Watters on SEN (or SUN, as the case may be)

[saint3d]

A friend of mine called me earlier and we got to talking about the Saints, as we do.

He said he heard Scott Watters talking to KB and someone from The Australian (Patrick Smith?) on the radio. I assume that's SEN.

Apparently Watters said the Saints will be a juggernaut in three or four years' time. Possibly he said for the next three or four years.

In any case he was certainly positive about the impact of the new players coming through.

Did anyone hear it? Can you confirm/deny/clarify?

[Stillwaiting]

That article is in todays herald Scum

[chook23]

I have read the article

the context of the use of word juggernaut.......was to do with supporters

not the playing list

discussions on the radio have not reflected that


from the article
The infamous St Kilda "bubble" has burst with a bang as Watters spearheads a more open policy to re-connect with its fans.

"That's been extremely driven by me," Watters said.

"I won't compromise our performance standards, but I think St Kilda has the capacity in the next three to four years ... it should become a juggernaut.

"We haven't connected with anywhere near enough supporters. There are a lot of people out there that barrack for St Kilda who aren't on board yet.

"I want them involved. I want them to come and face the challenges with us."

[saint3d]

Thanks for the info. Here's the article for those who haven't read it.

[andrewg]

He is right. Ross Lyon and his gang treated the supports with contempt. The st.kilda bubble did nothin more than isolate the playing group let along kill any information about new player or the clubs direction. They played boring football that nobody wanted to watch. Any wonder the supporters have slowly dropped off. Instead of drumming up support on this site to get people to games, lets pump Watters tyres up because he is the man that will get people to games and build a club that is attractive, successful and a pleasure to support, not continually dissapointing. Watters haters can go f*** themselves! GO SAINTS!!!!!!

[Teflon]

He is right. Ross Lyon and his gang treated the supports with contempt. The st.kilda bubble did nothin more than isolate the playing group let along kill any information about new player or the clubs direction. They played boring football that nobody wanted to watch.

Can't agree

Again, in 09 I went along every week LOVING the dread in opposition fans faces that this frenetic St Kilda side with huge pressure would slaughter anyone in our way... and we did ... bar 3 games.

Going to the footy was fun and I for one wanted to watch

[Old Mate]

He is right. Ross Lyon and his gang treated the supports with contempt. The st.kilda bubble did nothin more than isolate the playing group let along kill any information about new player or the clubs direction. They played boring football that nobody wanted to watch.

Can't agree

Again, in 09 I went along every week LOVING the dread in opposition fans faces that this frenetic St Kilda side with huge pressure would slaughter anyone in our way... and we did ... bar 3 games.

Going to the footy was fun and I for one wanted to watch

Agree it was good to win however if I remember correctly it was the game after the round 14 Cats match that we seemed to lose our invincibility. We won a couple of lucky matches, lost a couple and didn't dominate like we had earlier on in the season.

[hungry for a premiership]

Here we have a prime example of the way in which the media has the power to subvert the truth to make it fit it's own agenda.

It happens in the football media every day. People like Craig Hutchison have made a living off it. Football journo's with real integrity are few and far between.

The trick is not to directly lie or fabricate data - the trick is to present the data in such a way that it falls in line with and appears to support what the journo would have us believe. Hutchy uses all the data he collects to imply scandal or crisis for the people/club involved, because scandal and crises sell. That's it.



The pure data, in it's contextual form, has already been posted. Watters is asked about St.Kilda's more open policy with the fans since the infamous "bubble" burst, and he's saying how that has been extremely driven by him because connecting with fans and building the fan base is a big part of his overall philosophy, and then he says: "I won't compromise performance standards, but I think St.Kilda... should become a juggernaut."


CLEARLY, Watters, when he used the term "Juggernaut," was referring to the club's membership tally. Of course, with that, he's implying on-field success, too, and if asked, I doubt he'd deny that he aims to win a premiership with St.Kilda, but still, he was clearly, in this instance, specifically referring to the clubs off-field position - that we'd be an off-field juggernaut.


But, for some unknown but not unexpected reason, the majority of the media decided to have a nice little St.Kilda bashing this morning, so they took this big, loud word - "juggernaut" - and the slight ambiguity surrounding its use and used it to imply that Watters had come out and made these big, arrogant, controversial and even disrespectful statements about how St.Kilda will become a powerhouse club of the AFL in 3-4 years.

How was it done? The headline and the first sentence do virtually all the work.

Headline: "Saint's 'fearless,' declares Scott Watters"
First sentence: "ST KILDA coach Scott Watters has declared the club fears nobody as it takes steps towards quickly becoming a "juggernaut" of the competition."

Any evidence that is presented after that appears to back up the implication made here that Watters believes St.Kilda will become the on-field dominant side of the comp and is therefore either arrogant or fool-hardy.

I wake up and turn on the radio to hear KB having a good laugh at us as he mockingly announced "St.Kilda coach Scott Watters has said St.Kilda will become a (pause) juggernaut of the competition within 3-4 years," several times.

