Schadenfreude anyone?

[LostDoggy]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Because they're not relevant to the Rawlings matter & it's just a red herring by you to throw them into the mix.

Not sure why they are not relevent when the reasoning is the same, player A didn't get to the club of choice because the clubs dung their heels in.

Yeah, he didn't get to go to North, but the Bulldogs giving Hawthorn pick 6 for Lachlan Veale on the understanding they didn't trade Rawlings to North forced him to the Bulldogs.
It was a deal that stank at the time & stinks now.

No argument on the morals of the trade, just that the bulldogs didn't screw him.

Now ES, I know you can be pig headed & I'm not going to get involved in a 'Drugs in Sport' type debate like you & westdog54 had . Westdog54 should have had more sense, he, like me, knows you & he should have known he was never going to win, no one ever does with you!

Not sure why you brought this up, If I believe I'm wrong and proved it (and its happened here) i'll admitt it.

We'll agree to disagree & if you won't then I'll remove your name from my invite list!

I'll PM you about this.

[The Coon Dog]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

TCD, in your opinion what stunk more, the actual Veale Deal itself, or the attitude of Rawlings and his management to his new employer after he willingly signed a handsome contract and became a part of the club?

Good question.

I never felt comfortable with the way we acted in all honesty. I thought it was sly & underhanded.

My criticism here has been the manner in which I thought our club acted at that time, not how Rawlings responded to that. I'd still debate the word 'willingly' too.

[The Coon Dog]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Not sure why you brought this up, If I believe I'm wrong and proved it (and its happened here) i'll admitt it.



I'll PM you about this.

You've never been wrong, ever!!!

I tried PMing you, but your mailbox was full, t'was tongue in cheek, hence the 'wink'.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

I tried PMing you, but your mailbox was full, t'was tongue in cheek, hence the 'wink'.

I saw that before I posted and fixed it, I thought the max for 40 not 35.

[Sedat]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Good question.

I never felt comfortable with the way we acted in all honesty. I thought it was sly & underhanded.

My criticism here has been the manner in which I thought our club acted at that time, not how Rawlings responded to that. I'd still debate the word 'willingly' too.

It's a bit difficult to debate Rawlings' willingness to sign a contract with us when he decided to effectively sign the remainder of his career away with the Dogs for a length of term that is an eternity in football parlance, 4 years. Why would he decide to lock himself away for so long at the club if he desperately wanted out of there? There was absolutely nothing stopping him from placing a large salary demand on his head prior to nominating for the PSD. And there was nothing at all from stopping him and his management from negotiating a 1 or 2 year term with the Dogs. But no, he was all too willing to feather his nest for 4 years, and he would have well known that his knees were shot and that he could not possibly deliver on the field for his new employer what was expected of him.

IMO his conduct, once he came to the club, was childish, shallow and reprehensible, and every bit as underhanded (arguably more so) than anything that was done during trade week. The constant negativity aired by him in the press well after he arrived at the club no doubt damaged our brand, and would have dissuaded future prospects from being attracted to come to us. And only Aker's willingness to join us has gone some way to redressing the negative perception about joining the Dogs, a perception fostered and nurtured by the attitudes of Rawlings.

I appreciate that you are only commenting on nature of the Veale Deal, but surely if we displayed a sense of underhandedness in 2003 (in your opinion), we more than made up for it with the generosity of our trade with North in 2005. And what about the underhandedness of John Hook and the Hawks, not to mention Sheeds and the Bombers, who ensured the Hawks were recompensed with a key defender by moving Jacobs over to Glenferrie? Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Veale Deal, the Dogs were only one part of it, with at least 3 other clubs a willing participant in the outcome.

[Mofra]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

I never felt comfortable with the way we acted in all honesty. I thought it was sly & underhanded.

I can relate to that. Although we needed a tall forward, I felt there was a problem in getting a backman to turn forward & play for a club he didn't want to go to. His knees were dodgy and we knew that before we signed him.

I'm glad when Birss wanted to seek opportunities elsewhere, we sent him to teh club he barracked for as a kid, St Kilda. Ray also ended up at St Kilda, which I believe he was happy enough with. In return, Aker & Hudson got to their preferred clubs.

Teams should try tp be a little more accomodating and I believe the Rawlings situation proves this.

[Sedat]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Teams should try tp be a little more accomodating and I believe the Rawlings situation proves this.

Was 2 years later, but that's exactly what we did for Rawlings. Just remember, we didn't control Rawlings' destiny in 2003 - it was Hawthorn that essentially controlled this. When we were in control of his destiny in 2005, we bent over backwards to get him to his preferred destination.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Rawlings wanted out at Hawthorn, not sure exactly why but I think 1 year deal wasn't enough.
He was already trying to screw the Hawks over as both partys knew his knee was shot.
Had he not insisted that he go to North then he would he would have gained a lot more respect in a many people's book. What happened to him in that trade period was karma.

[Bornadog]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Rawlings wanted out at Hawthorn, not sure exactly why but I think 1 year deal wasn't enough.
He was already trying to screw the Hawks over as both partys knew he knee was shot.

Had he not insisted that he go to North then he would he would have gained a lot more respect in a many people's book. What happened to him in that trade period was karma.

We were blinded by the fact that we wanted a big CHF, but should have realized why the Hawks were only offering the one year contract.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Of course we did!

