy and friendly Smorgan was not in attendance was another error. I can't believe the club could have made such an error. Really disappointing.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Making Rose do it was incredibly stupid.

Smorgan or Fantasia should of been the ones out there, but as you said - they shouldn't of done a live interview with Aker, Sam etc. all in attendance.

I'm amazed.

[comrade]

I know there is another thread on the footy show...but

The decision by the Western Bulldogs to appear with Jason Akermanis on the footy show and not realise they would be put in a position of conducting a humiliating (for club and player) performance management session in public on national television was a massive error.

That Rose freely admitted his responsibility for PR shows he has nearly as much lack of insight about the media and performance management as Jason. Extremely disappointing that the club allowed itself to be put in the position of having Jason question them. They should have made Jason's exitfrom the set a condition of interview. The fact that the more media savvy and friendly Smorgan was not in attendance was another error. I can't believe the club could have made such an error. Really disappointing.

Tend to agree. When Rose had to face Jason and go on the defence, he was put in a powerless situation.

He should have just referred back to the press conference, and repeated that the decision was made for the good of the Club and stonewalled. It would have been boring TV but much more effective.

Instead, he kept repeating that trust broke down and Jason kept needling him for proof. When Rose wouldn't get in to a tit for tat, the crowd got offside.

We shouldn't have fanned the fire, IMO.

[LostDoggy]

Our club should be ashamed and embarassed. We are sending a guy who wasn't even at the meeting and is involved in such things as club finances. Fantasia, Eade or Smorgon should've gone on if anyone. In fact, the club needed to keep low key here and not send anyone on.

[bornadog]

I disagree, I think Rose handled it well, however, Aker should not have been allowed to be on Camera or question Rose at all.

[LostDoggy]

I disagree, I think Rose handled it well, however, Aker should not have been allowed to be on Camera or question Rose at all.

I thought it was a PR disaster.

[LostDoggy]

I know there is another thread on the footy show...but

The decision by the Western Bulldogs to appear with Jason Akermanis on the footy show and not realise they would be put in a position of conducting a humiliating (for club and player) performance management session in public on national television was a massive error.

That Rose freely admitted his responsibility for PR shows he has nearly as much lack of insight about the media and performance management as Jason. Extremely disappointing that the club allowed itself to be put in the position of having Jason question them. They should have made Jason's exitfrom the set a condition of interview. The fact that the more media savvy and friendly Smorgan was not in attendance was another error. I can't believe the club could have made such an error. Really disappointing.

Totally agree, the club really got this one wrong.

[GVGjr]

I disagree, I think Rose handled it well, however, Aker should not have been allowed to be on Camera or question Rose at all.

We simply got the order wrong.
Rose should have come out first and put forward the club positions. The grilling for Lyon and co wouldn't have been an issue. Aker could have then come out and had extra questions to answer.

[Before I Die]

I missed Aker speaking, but I saw Rose. I thought Rose did very well. The club had to be represented or it looks like we have something to hide. Rose was an excellent choice because he clearly represents the club but is also once removed from football operations. His position was absolutely clear, Aker has lost the trust of the club. Aker at times looked lost and confused. It was a bit sad because he clearly has no ability to reflect on his own behaviour and absolutely no idea of the concept of "we".

[LostDoggy]

After all this, does anyone think anyone's head will be on the chopping block?

[cinder]

Agree we had to send someone in but also agree it didn't go to plan. Aker made Rose look like an imbecile. And Rose just kept repeating himself in regards to the trust thing, just sounded like a rehearsed speel. This whole thing has really reflected badly on the club. I just pray to god things don't start falling apart on the field. If so, we're toast :(

[Jasper]

Aker at times looked lost and confused. It was a bit sad because he clearly has no ability to reflect on his own behaviour and absolutely no idea of the concept of "we".

The club did not have to publicly participate in Jason being hoisted on his own pittard. Jason's lack of self insight is there for all to see, it is sad, for the club to be there and participate in his humiliation was a farcical situation that as others have pointed could easily have been avoided. And the club still could have put its position forward via a pre-recorded interview or at least ensuring they didn't encounter Jason on set.

I am still shaking my head at this lapse.

[ledge]

It onl;y became "we" when he was choosing a winner, did notice he kept calling the blokes he played with his team mates, pretty confusing when you consider they were the ones who got rid of him due to his lack of TEAM.

[Mantis]

After all this, does anyone think anyone's head will be on the chopping block?

Like who?

[AndrewP6]

I missed Aker speaking, but I saw Rose. I thought Rose did very well. The club had to be represented or it looks like we have something to hide. Rose was an excellent choice because he clearly represents the club but is also once removed from football operations. His position was absolutely clear, Aker has lost the trust of the club. Aker at times looked lost and confused. It was a bit sad because he clearly has no ability to reflect on his own behaviour and absolutely no idea of the concept of "we".

But surely the point of having him there would be to provide more information, or reasons for the sacking? He simply parrotted the trust stuff from the presser, and in the process showed his best work is done in the office, and that he has little if any idea of what actually happens with the PEOPLE at the club. He's a bean counter. Aker looked lost and confused because he's just lost his job and felt that the reason/s for the sacking were not adequately explained - apart from the airy-fairy trust line which doesn't actually say much.

[AndrewP6]

Agree we had to send someone in but also agree it didn't go to plan. Aker made Rose look like an imbecile. And Rose just kept repeating himself in regards to the trust thing, just sounded like a rehearsed speel. This whole thing has really reflected badly on the club. I just pray to god things don't start falling apart on the field. If so, we're toast :(

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[comrade]

But surely the point of having him there would be to provide more information, or reasons for the sacking? He simply parrotted the trust stuff from the presser, and in the process showed his best work is done in the office, and that he has little if any idea of what actually happens with the PEOPLE at the club. He's a bean counter. Aker looked lost and confused because he's just lost his job and felt that the reason/s for the sacking were not adequately explained - apart from the airy-fairy trust line which doesn't actually say much.

Mate, you're as passionate as they come and it's great, but you've bought into Aker's victim act hook, line and sinker.

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.

The fact that Aker is trumpeting that he had no idea it was coming, and he wants proof says more about his almost narcissistic ability to deny anything is his fault and the constant blaming of everyone else for his woes. He even suggested he wasn't sacked from Brisbane!

Aker is a media personality and has the means to voice his side of the story - one that benefits him and him only. Don't forget there are two sides to every story.

[AndrewP6]

Mate, you're as passionate as they come and it's great, but you've bought into Aker's victim act hook, line and sinker.

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.

Don't know that he'd be capable of it...;)


Aker is a media personality and has the means to voice his side of the story - one that benefits him and him only. Don't forget there are two sides to every story.

True, but until the club presents a better one, I'm going with the one that's out there.

[G-Mo77]

But surely the point of having him there would be to provide more information, or reasons for the sacking? He simply parrotted the trust stuff from the presser, and in the process showed his best work is done in the office, and that he has little if any idea of what actually happens with the PEOPLE at the club. He's a bean counter. Aker looked lost and confused because he's just lost his job and felt that the reason/s for the sacking were not adequately explained - apart from the airy-fairy trust line which doesn't actually say much.

So what would you rather air more dirty laundry? :rolleyes:

We were going to lose the PR battle from the get go, it was an obvious no win situation and Campbell Rose didn't not give those twits on the footy show anything at all. He was the best man for the job and I thought he handled it quite well.

While you might think the "Trust" issue is nothing there was a guy on the panel tonight from his old club who thought it was massive issue also. I'll take his word over anyone else on there tonight. Aker has been let go for the exact same reason from 2 clubs now. Once this all blows over, and believe me it will, Aker will come out looking like the dill not Campbell Rose and not the Western Bulldogs.

[comrade]

True, but until the club presents a better one, I'm going with the one that's out there.

That's what Aker is banking on.

[Jasper]

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.



Would you concede that agreeing to appear on national television with a mouthy bloke with no self insight who you have just sacked on one side of you, and Sam Newman on your other side, was neither smart or professional??

[G-Mo77]

Would you concede that agreeing to appear on national television with a mouthy bloke with no self insight who you have just sacked on one side of you, and Sam Newman on your other side, was neither smart or professional??

Would we have looked any better if we didn't have a representative?

[comrade]

Would you concede that agreeing to appear on national television with a mouthy bloke with no self insight who you have just sacked on one side of you, and Sam Newman on your other side, was neither smart or professional??

I've already conceded that it wasn't smart.

Rose was professional/diplomatic enough not to get drawn into a back and forth stoush, which probably benefited Aker from a PR perspective.