Then I read the Age and find Robert Walls has taken it upon himself, again, to re-enforce the stigma of "perennial underachievers," "losers," "s*** club," onto St.Kilda in the age-old spirit of he and his Carlton buddies.


Jeez I hope we win tonight.

[plugger66]

Here we have a prime example of the way in which the media has the power to subvert the truth to make it fit it's own agenda.

It happens in the football media every day. People like Craig Hutchison have made a living off it. Football journo's with real integrity are few and far between.

The trick is not to directly lie or fabricate data - the trick is to present the data in such a way that it falls in line with and appears to support what the journo would have us believe. Hutchy uses all the data he collects to imply scandal or crisis for the people/club involved, because scandal and crises sell. That's it.



The pure data, in it's contextual form, has already been posted. Watters is asked about St.Kilda's more open policy with the fans since the infamous "bubble" burst, and he's saying how that has been extremely driven by him because connecting with fans and building the fan base is a big part of his overall philosophy, and then he says: "I won't compromise performance standards, but I think St.Kilda... should become a juggernaut."


CLEARLY, Watters, when he used the term "Juggernaut," was referring to the club's membership tally. Of course, with that, he's implying on-field success, too, and if asked, I doubt he'd deny that he aims to win a premiership with St.Kilda, but still, he was clearly, in this instance, specifically referring to the clubs off-field position - that we'd be an on-filed juggernaut, too.


But, for some unknown but not unexpected reason, the majority of the media decided to have a nice little St.Kilda bashing this morning, so they took this big, loud word - "juggernaut" - and the slight ambiguity surrounding its use and used it to imply that Watters had come out and made these big, arrogant, controversial and even disrespectful statements about how St.Kilda will become a powerhouse club of the AFL in 3-4 years.

How was it done? The headline and the first sentence do virtually all the work.

Headline: "Saint's 'fearless,' declares Scott Watters"
First sentence: "ST KILDA coach Scott Watters has declared the club fears nobody as it takes steps towards quickly becoming a "juggernaut" of the competition."

Any evidence that is presented after that appears to back up the implication made here that Watters believes St.Kilda will become the on-field dominant side of the comp and is therefore either arrogant or fool-hardy.

I wake up and turn on the radio to hear KB having a good laugh at us as he mockingly announced "St.Kilda coach Scott Watters has said St.Kilda will become a (pause) juggernaut of the competition within 3-4 years," several times.

Then I read the Age and find Robert Walls has taken it upon himself, again, to re-enforce the stigma of "perennial underachievers," "losers," "s*** club," onto St.Kilda in the age-old spirit of he and his Carlton buddies.


Jeez I hope we win tonight.

Its funny how you see things. I see Robert Walls article as not saying what you said at all and I heard KB and didnt hear him laughing at us. I suppose some people always think everyone is against us. Anyway one flag in 115 years suggests anyone can laugh at us if they want.

[hungry for a premiership]

Plugger66 wrote:

Its funny how you see things. I see Robert Walls article as not saying what you said at all and I heard KB and didnt hear him laughing at us. I suppose some people always think everyone is against us. Anyway one flag in 115 years suggests anyone can laugh at us if they want.

Hmmm, I think you're right. It's ME who likes scandal and controversy!

Look, I don't deny that I have a somewhat warped perception of reality and have a tendency to paranoia from some deep-seated psychologically-based inferiority complex or some shet like that, but I'll say this - at least I admit it!

I don't consider you nor anyone to percieve things the way I do - everyone's perception is slightly - or vastly - different. I accept and welcome the differences in perception. They teach you things. You're above post appears as a perception of good, solid common-sense, and I accept it and learn from it. There may not be good, solid horse-sense in my perceptions, but I hope you get something good, something else, out of them, anyway...

BTW Plugger, do you think we'll beat geelong tonight?

[Teflon]

Plugger66 wrote:

Its funny how you see things. I see Robert Walls article as not saying what you said at all and I heard KB and didnt hear him laughing at us. I suppose some people always think everyone is against us. Anyway one flag in 115 years suggests anyone can laugh at us if they want.

Hmmm, I think you're right. It's ME who likes scandal and controversy!

Look, I don't deny that I have a somewhat warped perception of reality and have a tendency to paranoia from some deep-seated psychologically-based inferiority complex or some shet like that, but I'll say this - at least I admit it!

I don't consider you nor anyone to percieve things the way I do - everyone's perception is slightly - or vastly - different. I accept and welcome the differences in perception. They teach you things. You're above post appears as a perception of good, solid common-sense, and I accept it and learn from it. There may not be good, solid horse-sense in my perceptions, but I hope you get something good, something else, out of them, anyway...

BTW Plugger, do you think we'll beat geelong tonight?

Your not alone on the paranoia stakes.... I've always got someone out to get me
What you say about the media instant quote trick is spot on - sleight of hand stuff that never gets corrected