Mega Thread The Former Player Thread: Part 2

[Tedeski]

I don’t see that they had any reason to lie. This was a question that I specifically asked after they suggested that there was a personal issue between the two. They were adamant that Longmire didn’t want to talk to him.

Was this after we stopped negotiations with Tom once it was rumoured he met with Clarko either before or after the game against the Hawks in Rd 17 2016?
http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/video/2016-07-14/match-highlights-swans-v-hawks-rd-17-2016.

Later that evening this article comes out.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...r/news-story/050ff8da7b338872a4bbf99d889f4c80

Then this happened
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-07-23/tom-mitchells-contract-talks-on-hold-until-end-of-season.

All this after Tom seemed like he was happy to stay a Swan back in March 2016 when everything was hunky dory as suggested in this recent article.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-19/how-tom-mitchell-became-a-trade-bargain

"Mitchell, the son of Swans great Barry, opened talks with Sydney in March that year about extending his contract beyond the end of 2016.
Speculation around this time suggested Carlton, which had made a play for Mitchell in 2015's trade period, was circling the midfielder. But from the end of May, multiple reports stated Mitchell was on the verge of re-signing with the Swans.
In mid-June, the midfielder's manager, Phil Mullen, said he was confident a deal would be finalised during the week of Sydney's round 14 bye."

Well done Clarko!

 

[Tedeski]

Tom's a great player & will become the greatest ball winning midfielder the game has ever seen.
He just didn't want it to be as a Swan or he would have stayed.

 

[bedford]

Tom's a great player & will become the greatest ball winning midfielder the game has ever seen.
He just didn't want it to be as a Swan or he would have stayed.

Not quite Ted , but not going to start all this again.

 

[TheMase]

It is stale atm, he needs to change a few things , or he will be gone in a nice manner. We always do those things well.

Yep so conditionally based rather than an absolute. And that’s fair enough too.

 

[connolly]

I know that I am going over old ground but I think that it is worthwhile to clarify a situation that many of us have speculated about over the past two years. Why did Tom Mitchell leave?
On a cruise that my wife and I just completed we came across some immediate members of Tom's family who only declared as much after we started talking about the footy and that we were Swan's supporters. One of them gave a very strange look when we mentioned this and I kept pressing them as to why. Eventually, they declared their relationship to him. For the sake of privacy, I won't declare exactly who they are but can assure you they know the true story in detail. They were not keen on telling the full story as they felt they were betraying Tom's confidentiality.
Firstly, they were adamant that Tom did NOT want to leave the Swans but was left with little option not to.
Tom declared to them only months after originally joining the Swans that John Longmire didn't seem to like him very much. He was told by his family that it was more than likely just in his head and not to worry or think about it too much. As time went on, he felt that it didn't seem to get any better.
The situation got so bad in Tom's eyes that he tried on a number of occasions to have a one on one discussion with Longmire about it but this was refused. Longmire literally refused to see one of his players who felt that there were issues.
Even though he felt somewhat unwanted he approached the club 6 months before his contract expired hoping to get a new deal done. He was continually told that there were other deals that needed to be finalised before they could look at his. Again, he tried to speak to Longmire about the situation but without success.
As time went on, it became quite obvious to Tom that the Swans weren't all that fussed about keeping him which was confirmed when they finally put an offer to him in August. The amount they offered was well below what should have been expected and was actually less than his current contract. As a result he started looking elsewhere (via his agent) and decided on Hawthorn. Hawthorn's offer was certainly not over the top like some offers to free agents have been recently but it was significantly more than Sydney's.
At the end of the day, it wasn't so much the money but it was the fact that he knew he wasn't respected or truly wanted at the Swans which forced him out the door. He still has a number of mates at the Swans who he is still very close to.
So for all those who have said over the last year or two "good riddance, he only left for the money" - you are sadly mistaken.
It is probably fair to say that Nick Newman falls into the same category. Not in Longmire's good books for whatever reason and is consequently no longer with us.
Shame the same thing won't happen with Longmire himself. He's certainly not in my good books.

Thanks for that mate. So we offered to reduce his take home pay. That has always worked to keep a stiff working for the boss. Then the kid wins a Brownlow. By the way information heard on cruise ships and Istanbul Expresses always worked for Poirot. It will do me.

 

[Tedeski]

It is stale atm, he needs to change a few things , or he will be gone in a nice manner. We always do those things well.

I agree 100% with this Bedders.
Really good coaches can do this so let's see if he is capable of getting all our players to gel with an adjusted game plan.
If not, as you say, he's still one of our few p'ship coaches we've ever had & we say good bye nicely.
I just have never agreed in a mid season sacking or with multiple years to run on a contract. That just hurts the club off field & we can't afford to look like a rabble off field.