[Before I Die]

But surely the point of having him there would be to provide more information, or reasons for the sacking? He simply parrotted the trust stuff from the presser, and in the process showed his best work is done in the office, and that he has little if any idea of what actually happens with the PEOPLE at the club. He's a bean counter. Aker looked lost and confused because he's just lost his job and felt that the reason/s for the sacking were not adequately explained - apart from the airy-fairy trust line which doesn't actually say much.

I actually think "the trust line" is everything. He hasn't been sacked for a particular text, or leak, or newspaper article or radio interview. He has been sacked because the playing group don't trust him anymore with regard to the agreed club code. The whole concept of team is about trust. You don't have to like your teammates or even consider them to be good people. But you have to believe that you can trust them with regard to all things football.

[Jasper]

Would we have looked any better if we didn't have a representative?

Yes.

Other Better Options:

1 - Rose appears prior to or after Aker being on set
2 - Rose pre-records an interview

Worst option:

What happened...

The only good thing is that at least the club is protecting the players and coaches from this circus.

[AndrewP6]

I actually think "the trust line" is everything. He hasn't been sacked for a particular text, or leak, or newspaper article or radio interview. He has been sacked because the playing group don't trust him anymore with regard to the agreed club code. The whole concept of team is about trust. You don't have to like your teammates or even consider them to be good people. But you have to believe that you can trust them with regard to all things football.

Aker must've trusted the club when they agreed to the "clean slate" thing...which Rose seemed to be trying backpedal from tonight.

[LostDoggy]

I think Campbell Rose did very well. Anybody closer to the playing group may have gotten drawn into the “tit for tat” stuff that the Footy Show boys were hunting for. They wanted to hear “Johnno said this” or “Brian Lake said that” so they'd have more news and shit to write/talk about. They were obviously of no mind to resolve the situation as they didn't attempt it once. Brayshaw was the most circumspect, and probably because he's a club president and understands both sides of the fence better than two former players in Lyon and Sam.

Jonathan Brown was very hard at Sam, you could tell he was upset with Sam Newman and the line Sam was taking.

Not having a representative, and shying away from the confrontation makes us look like BP in the Gulf Oil Crisis. Taking it head on and inviting the open discussion, on live TV where it can't be said to be rehearsed, whilst it didn't look 100% great for the club does give us the legitimacy — if/when Aker mounts another challenge in the future, we can simply say, “We appeared live on TFS to explain our position, we didn't have to do that and we've done enough, go away.”

[G-Mo77]

Aker must've trusted the club when they agreed to the "clean slate" thing...which Rose seemed to be trying backpedal from tonight.

He has been sacked because the playing group do not trust him! Did you not listen to Campbell Rose or the guy you just quoted?

That whole clean slate thing is completely irrelevant.

[AndrewP6]

He has been sacked because the playing group do not trust him! Did you not listen to Campbell Rose or the guy you just quoted?

That whole clean slate thing is completely irrelevant.

Maybe I'd have had more luck listening to Rose if he was the slightest bit convincing.

One of the "reasons" given in the press conference was the series of breaches over a period of time. That's where the clean slate comes in. They gave his behavioural breaches (I think 18 months was the timeframe) as reasons for the sacking. Tonight Rose put it simply down to the loss of trust, and said nothing of the behavioural breaches.

[Before I Die]

Aker must've trusted the club when they agreed to the "clean slate" thing...which Rose seemed to be trying backpedal from tonight.

I agree with you on this one. I think it is likely that this may have been the suits agreeing to a clean slate without really considering whether the playing group felt the same way. I am not saying the club hasn't made mistakes along the way with Aker, but I believe the sacking would not have been done if it was not a necessity. I also believe the club has handled it well. Not that that means there won't be any further fallout.

The one thing that was confusing me over the past few weeks was how strong Luke Darcy has been on the "Aker must go" line. He is obviously very close to the playing group and it is now clear just how unhappy they have been.

This won't be worthy of a headline by the middle of next week, unless you listen to MTR. AKER SACKED is a four year old story.

[SonofScray]

Didn't go too well but I thought Rose did OK.

TFS set this up and we got sucked into a no win situation really. Anyone with half a brain will acknowledge that Rose did not get given the same liberties to speak freely and openly to the extent Aker did. To put him out there in between Sam and Aker was pretty poor on their behalf given Rose was prepared to go in and face the music in the first place.

Bunker down now Doggies, we owe no one else anything. Just the fans, with results.

[Lurgan]

Mate, you're as passionate as they come and it's great, but you've bought into Aker's victim act hook, line and sinker.

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.

The fact that Aker is trumpeting that he had no idea it was coming, and he wants proof says more about his almost narcissistic ability to deny anything is his fault and the constant blaming of everyone else for his woes. He even suggested he wasn't sacked from Brisbane!

Aker is a media personality and has the means to voice his side of the story - one that benefits him and him only. Don't forget there are two sides to every story.

Agree completely. Yes, Rose was set up but he's a professional and he kept his cool and his dignity. According to Aker, he (Aker) never did nuffin', he was a team man, he was loyal and it all came as a shock... yeah, right. Pure narcissism, the second time around, too.

Enough of this nonsense.

[LostDoggy]

Here's a good question my uncle asked me: If it turns out that Aker is what's been wrong with the playing group, and we now start to find form and play great footy again, will you be as angry about sacking him, and if not, is that really honest?

[Ghost Dog]

So what would you rather air more dirty laundry? :rolleyes:

We were going to lose the PR battle from the get go, it was an obvious no win situation and Campbell Rose didn't not give those twits on the footy show anything at all. He was the best man for the job and I thought he handled it quite well.

While you might think the "Trust" issue is nothing there was a guy on the panel tonight from his old club who thought it was massive issue also. I'll take his word over anyone else on there tonight. Aker has been let go for the exact same reason from 2 clubs now. Once this all blows over, and believe me it will, Aker will come out looking like the dill not Campbell Rose and not the Western Bulldogs.

I actually thought Jason was pretty restrained and Campbell was pretty congenial. I thought the part where he admitted his son wore Aker's number a nice touch.
Both were decent enough, media will beat it for all it's worth.
Nobody at the club could have done better in his position - other than a real, breathing player. That was never going to happen.

[immortalmike]

Maybe I'd have had more luck listening to Rose if he was the slightest bit convincing.

One of the "reasons" given in the press conference was the series of breaches over a period of time. That's where the clean slate comes in. They gave his behavioural breaches (I think 18 months was the timeframe) as reasons for the sacking. Tonight Rose put it simply down to the loss of trust, and said nothing of the behavioural breaches.

How about these behavioural breaches.
1) The Gay player article that was printed was not the same as the one given to the club. Club asks Aker. Aker responds that the article was changed without his permission. Club then backs Aker to the point of his teammates allowing him to lead them out after winning their next game. Herald Sun called bullcrap on Aker. He then backpedals releasing a statement saying the article was changed with his permission making anyone who backed Aker, including his new best friend Sam Newman and the club look foolish and Aker look like a liar.

This incident alone elicited a punishment.

2) Aker then states in the media that he needed a break due to a hamstring injury that the match committee forced him to play with making the club look negligent.

3) After a weak arse performance in a huge Williamstown win and a 3 week media ban Aker made an inflammatory remark about a St Kilda rookie.

4)Aker discusses confidential club meetings with known media whores Sam Newman and Steve Price. This leads to a situation (which in my opinion was orchestrated by Aker to stir up public favour) where Adam Cooney ( who was apparently very unhappy) is grilled and totally blindsided by Newman.

That is just the stuff we definitely know about, and this is coupled with the fact that he continually would speculate in the media why he wasn't being played. How could you trust this guy.

Seriously he can't even get his story straight with Sam on whether he told him or Sam overheard him:rolleyes: and he insists he wasn't sacked at Brisbane when every single comment from a former or current Lion player is along the lines of "Its deja vu". How much more in the right can the club be. Hell Aker even wanted to show Rose texts from players who supported him, yeah he's trustworthy that Aker.

I loved him as a player and he seems nice enough and I even feel sorry for him a little but unfortunately he couldn't keep his mouth shut when he needed to and it has cost him not once but twice.

[BulldogBelle]

Also you must add the self promoting on radio. That he has done his time, that he has been down to Williamstown, Blah Blah Blah, don't know why I'm not getting picked,

This is terrible behaviour, it compromises the coach and selection committee and every other player who is trying to get a game. Aker could not see this.

I thought that Campbell Rose was good.

Obviously Aker asking for proof was a ploy. Obviously Rose could not and would not provide proof on the Footy Show. Obviously this would just escalate matters, that Rose didn't want to do. To me, therefore Aker's request for proof was just nonsense.