We conspired with Hawthorn to force Jade Rawlings into the PSD where we had 1st pick.

Dress it up any way you like, it won't change the fact that we & Hawthorn screwed Jade Rawlings over to ensure he became a Bulldog.

The main club that screwed over Rawlings was North Melbourne.

They convinced him to ask for a trade to them and then refused to pony up a reasonable draft pick to Hawthorn.

[The Adelaide Connection]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

But it's not just the way he left.

It's how he has continued to be part of an ex-Dogs gang at Richmond (most who left under acrimonious circumstances) that has not been able to let go of angst towards the Dogs and has continually sought to undermine us at every opportunity -- be it on drafting day, trading day, etc etc. (search through the archives here on WOOF and you may find some stories from those close to Rocket), and it is Wallet that created the animosity from the Dogs with his continuous malicious attacks on the Dogs, first in the media during the Rhode years (claiming it was a weak list that he couldn't take any further -- the same tactic he's trying now at Richmond), and then from the coaches box pre-game and post-game into the Rocket years, when we were (initially) down in the dumps.

Don't let youself be another naive person he takes advantage of through his smooth tongue. He's certainly talked his way out of many things before, and has somehow created an aura of competence around what really is a pretty ordinary coaching record, apart from the first couple of years at the Dogs (where he reaped the benefits of a previous recruiting regime).

He's shown quite clearly that he has no list building ability whatsoever -- after 7 years at the Dogs he left us with the list in shambles and no balance at all, and he's done the same at Richmond after 5 years. And yet, people continue to think of him as a competent coach -- he really has pulled the wool over many eyes.

Don't be fooled: Wallet has only ever cared about one thing -- number one.

ps. I'll take the word of Chris Grant over Terry Wallace anyday, and Chris couldn't stand the bloke towards the end there. Speaks volumes.

I would certainly not brush aside the word of Chris Grant, one of my favourite players of all time and a seemingly top bloke. The reality is though that there are not too many coaches going around that are liked by every player on their list, I am sure if we asked Jordan McMahon or Farren Ray they may say that they were not fans of rockets. Whether that be a personality, differing opinions, not getting played, etc etc. But a coach is not trying to win a popularity contest, obviously if they can be successful and liked that is a huge bonus, but at the end of the day they have a job to do and sometimes toes will get stepped on.

Let me make this clear, I am neither here nor there on Terry Wallace. I have no real like or dislike for the bloke. I do understand the animosity, but you don't need to be Dr. Phil to know that with any jilted relationship comes the potential for bitterness to simmer long after the house and furniture have been divided up.

However I believe there comes a time when one needs to move on with their lives and stop taking pleasure out of the misfortunes of others. It is really easy to look at the lousy things the bloke has been responsible for, but I bet there was a time when everyone on this forum thought the man was great and brilliant for our footy club.

The facts are that he was a passionate member of our club at one point in time and he did do a very good job for most of his time here. "Leaving the list in shambles" may be a reflection on his poor ability to draft but certainly not on his ability to coach and I would suggest that the "list being in shambles" would certainly have something to do with a team of people, not just the coach.

It is the widely held belief that this footy club were one bad quarter away from winning a premiership after finishing 15th the previous year. If one clears the fog of contempt away from their eyes for a moment a realisation that if achieved it would have gone down as one of the most amazing turnarounds and a Disney movie about Terrys amazing coaching feat and his against the odds team would be on the cards. Malcolm Blight ended up being a messiah in Adelaide, it could have easily been Terry in Footscray.

So yes, there has been a lingering issue with this footy club and his Walletness. But footy clubs screw people over and people screw footy clubs over. As people have admitted we have not been guiltfree. But seven years later I would rather be the sort of guy that reflects on the positives and wishes their former partner well and moves on, rather than the soapy embittered type who sits round hoping all their future pursuits are disasters.

"Until next time, take care of yourselves... and each other"

P.S. Terrys coaching record at the Bulldogs:
1996- 15th (took over midyear)
1997- 3rd (Prelim Exit)
1998- 2nd (Prelim Exit)
1999- 4th (Semi Exit)
2000- 7th (Elim. Final Exit)
2001- 10th
2002- 12th (Wallace left before the last game)

[ledge]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

We tend to forget how good he was for us on the field too.

[Mofra]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

However I believe there comes a time when one needs to move on with their lives and stop taking pleasure out of the misfortunes of others. It is really easy to look at the lousy things the bloke has been responsible for, but I bet there was a time when everyone on this forum thought the man was great and brilliant for our footy club.

Very well said, especially the quoted paragraph above.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

I will continue to take EXTREME pleasure, but nicely said.

[Topdog]

Re: Schadenfreude anyone?

Not sure what you mean about Brisbane and Adelaide. Its fact that some players in trade period don't go to the clubs of their choice. A number stay where they are because they are in contract but if you are out of contract you are free game.

Make no bones about it we did North a favour, we got the player with an attitude problem, exaggerated salary and a bung knee not them and when he did go there we were still were paying for him.

As for us 'the bulldogs' screwing over Rawlings, its rubbish.

Brisbane and Adelaide didn't have the same feelings as you guys seem to have with the draft period and allowed Aker and Welsh / Hudson (forget which one) to come to the club of their choice. They could have refused to trade but they didn't. They did what was right by the player.