Francis Albert Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 As I remember only one paper (the Scottish Sun?) really ran with the story that Hartley refused to make a public apology required by Vlad, although others including the EEN and Scotsman picked it up, not independently but on the back of the original story. Today's events make it seem more unlikely that this was the real reason Hartley went to Aberdeen. If Vlad is prepared to forgive and forget the far greater sins of Webster, why would he have required Hartley to do what was reported?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Says nothing as you can read into it what you want! One thing could be that time is a healer and also JJ possibly does have a crackin relationship with Vlad with Vlad trusting his judgement. I could go on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 even if the 'confession' story had any basis then i guess it says that romanov was more personally wounded in terms of his ego due to R3 than he was regarding webster's departure and subsequent legal case. i still wouldn't place any money on the 'confession' thing being true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambonian Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 As I remember only one paper (the Scottish Sun?) really ran with the story that Hartley refused to make a public apology required by Vlad, although others including the EEN and Scotsman picked it up, not independently but on the back of the original story. Today's events make it seem more unlikely that this was the real reason Hartley went to Aberdeen. If Vlad is prepared to forgive and forget the far greater sins of Webster, why would he have required Hartley to do what was reported?. Maybe he was informed on how pizd off everyone was when Hartley didn't happen or maybe he saw it as two different scenarios, Webster was not part of the Riccarton 3 so didn't have to sign whatever nonsense Hartley had to. Hartley was 34, Websters 28, maybe he sees a transfer out of him in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Perhaps Hartley's confession was to be on his weight. After filling his face so much he clearly wouldn't have made the weight for the SPL fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeno Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Did you no ask the same pish when Rudi returned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossthejambo Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Did you no ask the same pish when Rudi returned? Was just thinking the same. I suggested at the time that Hearts were less forthcoming with a contract offer than Aberdeen and that's why he joined them. The written apology was nothing but Weejia speculation (shit stirring). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 there is also added value for vlad to be seen to bring the various 'black sheep' back into the fold. it adds weight to the theory - if there is one - that hearts football club isn't the environment that people tried to portray it as... one to get the hell out of as quick as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted February 3, 2011 Author Share Posted February 3, 2011 Did you no ask the same pish when Rudi returned? Can't remember, but don't think so. After all people seemed to think Rudi was required to confess his sins (his "I was misled by bad people" line). Today seems to me to weigh the evidence more towards Rudi's words being his own, and the required Hartley confession story being, in your word, pish, which I thought at the tiime. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vintage1874 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Was just thinking the same. I suggested at the time that Hearts were less forthcoming with a contract offer than Aberdeen and that's why he joined them. The written apology was nothing but Weejia speculation (shit stirring). I thought we all thought and hearts thought hartley was a "done deal" especially as when the squad numbers were released there was no name assigned to number 10, fuelling speculation PH would sign for us. The hearts management team did want him at the time. The PH saga did seem to drag on a bit so you may be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossthejambo Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I thought we all thought and hearts thought hartley was a "done deal" especially as when the squad numbers were released there was no name assigned to number 10, fuelling speculation PH would sign for us. The hearts management team did want him at the time. The PH saga did seem to drag on a bit so you may be right. JJ never sounded all that keen on him, he was more keen on Bryson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut The Crap Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Don't really understand the ongoing obsession with the Aberdeen captain of some people on here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennyblack'sshot Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 If it was only in the Sun it wasn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I thought we all thought and hearts thought hartley was a "done deal" especially as when the squad numbers were released there was no name assigned to number 10, fuelling speculation PH would sign for us. The hearts management team did want him at the time. The PH saga did seem to drag on a bit so you may be right. And that is interesting. They did not want Hartley, they did not get him. They did want Webster, they got him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 As I remember only one paper (the Scottish Sun?) really ran with the story that Hartley refused to make a public apology required by Vlad, although others including the EEN and Scotsman picked it up, not independently but on the back of the original story. Today's events make it seem more unlikely that this was the real reason Hartley went to Aberdeen. If Vlad is prepared to forgive and forget the far greater sins of Webster, why would he have required Hartley to do what was reported?. how about ,,,,the story was true and vlad didnt push it this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Bapswent Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Nothing. Why do we insist on looking for things that arent there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMBOLEE Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 hartley is past it ,we could maybe see the best of webster now as thought he was outstanding last season this is a great day for us mad vlad is now thinking alot more of the team than himself it appears Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.