[chef]

I disagree, I think Rose handled it well, however, Aker should not have been allowed to be on Camera or question Rose at all.

I agree, under the circumstnces he handled the situation pretty good.


Don't know that he'd be capable of it...;)


Why, because he didn't want to argue with that idiot. Aker will never get it.
.

[firstdogonthemoon]

It was set up to be a bloodbath, a lose/lose PR disaster whatever happened because that is how TFS structured it. Sam feigning outrage.

I thought Rose was great. I also don't think it mattered what he said, he was going to get attacked before after or during and the scallops in the crowd were going to cheer like demented troglodytes whatever he said.

We sent the CEO of our club to do this unpleasant task, sparing the coach, football director and president from having to do the heavy lifting in a no win situation. It was the right thing to do.

After everything Aker still really didn't appear to get what the fuss was about so I can understand why he wasn't able to fix whatever he was presented with at any point. At some point you have to say to yourself, even though I don't think there is a problem, you 43 other people do so maybe I need to work on some of this stuff just because I'm in a team.

And Aker is now dumping on Johnno and whoever else he can find.

Sad.

[choconmientay]

I thought Rose was calm and and handled all the attacks quite well. He however missed an opportunity to expose Aker when he offered Rose to see the "text messages from team mates who supported him but couldn't stand up" .... Wasn't Aker going to breach the trust of those team mates who trusted him by offering this?!

[w3design]

Personally I'm not sure we needed to go on at all. It was never going to end well. Overall most of the footy media has supported us. The only group we were trying to win over by going on TFS are the same bogans who have booed Aker for years, and who now get whipped into a frenzy and whoop and holler their support for him because they are 'on the telly.'

I hadn't watched this show in years and could not believe how much it has degenerated, but is it really representative of most footy fans? Am I just being naive??

[LostDoggy]

I thought Rose was calm and and handled all the attacks quite well. He however missed an opportunity to expose Aker when he offered Rose to see the "text messages from team mates who supported him but couldn't stand up" .... Wasn't Aker going to breach the trust of those team mates who trusted him by offering this?!

What does "support" mean anyway? It could've been a simple message from a player that just said "Good Luck and all the best for the future".

[Dancin' Douggy]

I don't think we should have sent anyone.

Maybe some keystone cops with some big cream pies to throw around.
And funny horns and whistles.
Maybe a smoking Chimp on a tricycle with crazy wheels.

[Ozza]

I thought Jono Brown made more sense than anyone last night.

[Dancin' Douggy]

I thought Jono Brown made more sense than anyone last night.

I've mentioned this on another thread but It looked to me like J. Brown wanted to punch the living shit out of Aker.

[Twodogs]

The club did not have to publicly participate in Jason being hoisted on his own pittard.


Petard. It was an explosive that was attached to the door of a castle to blow it in. Medieval warfare is my passion. It'd take seriously big goolies to run up to the door of a castle with a live bomb while archers took potshots at you from point blank range. Anyway.


We couldnt just let Aker and Sam blow take potshots at the club with no reply at all. Rose was the correct choice because on three months no-one will remember that Rose was on TFS last night, what they will remember is Sam's Mea Culpa (great mate to have-"BTW mate, I betrayed your confidence on national TV and got you sacked. But dont worry it's everybody else's fault") and the differing and contradicting versions of events that Sa, and Aker offered up.

[Sedat]

Campbell Rose was the perfect choice to go on last night precisely because he is not a nuts & bolts football person and could therefore take the emotional irrationality out of the decision, which I thought he did with aplomb and a touch of class. It was also important for all our leaders of the club to go public and provide a united front, so last night was Campbell's turn to take the mic. This shows the football world that this decision was not made by Smorgon, or Rocket, or the players, or the CEO, or the Footy Ops Manager. It was made by the entire club.

I initially thought we should just ignore TFS' request to appear on the show last night but in hindsight that would have been the soft option and would have given Aker/Sam full license and a free hit. As it turned out, they got some cheap points with their rent-a-crowd of "bogans and no-shows" but the 3 things that untimately stood out were 1) "at least I'll be remembered", 2) "now piss off" and 3) the not insignificant point that Aker leaked the information out directly to Sam, thereby confirming that Sam's poorly coroborated story last week was a stage-managed and concocted lie designed to save Aker's arse. All these 3 elements point to a person that is self-involved, self-absorbed, and has absolutely no concept of the team dynamic (as has been proven twice in 4 years by 2 separate and disparate football organisations).

Of course Campbell could not go into specifics about exactly what transpired to come to the decision to sack Akermanis (which of course disappointed the crowd baying for tidbits of juicy tabloid gossip), but that was a shallow and short-term victory for Akermanis if ever there was one. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I thought last night went as well as can be expected - was great to see Aker take ther bait and foam off at the mouth again this morning, further eroding his dwingling credibility.

[Bulldog4life]

Campbell Rose was the perfect choice to go on last night precisely because he is not a nuts & bolts football person and could therefore take the emotional irrationality out of the decision, which I thought he did with aplomb and a touch of class. It was also important for all our leaders of the club to go public and provide a united front, so last night was Campbell's turn to take the mic. This shows the football world that this decision was not made by Smorgon, or Rocket, or the players, or the CEO, or the Footy Ops Manager. It was made by the entire club.

I initially thought we should just ignore TFS' request to appear on the show last night but in hindsight that would have been the soft option and would have given Aker/Sam full license and a free hit. As it turned out, they got some cheap points with their rent-a-crowd of "bogans and no-shows" but the 3 things that untimately stood out were 1) "at least I'll be remembered", 2) "now piss off" and 3) the not insignificant point that Aker leaked the information out directly to Sam, thereby confirming that Sam's poorly coroborated story last week was a stage-managed and concocted lie designed to save Aker's arse. All these 3 elements point to a person that is self-involved, self-absorbed, and has absolutely no concept of the team dynamic (as has been proven twice in 4 years by 2 separate and disparate football organisations).

Of course Campbell could not go into specifics about exactly what transpired to come to the decision to sack Akermanis (which of course disappointed the crowd baying for tidbits of juicy tabloid gossip), but that was a shallow and short-term victory for Akermanis if ever there was one. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I thought last night went as well as can be expected - was great to see Aker take ther bait and foam off at the mouth again this morning, further eroding his dwingling credibility.

Great Post. Agree 100% with you Sedat.

[BulldogBelle]

I also thought the Campbell Rose did very well.

To win the argument he had to maintain the Bulldogs line, prevent any new data from entering the fracas, not further denigrate Aker and make Aker feel as though he had a win.

I thought that Rose did this well.

Congratulations to the Bulldogs for being Pro-active in this one. I was dreading another disaster like that which befell Brisbane before Aker finally left them. The disruptions seemed to go on for months.

Learn from History, its very important.

[Curly5]

I loved him as a player and he seems nice enough and I even feel sorry for him a little but unfortunately he couldn't keep his mouth shut when he needed to and it has cost him not once but twice.

That's how I feel now that the dust is settling.


Also you must add the self promoting on radio. That he has done his time, that he has been down to Williamstown, Blah Blah Blah, don't know why I'm not getting picked,

This is terrible behaviour, it compromises the coach and selection committee and every other player who is trying to get a game. Aker could not see this.

I thought that Campbell Rose was good.

Obviously Aker asking for proof was a ploy. Obviously Rose could not and would not provide proof on the Footy Show. Obviously this would just escalate matters, that Rose didn't want to do. To me, therefore Aker's request for proof was just nonsense.


On Jason asking for proof and expressing how "shocked" he was, Smorgon has said Aker only needs to read through his file of correspondence over the past 2 years. It should have come as no shock whatsoever.



It was set up to be a bloodbath, a lose/lose PR disaster whatever happened because that is how TFS structured it. Sam feigning outrage.

I thought Rose was great. I also don't think it mattered what he said, he was going to get attacked before after or during and the scallops in the crowd were going to cheer like demented troglodytes whatever he said.

We sent the CEO of our club to do this unpleasant task, sparing the coach, football director and president from having to do the heavy lifting in a no win situation. It was the right thing to do.

After everything Aker still really didn't appear to get what the fuss was about so I can understand why he wasn't able to fix whatever he was presented with at any point. At some point you have to say to yourself, even though I don't think there is a problem, you 43 other people do so maybe I need to work on some of this stuff just because I'm in a team.

And Aker is now dumping on Johnno and whoever else he can find.

Sad.