 

[Kummerspeck]

It happens all the time. I don’t take any notice anything either party says until the player has actually signed.

His manger clearly contradicted the version of events you put forward in a way that doesn't favour Tom. If the club had no offer on the table till August and they had been ignoring attempts to start negotiations, why on Earth would he say there was an offer and the Swans had been calling them?

 

[connolly]

His manger clearly contradicted the version of events you put forward in a way that doesn't favour Tom. If the club had no offer on the table till August and they had been ignoring attempts to start negotiations, why on Earth would he say there was an offer and the Swans had been calling them?

I agree with Bandicoot. You actually believe a player manager? The most unreliable source this side of Donald Trump. I will give you one reason he would BS. To boost his own stocks that he got an offer early. Isn't a good look for the manager to be ignored in negotiations. He lied to promote his own business. Do ya reckon a player manager might stoop so low?

 

[Kummerspeck]

I agree with Bandicoot. You actually believe a player manager?

Yes, I place more stock in public statements from two parties on opposite side of negotiations that agree with each other and reported timelines on events rather than eating up a third hand, one sided recounting of events posted on a message board

 

[Bandicoot]

I didn’t suggest they lied from their perspective of what they were told.

That doesn’t mean it is the truth though, just Tom’s perspective on his version of events from his perspective which would certainly have an element of bias in his favour.

It is highly unlikely that any issue John had with Tom was completely unfounded, and it is clear this detail is missing from the turn of events you’ve been presented.

Perhaps he had an attitude problem? Certainly Newman is another one that has been noted as John not being a fan of and Mick O has indicated that attitude was an issue for him from the clubs perspective.

You may well be right. Mitchell may have been a smsrtarse as many 18-19 year olds can be. I still feel though that the club and horse didn't handle the situation as professionally as it could have. No club can afford to get rid of very talented footballers simply because of personal differences, especially those who end up becoming Brownlow medalists.

 

[Bandicoot]

Was this after we stopped negotiations with Tom once it was rumoured he met with Clarko either before or after the game against the Hawks in Rd 17 2016?
http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/video/2016-07-14/match-highlights-swans-v-hawks-rd-17-2016.

Later that evening this article comes out.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...r/news-story/050ff8da7b338872a4bbf99d889f4c80

Then this happened
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-07-23/tom-mitchells-contract-talks-on-hold-until-end-of-season.

All this after Tom seemed like he was happy to stay a Swan back in March 2016 when everything was hunky dory as suggested in this recent article.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-19/how-tom-mitchell-became-a-trade-bargain

"Mitchell, the son of Swans great Barry, opened talks with Sydney in March that year about extending his contract beyond the end of 2016.
Speculation around this time suggested Carlton, which had made a play for Mitchell in 2015's trade period, was circling the midfielder. But from the end of May, multiple reports stated Mitchell was on the verge of re-signing with the Swans.
In mid-June, the midfielder's manager, Phil Mullen, said he was confident a deal would be finalised during the week of Sydney's round 14 bye."

Well done Clarko!

Ted, it was only over breakfast on the ship that I discussed this matter with them so I didn't have the time or opportunity to go into great detail of the timeline. Just fair to say again that Tom would have preferred to stay with the Swans had the circumstances been different.

 

[Bandicoot]

Tom's a great player & will become the greatest ball winning midfielder the game has ever seen.
He just didn't want it to be as a Swan or he would have stayed.

I don't believe that to be so.

 

[Bandicoot]

Thanks for that mate. So we offered to reduce his take home pay. That has always worked to keep a stiff working for the boss. Then the kid wins a Brownlow. By the way information heard on cruise ships and Istanbul Expresses always worked for Poirot. It will do me.

It's a small world. Amazing how many people you get to meet whilst going overseas.

 

[Bandicoot]

His manger clearly contradicted the version of events you put forward in a way that doesn't favour Tom. If the club had no offer on the table till August and they had been ignoring attempts to start negotiations, why on Earth would he say there was an offer and the Swans had been calling them?

If you choose to believe in what clubs and player managers say during contract negotiations I can't stop you. I treat most of their comments with a grain of salt.
Let's just say that the old story of the boy who cried wolf sits well in these circumstances.

 

[Kummerspeck]

If you choose to believe in what clubs and player managers say during contract negotiations I can't stop you.

Both sides of negotiations were agreeing. Why would I not place some stock in that ?
I

treat most of their comments with a grain of salt.