There's something very 21st century about the thrall the media has us in. We daren't make a move, utter a word, go out without our best face and clothes on, make a decision or have an opinion, in fear of the Media. When summoned we can't refuse but front up to be analysed, mocked, adored, disbelieved, abused, judged, slaughtered or worshipped. All by masses of the faceless, the uninformed, the wilfully ignorant, the disaffected or those just having a bad day. Welcome back to the Colosseum.


Great Post. Agree 100% with you Sedat.

Me three.

[Cyberdoggie]

Agree completely. Yes, Rose was set up but he's a professional and he kept his cool and his dignity. According to Aker, he (Aker) never did nuffin', he was a team man, he was loyal and it all came as a shock... yeah, right. Pure narcissism, the second time around, too.

Enough of this nonsense.

Aker just shot himself in the foot by saying it was emabarrasing that they made "HIM" sit in front of the group "3 times".

At what point would anyone else register that there might be a problem with their behaviour?, after the first one?, the second? not even the third time did it seem to register with Aker that there was a problem. I tell you what if everyone in my work place did that to me i would be very concerned about things, but Aker just shrugged it off like it was a joke and that it was beneath him.

The other point was that he thinks trust is only earned on the footy field. What the!
So potentially you can treat everyone around you like dogs and expect them to trust you on the field?

Then there was the comment about leaking confidential and secret information. Jason's response was i didn't leak anything, i just told my mates (Steve Price and Sam Newman).
Hello......what part of confidential does he not understand?


I really feel sorry for him that it ended this way.

[LostDoggy]

I have a question to everyone:

Do you think that Jose Mourinho would have appeared on a TV show to explain why he sacked Adriano from Inter Milan last year? Did anyone from the club? Did Sir Alex or the Man U CEO appear on TV to explain selling David Beckham?

The saddest thing out of all this for me is that the Western Bulldogs brand has been made to look so small. Brand Aker is almost as big as a club's, at least at this point in time. The Dogs have made their move to make themselves look like a big club. If non-Dogs fan reactions are anything to go by, this certainly hasn't happened (we're not exactly objective here). A big club would have shut Aker up, paid him off, got him to sign a confidentiality agreement, trotted out some line about him being injured, knocked it on the head, brought the captain on to talk about the game on the weekend, moved on. Instead this circus has been going on for weeks, and if his book comes out, will go on for another few months. We may have made our point, but we've lost our dignity in the process, I fear.

[The Coon Dog]

I have a question to everyone:

Do you think that Jose Mourinho would have appeared on a TV show to explain why he sacked Adriano from Inter Milan last year? Did anyone from the club? Did Sir Alex or the Man U CEO appear on TV to explain selling David Beckham?

That's 3 questions Lantern! ;)

[comrade]

That's 3 questions Lantern! ;)

Why use a few words, when you could use many :D

Lantern makes a good point. Our administration should have killed it.

[ledge]

Tend to disagree Lantern , I think Aker damaged himself bigtime last night, lies and just the whole its all about me and the piss off after shaking a mans hand wont sit with many, the thoughts of supporters will turn towards us more than him.
Rose did the official and proffessional way, not divulging all the indiscretions, 1 because it was probably a few 2 because thats sounds like 2 kids and 3 it gets you nowhere.
The more Aker whinges the more people will say get over it.
I must point out how he put such big dollars on himself, poor me i couldnt survive on 100,000-200,000 a year!
Thy also paid him out, so the next 6 weeks he is on money for nothing. He got his wage and all he was going to get because it was his last year of contract anyway.
Even though the club admitted he was sacked and apparently had legal advice they could sack him, thus not have to pay him out.
He was offered to take the retirement policy too so it didnt look bad and stopped this stuff happening, but noooo its all about Aker and he doesnt care who he steps on to get what he wants!
The public will wake up to it as I think a few of the media did last night.

[LostDoggy]

I have a question to everyone:

Do you think that Jose Mourinho would have appeared on a TV show to explain why he sacked Adriano from Inter Milan last year? Did anyone from the club? Did Sir Alex or the Man U CEO appear on TV to explain selling David Beckham?

The saddest thing out of all this for me is that the Western Bulldogs brand has been made to look so small. Brand Aker is almost as big as a club's, at least at this point in time. The Dogs have made their move to make themselves look like a big club. If non-Dogs fan reactions are anything to go by, this certainly hasn't happened (we're not exactly objective here). A big club would have shut Aker up, paid him off, got him to sign a confidentiality agreement, trotted out some line about him being injured, knocked it on the head, brought the captain on to talk about the game on the weekend, moved on. Instead this circus has been going on for weeks, and if his book comes out, will go on for another few months. We may have made our point, but we've lost our dignity in the process, I fear.

I think a lot of this is fair enough lantern except David Beckham is not a human hand grenade waiting to explode and take everyone else down with him like Akermanis is.

This is a gigantic mess no doubt but we are dealing with an absolute nutter here and im sure Aker would have found a way to go out with a gigantic bang no matter how we handled it or what we got him to sign.

[OLD SCRAGGer]

Mate, you're as passionate as they come and it's great, but you've bought into Aker's victim act hook, line and sinker.

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.

The fact that Aker is trumpeting that he had no idea it was coming, and he wants proof says more about his almost narcissistic ability to deny anything is his fault and the constant blaming of everyone else for his woes. He even suggested he wasn't sacked from Brisbane!

Aker is a media personality and has the means to voice his side of the story - one that benefits him and him only. Don't forget there are two sides to every story.

FINALLY some common sense !!!

[choconmientay]

I don't think we should have sent anyone.




A no show could also be seen as weakness. As a club with growing membership we have to be strong and be on top of these issues.


Campbell Rose was the perfect choice to go on last night precisely because he is not a nuts & bolts football person and could therefore take the emotional irrationality out of the decision, which I thought he did with aplomb and a touch of class. It was also important for all our leaders of the club to go public and provide a united front, so last night was Campbell's turn to take the mic. This shows the football world that this decision was not made by Smorgon, or Rocket, or the players, or the CEO, or the Footy Ops Manager. It was made by the entire club.



Fully agree with your view.

Also, I thought Aker was quite bitter and that can be read by everyone. Gary Lyon (to my surprise) was asking Aker some tough questions and did put thing in perspective.

[Murphy'sLore]

Question for Lantern: do you think Aker would have agreed to sign a confidentiality agreement? Or if he had signed, that he would have managed to adhere to it?

[LostDoggy]

Question for Lantern: do you think Aker would have agreed to sign a confidentiality agreement? Or if he had signed, that he would have managed to adhere to it?

Promise, last thing I'll say about the sorry affair:

If he signs one and doesn't keep his mouth shut, throw the book at him. There are legal channels. If we can't hold the nut to a confidentiality agreement, then we should have come out openly and said this is a business decision. Simple, professional, no need for all this lovey-dovey hypocritical trust crap.

I don't really care if Aker is right or wrong, or even about Aker himself very much, I just think we've damaged our club and our brand the way we've gone about it. Perception is everything, and the way it has been communicated and reported, it does seem like an underhanded, knee-jerk, petty, precious decision, which probably has some truth to it.

And as for those supporters (not you, ML) who can't seem to differentiate between supporting the club and blindly swallowing everything the administration of the club sells you, be very aware that mature supporters and clubs can handle violent disagreement without being called disloyal. In fact, those of us who care are those of us who say something -- are the Manchester United supporters who are criticising the board for the corporate takeover of their club disloyal? George W. Bush wanted everyone to think that criticising him as president was being disloyal to America. What rubbish. What are we, wingnuts?

[Sedat]

I don't really care if Aker is right or wrong, or even about Aker himself very much, I just think we've damaged our club and our brand the way we've gone about it. Perception is everything, and the way it has been communicated and reported, it does seem like an underhanded, knee-jerk, petty, precious decision, which probably has some truth to it.
The wound is fresh and the issue is still on high rotation. Let's revisit this in a couple of weeks' time to see how the general public responds to incoherent rant after incoherent rant from Akermanis and his low-rating propaganda machine without any comments from the club to fan the flames and give this issue oxygen.

As an aside, isn't it incredibly amusing to see the "close bond" between Aker and Price blossoming before our eyes - Price is playing Aker like a 2nd hand fiddle to raise the profile of his low-rent and irrelevent network. When his morning shift moves from 1.1 to 1.2 in the next couple of ratings surveys and still sits behind the Bulgarian News Bulletin on SBS Radio, he will quickly tire of his special new bestest friend in the whole wide world :rolleyes:

[LostDoggy]

Campbell Rose was the perfect choice to go on last night precisely because he is not a nuts & bolts football person and could therefore take the emotional irrationality out of the decision, which I thought he did with aplomb and a touch of class. It was also important for all our leaders of the club to go public and provide a united front, so last night was Campbell's turn to take the mic. This shows the football world that this decision was not made by Smorgon, or Rocket, or the players, or the CEO, or the Footy Ops Manager. It was made by the entire club.

I initially thought we should just ignore TFS' request to appear on the show last night but in hindsight that would have been the soft option and would have given Aker/Sam full license and a free hit. As it turned out, they got some cheap points with their rent-a-crowd of "bogans and no-shows" but the 3 things that untimately stood out were 1) "at least I'll be remembered", 2) "now piss off" and 3) the not insignificant point that Aker leaked the information out directly to Sam, thereby confirming that Sam's poorly coroborated story last week was a stage-managed and concocted lie designed to save Aker's arse. All these 3 elements point to a person that is self-involved, self-absorbed, and has absolutely no concept of the team dynamic (as has been proven twice in 4 years by 2 separate and disparate football organisations).

Of course Campbell could not go into specifics about exactly what transpired to come to the decision to sack Akermanis (which of course disappointed the crowd baying for tidbits of juicy tabloid gossip), but that was a shallow and short-term victory for Akermanis if ever there was one. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I thought last night went as well as can be expected - was great to see Aker take ther bait and foam off at the mouth again this morning, further eroding his dwingling credibility.

Cant agree at all with this Sedat.

The club delivered a press conference and it should of ended there. Everything said at the press conference was parroted by Campbell on TFS. This why we have press conferences, they are controlled environments where we have our say and we call the shots. What happened last night was a disgrace and the footy show should be held in contempt, but it's our own fault.

So Aker takes a few cheap shots, he going to take many more in the coming days. The club does not have to continue in the slanging match which only creates more distraction and questions.

The club needed to stay right away last night and let those two bozo's tie the noose around their own necks

[Sedat]

Cant agree at all with this Sedat.

The club delivered a press conference and it should of ended there. Everything said at the press conference was parroted by Campbell on TFS. This why we have press conferences, they are controlled environments where we have our say and we call the shots. What happened last night was a disgrace and the footy show should be held in contempt, but it's our own fault.

So Aker takes a few cheap shots, he going to take many more in the coming days. The club does not have to continue in the slanging match which only creates more distraction and questions.

The club needed to stay right away last night and let those two bozo's tie the noose around their own necks
TAMA, I was also initially of the opinion we should not have gone on TFS, but then we would have appeared weak by doing so, not to mention give Akermanis and Newman a clear path to set their obvious agenda on what was going to be a high rating show. A few cheap thrills for their rent-a-crowd does not maketh a PR victory: the vast majority of clear-headed football and media personnel have been universal in their commendation of the decision by the Dogs to cut Akermanis loose, and of Rose's measured and impassive performance in what was a very hot kitchen last night.

Having made the decision to front up last night, and being an employer who has sacked a disgruntled and vocal employee, Rose could never go into any specific details for the public domain last night. He was on a hiding to nothing with the tools and the environment he had at his disposal but he never lost composure, never stooped to the denigratory levels of Akermanis or Newman, and he remained resolute to the club message throughout. Rest assured, the proper protocols were observed by the club in relation to all contractual matters, and Akermanis was given more opportunities than he could reasonably be expected to receive with which to redress his behavioural problems with his employer. Sadly, he took the soft option and paid the price accordingly. Make no mistake it took balls to front TFS last night when the safe option would have been not to front up, and it took balls to sack him when the safe option was to let him rot at Williamstown for the rest of the season. I am genuinely proud of the club for making a very difficult and not at all populist decision for the betterment of the club.

The nuffies on BF, MTR and SEN, who combined would make up 2/5ths of stuff-all population, can talk all they like about the death of personality and other such tripe. Judging the winner of the PR battle against such a small and heavily skewed subset of the population is to give Akermanis far too much credit than he deserves. And on a good day, Steve Price would attract a daily audience of 3 men and a dog. Aker's rants will grow tiresome with each passing day, and there will be less and less media people reporting on the issue. The book release will heighten interest again for a short period when it comes out but then it's all over red rover after that. Football clubs last multiple lifetimes, players come and go every year. Aker is little more than just another ex player today, and one that has decided to shit on our monument as he walked out the door.

Where I am in complete agreeance with yourself, Lantern and TBB is that the playing group, in particular the leadership group, have to display absolute top shelf leadership out on the field of battle from this moment forward. There is simply nowhere to hide for them. They will rightly be scrutinised like never before, and for better or worse they will be stringently judged by the on-field results between now and the rest of the season, and their collective performances in the heat of the kitchen come September. That can only be a good thing for the supporters and the club, for we will either (finally) rise to the challenge or we will know specifically who cannot take us further.

[Remi Moses]

Mate, you're as passionate as they come and it's great, but you've bought into Aker's victim act hook, line and sinker.

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.

The fact that Aker is trumpeting that he had no idea it was coming, and he wants proof says more about his almost narcissistic ability to deny anything is his fault and the constant blaming of everyone else for his woes. He even suggested he wasn't sacked from Brisbane!

Aker is a media personality and has the means to voice his side of the story - one that benefits him and him only. Don't forget there are two sides to every story.

Didn't see the show but I agree with the notion of the "victim" mentality that this self absorbed person.Akermanis and his "piss off" line just showed what a classless individual he really is

[comrade]

Interesting that a book that Aker claimed was merely 'notes' is now being pushed for publication prior to finals, with the ghost writer publicly stating it will be brutally honest regarding his former teammates. Wasn't brutal honesty a concept that Aker was indignant about and claimed was tantamount to workplace bullying?

Complete and utter narcissist.

[Mantis]

Interesting that a book that Aker claimed was merely 'notes' is now being pushed for publication prior to finals, with the ghost writer publicly stating it will be brutally honest regarding his former teammates. Wasn't brutal honesty a concept that Aker was indignant about and claimed was tantamount to workplace bullying?



It's much easier to hind behind words than to look someone in the eyes to deliver a message. ( Much like I'm doing - Oh the irony ;) )

On the first point I guess the publisher must strike while the iron is hot because once the footy season is done Aker will be just another washed up footballer looking to make a $$, but with nothing but a loud mouth and an over enhanced opinion of himself to fall back on.

[The Pie Man]

It's much easier to hind behind words than to look someone in the eyes to deliver a message. ( Much like I'm doing - Oh the irony ;) )

On the first point I guess the publisher must strike while the iron is hot because once the footy season is done Aker will be just another washed up footballer looking to make a $$, but with nothing but a loud mouth and an over enhanced opinion of himself to fall back on.

So true - his currency drops significantly following the close of this season.

[Before I Die]

And as for those supporters (not you, ML) who can't seem to differentiate between supporting the club and blindly swallowing everything the administration of the club sells you, be very aware that mature supporters and clubs can handle violent disagreement without being called disloyal. In fact, those of us who care are those of us who say something

Why do people feel the need to denigrate the opinion of others when giving their own opinions?

[LostDoggy]

My personal view is that the club came out of last night's TFS looking really bad. Campbell Rose may be a good administrator, but, to me, he came across about as convincing as Kevin Rudd or Julia Gillard giving their spin. All spin, just like the press conference.

Aker hurt himself with his P-off comment, but prior to that I thought he held himself quite well - put yourself in his shoes, if you'd been publicly sacked, had the world told you couldn't be trusted, etc, how would you feel? What would you say?

I also agreed with a lot of what Sam Newman said.

Just my two cents worth - I wish Aker the best for the future, am sorry I won't get to see him play for us again, and disappointed that he won't get a send off. The club will move on, hopefully the players stop the sulks, give their egos the punt, and start playing as a team till the GF.

[LostDoggy]

Mate, you're as passionate as they come and it's great, but you've bought into Aker's victim act hook, line and sinker.

Rose is a professional and wasn't going to get drawn into a tit for tat verbal stoush on live TV, outlining Aker's every indiscretion.

The fact that Aker is trumpeting that he had no idea it was coming, and he wants proof says more about his almost narcissistic ability to deny anything is his fault and the constant blaming of everyone else for his woes. He even suggested he wasn't sacked from Brisbane!

Aker is a media personality and has the means to voice his side of the story - one that benefits him and him only. Don't forget there are two sides to every story.

Spot on I cound not have said it better myself

Thank god there is some one with a brain in this place

[LostDoggy]

I was waiting for Cam Rose to ask Sam about my teeth. Disappointed. As there are updates! ;)

[LostDoggy]

Spot on I cound not have said it better myself

Thank god there is some one with a brain in this place

C'mon c'mon, let's debate this without getting personal with each other. We can't and won't always agree with everything, some will side with Aker, some against him. Both sides are passionate supporters with brains - end of story.