You'd be well advised to also apply that to tales of woe from one side of a story. Keep in mind when Tom was interviewed after the Brownlow he said he felt he wasn't really given any opportunities in 2016 and had to play reserves, so his perspective and therefore those diluted through his family probably aren't ones you could take as gospel.

 

[Tedeski]

Ted, it was only over breakfast on the ship that I discussed this matter with them so I didn't have the time or opportunity to go into great detail of the timeline. Just fair to say again that Tom would have preferred to stay with the Swans had the circumstances been different.

I think those circumstances may be money related & no one can ever begrudge Tom for that. He needs to be able to cash in on this part of his life as an AFL footballer. If he really wanted to stay with his team mates he would have. Up until post brownlow, he still felt that he wasn't given a chance to play senior footy at the Swans yet he played nearly every game since his injuries settled.
It doesn't matter now. He didn't like Horse or Horse didn't like him. Not the first time this has happened.

 

[bedford]

I think those circumstances may be money related & no one can ever begrudge Tom for that. He needs to be able to cash in on this part of his life as an AFL footballer. If he really wanted to stay with his team mates he would have. Up until post brownlow, he still felt that he wasn't given a chance to play senior footy at the Swans yet he played nearly every game since his injuries settled.
It doesn't matter now. He didn't like Horse or Horse didn't like him. Not the first time this has happened.

And Barry was a mercenary as well.

 

[Bandicoot]

The only reason I made this post was that we have all speculated for the past two years as to why the Swans seemed to be so happy to get rid of Mitch. Unless you had the opportunity to speak to him, his family or to the people at Sydney directly responsible, we were all just guessing.
So, having discussed it with his family, I have passed on their perspective as to how it all unfolded. Granted, it is only one side of the story and they were only relaying to me what Tom had told them.
If you choose to believe what they have said - fine. If you choose to not believe what they have said, again, that is your choice.
The only difference is that what I have stated here has not been pure speculation as every other post regarding his departure has been but has come from a credible source.

 

[connolly]

Yes, I place more stock in public statements from two parties on opposite side of negotiations that agree with each other and reported timelines on events rather than eating up a third hand, one sided recounting of events posted on a message board

Mate let me assure you from personal experience negotiating parties public rationales and excuses in regard to contractual negotiations should be treated very sceptically. There tends to be a lot of face saving and arse covering. Anatomically difficult but achievable through PR departments and press releases.

 

[connolly]

The only reason I made this post was that we have all speculated for the past two years as to why the Swans seemed to be so happy to get rid of Mitch. Unless you had the opportunity to speak to him, his family or to the people at Sydney directly responsible, we were all just guessing.
So, having discussed it with his family, I have passed on their perspective as to how it all unfolded. Granted, it is only one side of the story and they were only relaying to me what Tom had told them.
If you choose to believe what they have said - fine. If you choose to not believe what they have said, again, that is your choice.
The only difference is that what I have stated here has not been pure speculation as every other post regarding his departure has been but has come from a credible source.

In what other area of employment relationships is the principal of a contractual negotiation so rarely heard or even allowed to speak directly? The clubs have a huge vested interest in spin and PR BS to protect their contractual position in the negotiation from the scrutiny of their members.

 

[Tedeski]

And Barry was a mercenary as well.

Well he left us when we were at our lowest & as a supporter it hurts losing players in such fashion.
For me it started when Teasdale left for Collingwood. We've lost Rhys Jones to Carlton, Williams to Carlton, Bernie Evans to Carlton, Mitchell to Collingwood.
I hate those clubs. Now I hate Hawks. Tom goes there. Good luck to him.

 

[Kummerspeck]

.
The only difference is that what I have stated here has not been pure speculation as every other post regarding his departure has been but has come from a credible source.

Who told you demonstrably false information

 

[Bandicoot]

Who told you demonstrably false information

Unless you can advise of a credible source you are just talking bullshit. This is your OPINION and nothing more so don't say that what I have said is untrue. Your opinion is an opinion and not fact.

 

[Kummerspeck]

Unless you can advise of a credible source you are just talking bullshit. This is your OPINION and nothing more so don't say that what I have said is untrue. Your opinion is an opinion and not fact.

You claimed they said the Swans didn't put an offer to Mitchell until August. Both Ted and I have provided multiple links from both parties in negotiations and media reports showing that to be false.

I'm interested in what you think is a credible source given you dismiss multiple parties saying the same thing as lies, yet you accept without question second hand information from an unnamed source on a cruise ship who has made clearly incorrect statements

 

[Mick Oxlong]

Geez...someone might want to go watch the Andrew Ireland interview with Mike Sheahan. We had no money for Mitchell, plain and simple!