[Chicago1]

I just watched the segment on the WWOS site. I thought Campbell Rose came off as professional and logical. He did not speak emotionally, but direct and rather detached, something needed by the club at this stage. He also appeared far more empathetic than I thought he would be. I was glad he didn't get into a tit-for-tat argument like Sam surely was hoping for. (Sorry, but Sam is one of the biggest asses I've ever seen on Australian TV.)

Someone from the club had to appear on TFS, I believe, otherwise the club would have come off as too scared to be confronted in a "neutral" setting. I think Campbell did a fine job on our behalf.

I also watched the segment where Gary Lyon interviewed Aker. I have to admit that I think Gary did a good job. Aker came across as playing the victim to me. He's not a very convincing actor, but much better than many on "Home and Away". :p

[LostDoggy]

We over this all yet? Last night was bad but its out of the way now, people keep coming out to bat for us in the media, and all will be forgotten in days/maybe 2 weeks max. Rose wasnt the right choice or maybe he was... he delivered without passion and from an organisational standpoint. Smorgon has too much heart and Bazza doesnt deserve the crap. Fantasia may have done better but lets get perspective, its nearly over. The only thing left is the 'book', how credible will it look to be the persecuted man at two clubs having shots at Lions and dogs players on the way out? The finals will galvanise the players or WTF are they playing for?
Aker was great for us, one of the best players ever but its over now, come finals he will be little more than a whisper to us. Rohan Smith will be a bulldog legend for ever.

[Stefcep]

My personal view is that the club came out of last night's TFS looking really bad. Campbell Rose may be a good administrator, but, to me, he came across about as convincing as Kevin Rudd or Julia Gillard giving their spin. All spin, just like the press conference.

Aker hurt himself with his P-off comment, but prior to that I thought he held himself quite well - put yourself in his shoes, if you'd been publicly sacked, had the world told you couldn't be trusted, etc, how would you feel? What would you say?

I also agreed with a lot of what Sam Newman said.

Just my two cents worth - I wish Aker the best for the future, am sorry I won't get to see him play for us again, and disappointed that he won't get a send off. The club will move on, hopefully the players stop the sulks, give their egos the punt, and start playing as a team till the GF.

i agree with most of this except that bit about telling Rose to "piss off". IMO it enhanced Akers position. How many people do you know -or even yourself- who wish to be able to tell their A-hole of a boss in a suit to "piss off"? Its Australian as vegemite. 99% of the public would have love Aker "sticking it to the man".

[comrade]

i agree with most of this except that bit about telling Rose to "piss off". IMO it enhanced Akers position. How many people do you know -or even yourself- who wish to be able to tell their A-hole of a boss in a suit to "piss off"? Its Australian as vegemite. 99% of the public would have love Aker "sticking it to the man".

99% of the bogan Footy Show viewing public. Big deal.

[LostDoggy]

Don't seem to have missed anything by having an early night and forgoing watching TFS last night, though admittedly haven't watched it for quite a few years!!! Still a passionate Bulldogs supporter though. Sad that Aker is so egocentric that he can't see that HE was/is the problem. Think Campbell was probably a wonderful choice to go on that show last night.

[Mantis]

i agree with most of this except that bit about telling Rose to "piss off". IMO it enhanced Akers position. How many people do you know -or even yourself- who wish to be able to tell their A-hole of a boss in a suit to "piss off"? Its Australian as vegemite. 99% of the public would have love Aker "sticking it to the man".


With the 'piss off' line Aker lost the respect of people who carry themselves with a little bit of class & honour. To show class through the process would have enhanced his claims of being hard done by, but he carried on like a selfish prick and it became much clearer thru the interview to why he was given the lemonade and sars in the first place.

[mighty_west]

With the 'piss off' line Aker lost the respect of people who carry themselves with a little bit of class & honour. To show class through the process would have enhanced his claims of being hard done by, but he carried on like a selfish prick and it became much clearer thru the interview to why he was given the lemonade and sars in the first place.

Exactly.

Campbell Rose = class
Jason Akermanis = twat

[Doc26]

i agree with most of this except that bit about telling Rose to "piss off". IMO it enhanced Akers position. How many people do you know -or even yourself- who wish to be able to tell their A-hole of a boss in a suit to "piss off"? Its Australian as vegemite. 99% of the public would have love Aker "sticking it to the man".

Certainly didn't enhance his position in my demographic, to the contrary in fact, although I don't doubt for a moment that many will be drawn in by Aker playing the role of victim rather than that of agitator.

His parting cheap shot to Cam just helped to validate / legitimise the course the hierarchy took in disposing of this angry self obsessed man.

If anyone needed any proof of how divisive this bloke and his actions can be just look / read how he has managed to divide our supporter base.

[Twodogs]

What happened last night was a disgrace and the footy show should be held in contempt, but it's our own fault.

I think you're being a bit unfiar on TFS bud. I was expecting them to be pulling each other dicks and a mutual appreciation society with the whole panel pushing Aker from the off to totally bag out the club, name names and generally provoke as much moral outrage as they could.

Against my expectations it was an even handed and fair exploration of the events with both sides getting plenty of time to pout their sides of the story. This was never going to end in a win for us-at worst we we were going to look like the Grinch who stole christmas and the best result we could hope for on the night was a nil all draw which is what we got.

[Stefcep]

I think you're being a bit unfiar on TFS. I was expecting them to be pulling each other dicks and a mutual appreciation society with the whole panel pushing Aker from the off to totally bag iout the club, name names and generally provoke as much moral outrage a shttey could




The club needed to stay right away last night and let those two bozo's tie the noose around their own necks

THIS. The club issued a statement. End of.

But once the decision was made to go on TFS, why did we choose Rose, who's role at the club wouldn't have had much to do with the sacking anyway. IMO it appeared as if we'd sent another corporate "suit" to spin our way out of it.

[choconmientay]

THIS. The club issued a statement. End of.

But once the decision was made to go on TFS, why did we choose Rose, who's role at the club wouldn't have had much to do with the sacking anyway. IMO it appeared as if we'd sent another corporate "suit" to spin our way out of it.

For me, you don't fight fire with fire so bringing in someone really calm like Rose would have taken out all the stinging attack from Aker and Sam and TFS crew which we clearly achieved.

[LostDoggy]

WOW great backhand to Aker from the boys on CH.7

[G-Mo77]

WOW great backhand to Aker from the boys on CH.7

Yep, really enjoyed that.

[chef]

Certainly didn't enhance his position in my demographic, to the contrary in fact, although I don't doubt for a moment that many will be drawn in by Aker playing the role of victim rather than that of agitator.

His parting cheap shot to Cam just helped to validate / legitimise the course the hierarchy took in disposing of this angry self obsessed man.

If anyone needed any proof of how divisive this bloke and his actions can be just look / read how he has managed to divide our supporter base.

Agree totally, good post Doc26.

[LostDoggy]

WOW great backhand to Aker from the boys on CH.7

Yep, was great.

I think we are doing things pretty well actually, everybody is keeping along the same lines. Trust, trust, trust and in the process not allowing it to be pinpointed at one thing, something Aker doesn't seem to be able to contemplate.

[G-Mo77]

Yep, was great.

I think we are doing things pretty well actually, everybody is keeping along the same lines. Trust, trust, trust and in the process not allowing it to be pinpointed at one thing, something Aker doesn't seem to be able to contemplate.

Unfortunatly some of own supporters can't either.

[LostDoggy]

Yep, was great.

I think we are doing things pretty well actually, everybody is keeping along the same lines. Trust, trust, trust and in the process not allowing it to be pinpointed at one thing, something Aker doesn't seem to be able to contemplate.

Yep and come sunday night it will be all over. ;)

[Twodogs]

But once the decision was made to go on TFS, why did we choose Rose, who's role at the club wouldn't have had much to do with the sacking anyway. IMO it appeared as if we'd sent another corporate "suit" to spin our way out of it.

Like someone said earlier I think it was important that all the senior members of the club took their turn to demonstrate that the entire club are singing from the same page in the songbook. Smorgo, Johnno, Fantasia and Rocket had all stepped up to the plate and it was Rose's turn last night.

An alternative cynical view would be that Rose wasnt around the club on wednesday. That way he could honestly deny having intimate knowledge of what happened at the meeting in order to avoid any tricky questions.

[chef]

Unfortunatly some of own supporters can't either.

Yep, I can't believe some of our supporters would rather side with an individual(who's clearly in the wrong) over the club.

[G-Mo77]

Yep, I can't believe some of our supporters would rather side with an individual(who's clearly in the wrong) over the club.

And not just our club either another club sacked him for the exact same reason.

[Twodogs]

Just a question for those that think Aker is being harshly teated.


How do you feel about his admission that he did actually disclose the information purporsely to Newman which Newman that used to ambush Adam Cooney on national TV with? Especially when he and Newman first claimed that Newman had overheard it and used it without Aker's knowledge?


I'm genuinly interested in your honest opinions. I'm not asking my question to provoke a negative response or to make a point.

Personally I think it shows exactly the sort of disregard for teammates and lack of team ethos Aker is being accused of.

[Doc26]

Like someone said earlier I think it was important that all the senior members of the club took their turn to demonstrate that the entire club are singing from the same page in the songbook. Smorgo, Johnno, Fantasia and Rocket had all stepped up to the plate and it was Rose's turn last night.

An alternative cynical view would be that Rose wasnt around the club on wednesday. That way he could honestly deny having intimate knowledge of what happened at the meeting in order to avoid any tricky questions.

TwoDogs, this is possibly an alternative view but rather than it being seen as cynical I'd prefer it viewed as a smart and considered move by the Club that avoided a tit for tat on specifics, that enabled the focus to be centered on Jason's history of poor behaviour and the Club's effort to remedy this over time. Cam representing the Club on TFS totally starved Jason and Sam of the oxygen they were seeking with only frustration apparent.

Those that believe the Bulldog brand has been damaged through this exercise will fortunately be proven wrong. The Bulldog stocks have risen as a result of backing the Team rather than, as Lethal once claimed of Aker, a 'consultant'.

[LostDoggy]

Like someone said earlier I think it was important that all the senior members of the club took their turn to demonstrate that the entire club are singing from the same page in the songbook. Smorgo, Johnno, Fantasia and Rocket had all stepped up to the plate and it was Rose's turn last night.

An alternative cynical view would be that Rose wasnt around the club on wednesday. That way he could honestly deny having intimate knowledge of what happened at the meeting in order to avoid any tricky questions.

Sitting back now thinking about the whole situation, i agree with this. Last night i wasn't happy with what had happened, but i think you may have hit the nail on the head.

[GVGjr]

Just a question for those that think Aker is being harshly teated.


How do you feel about his admission that he did actually disclose the information purporsely to Newman which Newman that used to ambush Adam Cooney on national TV with? Especially when he and Newman first claimed that Newman had overheard it and used it without Aker's knowledge?


I'm genuinly interested in your honest opinions. I'm not asking my question to provoke a negative response or to make a point.

Personally I think it shows exactly the sort of disregard for teammates and lack of team ethos Aker is being accused of.

Not sure that he was harshly treated but I think the club did get some things wrong.
Regarding the issue of Newman having a crack at Cooney with info being supplied by Aker (either directly or indirectly) I certainly don't think it's a good thing but I wouldn't take some of the comments over the last few days as gospel that he deliberately loaded the gun for Newman.
There is no evidence to take that as a granted.

We know that sensitive information gets shared from time to time and Newman just broke that trust. Others choose not to.

If I wanted to knit-pick, I thought some of the comments from Smorgon on the radio (not the prepared statement) about the 'number of serious breaches' that Akermanis apparently did, showed a lack of strong management.
Exactly how many serious breaches is too many? I would have thought no more than 2 or 3.

Now I guess when DS said a number of serious breaches it was more a culmination of a lot of things with some serious and some not so but it just shows that you can't get too deep into the issues without seeing some flaws for both sides description of events.

As for Akermanis being an individual rather than a team guy, didn't we know this from day one when we signed him and had it confirmed all the way through until we re-signed him?

The club and other people in the media keep saying that Akermanis should have seen this coming but I'd argue that the club should have also seen this coming. It's no good saying that over 18 months he racked up a number of misdemeanors when we resigned him 8 months ago. We got him cheap and we have now paid a price for it.

[AndrewP6]

Why use a few words, when you could use many :D

Lantern makes a good point. Our administration should have killed it.

Why use a big word when a diminutive one will do? :)

[The Coon Dog]

the best result we could hope for on the night was a nil all draw which is what we got.

Spoken like a true Arsenal supporter! ;)

[Jasper]

Interesting discussion.

On reflection, agree that Rose handled things as best he could.

I don't think he or the club should have gone face to face with Aker, the price for appearing weak (which I don't accept) was small compared to the indignity the club went through in effectively having a performance discussion on national tv with one of the least self aware individuals I have seen (and having managed people, these people are almost impossible to counsel and the discussion is never pretty). It was never going to end well, the club was never going to get into specifics (nor should it), so what really did it add to send Rose in to face him?

Brad Johnson's calm and measured approach throughout has been impressive. The support offered by pretty much all the game's leading lights is also satisfying. I don't question the decision, I do question the appearance on the footy show and how it was managed, I hope they have learnt from it. And that is don't get in the same room as Aker with a microphone for a long time.

Anyway time to move on...although don't think for a minute that this will be over once/if we win Sunday. Aker has kept a lot of powder dry and the bombs will conintue to go off throughout the rest of the season and in the lead up to his book release, no doubt just prior to finals.

And finally something relevant from Shakespeare (I think) - "The empty vessel makes the loudest sound"

[AndrewP6]

Just a question for those that think Aker is being harshly teated.


How do you feel about his admission that he did actually disclose the information purporsely to Newman which Newman that used to ambush Adam Cooney on national TV with? Especially when he and Newman first claimed that Newman had overheard it and used it without Aker's knowledge?

I think it was dumb. Stupid. Ill-conceived. And other assorted synonyms for dumb!:) I also think too much was made of it. And I think too much has been made of Coon's 'ambush'. I didn't think that was that big of a deal.

[AndrewP6]

How many people do you know -or even yourself- who wish to be able to tell their A-hole of a boss in a suit to "piss off"?

Having been 'let go' before (albeit in significantly different circumstances!) I've very much been in that position, and understood the reaction completely.

[AndrewP6]

Not sure that he was harshly treated but I think the club did get some things wrong.
Regarding the issue of Newman having a crack at Cooney with info being supplied by Aker (either directly or indirectly) I certainly don't think it's a good thing but I wouldn't take some of the comments over the last few days as gospel that he deliberately loaded the gun for Newman.
There is no evidence to take that as a granted.
Good point.


If I wanted to knit-pick, I thought some of the comments from Smorgon on the radio (not the prepared statement) about the 'number of serious breaches' that Akermanis apparently did, showed a lack of strong management.
Exactly how many serious breaches is too many? I would have thought no more than 2 or 3.

Excellent point.


As for Akermanis being an individual rather than a team guy, didn't we know this from day one when we signed him and had it confirmed all the way through until we re-signed him?

The club and other people in the media keep saying that Akermanis should have seen this coming but I'd argue that the club should have also seen this coming. It's no good saying that over 18 months he racked up a number of misdemeanors when we resigned him 8 months ago. We got him cheap and we have now paid a price for it.

Another excellent point. OK, I'm sounding too teacher-like. Must stop now! (Shame there's no "Slap myself in the face" emoticon! :) )

[AndrewP6]

Yep, I can't believe some of our supporters would rather side with an individual(who's clearly in the wrong) over the club.

I'd be slightly happier if the club were to put their hand up and say something like "We've made some poor management decisions in recent times. We let this go on far too long without acting on it, and it blew up in our faces."

[immortalmike]

To all those who have said Smorgon should have been the one to front up instead of Rose. I think that would have been the worst possible scenario as (and let me state I love Smorgo he's been awesome,with the possible exception of the name change:(, for our club) he does not have a great track record regarding commenting on player rifts and contoversies within our club. I think in his fierce love and loyalty to the club he often gets a little petty and combative and can sometimes have a bit of foot in mouth disease. Maybe its just me but I remember all too well the issues with Dougie, Dimma and Libba. The other side of this is that David has a great capacity for forgiveness and buries the hatchet quite willingly and with great class.

I think by having someone as non-combative and removed from the situation as Campbell Rose the club avoided getting into a messy fight live on television. I was however quite angry that they allowed Aker to stay out there during Rose's segment it looked to me like an ambush.

[chef]

I'd be slightly happier if the club were to put their hand up and say something like "We've made some poor management decisions in recent times. We let this go on far too long without acting on it, and it blew up in our faces."

I would too, maybe the club was holding out hoping that Aker would pull his head in and focus on football. But he wouldn't and this needed to be done(no matter how messy it's going to get).

[Ghost Dog]

I'd be slightly happier if the club were to put their hand up and say something like "We've made some poor management decisions in recent times. We let this go on far too long without acting on it, and it blew up in our faces."

Andrew I totally agree here. All the spin and stonewalling does is make members more cynical. Good point.

[comrade]

Andrew I totally agree here. All the spin and stonewalling does is make members more cynical. Good point.

Lantern actually made this point much earlier, and who knows, the Club may come out and say something along these lines once the dust has settled.

It may be that we have to be careful with our wording to ensure we satisfy all legal requirements. Cynical, but if supporters can't deal with a bit of stonewalling in a difficult time, too bad. The fact that these same supporters are eating up Aker's victim act just because he has the loudest voice suggests the Club is in a lose/lose situation regardless.

[Ghost Dog]

Lantern actually made this point much earlier, and who knows, the Club may come out and say something along these lines once the dust has settled.

It may be that we have to be careful with our wording to ensure we satisfy all legal requirements. Cynical, but if supporters can't deal with a bit of stonewalling in a difficult time, too bad. The fact that these same supporters are eating up Aker's victim act just because he has the loudest voice suggests the Club is in a lose/lose situation regardless.

Firstly, after him telling Rose to 'piss off' I'm no great Aker supporter.

However, there is no legal ramification for saying ' We didn't handle it perfectly'.
Nor for saying ' a few of the blokes took it pretty hard but in the end, it was a majority decision. Saying the players were all 100% behind the sacking is silly as it's clearly not true. We all know human nature is not like this.
Jason in no position to take legal action as it would just erode his diminishing supporter base.

He's not a victim and if he is then he made himself vulnerable for taking out large loans that obligated him to continue his media work and then choosing to enter relations with the likes of Price. He should have been more mindful of the company he keeps.
Sam Newman is a bomb waiting to explode.

Two sides to every story and only they know the facts. Give me the complicated facts over drum beating. The club is always bigger than the man, and if it's best for him to go, then that's fine with me. There is however no shame in pointing out errors from the club because that is how we learn and improve.

Lockett, Poly Farmer, Ablett. All clubs have had to learn with their individualists.

Onward!

[Twodogs]

Not sure that he was harshly treated but I think the club did get some things wrong.
Regarding the issue of Newman having a crack at Cooney with info being supplied by Aker (either directly or indirectly) I certainly don't think it's a good thing but I wouldn't take some of the comments over the last few days as gospel that he deliberately loaded the gun for Newman.

There is no evidence to take that as a granted.


Maybe not definitive evidence, but it stinks to high heaven from Sam and Aker's POV. Maybe I wouldnt get this to stand up in court in a criminal case where the defence only have to provide a reasonable doubt but you can bet your balls I'd win a civil case where the decision is made on the overall balance of probabilities.


The fact that Sam and Aker changed their story on this exact subject twice on thursday night (from "Sam overheard me" to "I told Sam" makes me very curious. Any decent lawyer woulkd wipe the floor with any witness who told varying stories like that.

I went into this whole situation with an open mind because I love Aker and the footy club isnt always in the right. Since then it's become more and more apparant that the club was put in an intolerable position by a player who put his trust in a media personality who couldnt wait to pot him and a journalist who he expected to keep a confidence.

As for Price, Aker is looking for who it was that betrayed him to the media, the coach, the 'footy personality' or the journo who cant keep his mouth shut. I know who my money would be on. I also knoiw who the bookies would frame as favorite and it aint the footy coach.

[GVGjr]

To all those who have said Smorgon should have been the one to front up instead of Rose. I think that would have been the worst possible scenario as (and let me state I love Smorgo he's been awesome,with the possible exception of the name change:(, for our club) he does not have a great track record regarding commenting on player rifts and contoversies within our club. I think in his fierce love and loyalty to the club he often gets a little petty and combative and can sometimes have a bit of foot in mouth disease. Maybe its just me but I remember all too well the issues with Dougie, Dimma and Libba. The other side of this is that David has a great capacity for forgiveness and buries the hatchet quite willingly and with great class.

I think by having someone as non-combative and removed from the situation as Campbell Rose the club avoided getting into a messy fight live on television. I was however quite angry that they allowed Aker to stay out there during Rose's segment it looked to me like an ambush.

It was a no win situation for the club to have anyone front up to the footy show. To that end Rose did his job well.
As BornaScragger pointed out an employer can't bag an employee on national TV and get into the specifics of why a tough decision was made. This could go to court.

We can argue all we like if Aker told Price or Newman with a view of grabbing a headline and we can argue all we like if it was a unanimous club decision or not. In the end it makes no difference if Aker's side of the story is right or it isn't.

We do know Akermanis lost a significant portion of the club's support and that was enough to have his contract terminated.

I understand why people are getting stuck into Akermanis but won't be joining that queue.
I also understand why so many are backing the club regardless of how it performed through this issue and once again I won't be joining that queue either.

I wonder if this new found appreciation of the clubs decision making process a lot of supporters have embraced in the last few days will be continue to be extended if we rack up a few disappointing results?

[boydogs]

If anyone needed any proof of how divisive this bloke and his actions can be just look / read how he has managed to divide our supporter base.

Very observant point. I have enjoyed reading the Aker posts on this board, some very intelligent and insightful comments.

However, can I please remind everyone of one thing in this debate -

Jason Akermanis is a footballer

He is not a diplomat, a role model, or a PR manager. Have we become so PC these days that a loudmouth can't play football?


Just a question for those that think Aker is being harshly teated.

How do you feel about his admission that he did actually disclose the information purporsely to Newman which Newman that used to ambush Adam Cooney on national TV with? Especially when he and Newman first claimed that Newman had overheard it and used it without Aker's knowledge?

I'm genuinly interested in your honest opinions. I'm not asking my question to provoke a negative response or to make a point.

Personally I think it shows exactly the sort of disregard for teammates and lack of team ethos Aker is being accused of.

I think probably the same as you and most others, that it shows he is a big mouth trying to lie his way out of trouble. I just don't think this sin should prevent you from playing sport.

This wasn't a marriage, it was a sports team. The only thing that should be important is results. As long as we can 'trust' that he will give his all on the playing field, then he should be playing


Andrew I totally agree here. All the spin and stonewalling does is make members more cynical. Good point.

I don't think there is much spin to it. He lost the trust of the playing group, and they sacked him for it. There is no hidden truth that vindicates their position, that's it

[LostDoggy]

Am i the only one who thinks the footy community & media world, have lost the concept as to why he was sacked?

Yeah, he has always been a media person & outspoken, we knew that & supported him when the homophobic article came out. Wasn't every article Aker published, ran past James Fantasia? surely we wouldn't have let it go through to the Herald Sun, if we didn't support Aker's freedom of speech & what he put forward to the club.

I think the bigger picture in all of this is the lack of trust, which was ultimately between Aker and the playing group. Which came to a head because he leaked confidential information to Sam Newman, which resulted in Cooney being made a fool on live TV & scathing attacks on teammates in a book. A leak had to come from somewhere, considering Aker & possibly the ghost writer are the only ones who would ultimately know about the book.

It seems to me that people have got caught up in the whole "we knew what we were getting into" talk, which i think everyone has acknowledged that part of it anyway. I still feel WE didn't know what we were getting into, in regards to confidential team meetings being spoken about to other media personalities.

I really feel that Aker has done what he set out to do, divert attention away from the real issue.

[chef]

Am i the only one who thinks the footy community & media world, have lost the concept as to why he was sacked?

Yeah, he has always been a media person & outspoken, we knew that & supported him when the homophobic article came out. Wasn't every article Aker published, ran past James Fantasia? surely we wouldn't have let it go through to the Herald Sun, if we didn't support Aker's freedom of speech & what he put forward to the club.

I think the bigger picture in all of this is the lack of trust, which was ultimately between Aker and the playing group. Which came to a head because he leaked confidential information to Sam Newman, which resulted in Cooney being made a fool on live TV & scathing attacks on teammates in a book. A leak had to come from somewhere, considering Aker & possibly the ghost writer are the only ones who would ultimately know about the book.

It seems to me that people have got caught up in the whole "we knew what we were getting into" talk, which i think everyone has acknowledged that part of it anyway. I still feel WE didn't know what we were getting into, in regards to confidential team meetings being spoken about to other media personalities.

I really feel that Aker has done what he set out to do, divert attention away from the real issue.

I agree, his interview on BTG was set up well too(he certainly has more mates in the media than he does in footy).