delisting of the MFC

[Wolfmother 182]

We probably need 6 spots on the list this year for recruiting.... where are they going to come from????

Wheatley

Robbo

Whelan gives us three

But who is out of contract and can be delisted

Miller

McNamara

Cheney

Bartram

Buckley

The following are contract and cannot be delisted only traded

Bell

Newton

Meeson

Johnson

Dunn

I thought it would be worth having one thread for the info as it seems a bit scattered at the moment

Edited September 8, 2009 by Wolfmother

[e25 5]

Bartram will be first to go

[Mousey 47]

Cant remember when delistings happened last year but i presume the club will wait till after the trading period to make official decisions and to see if they can trade players they have in mind.

I think someone said Miller had signed a new deal in December but there was never any coverage of it?

Will be based on who we draft i was presume but i think Clint Bartram is going going gone....

[rpfc 28,045]

There are a number of delist threads running around, but...

1, 2, 18, 34, PSD1, and Spencer would be my 6.

Robertson, Whelan, and Wheatley are gone.

Batram, Johnson, McNamara, Dunn, Miller, and Buckley might be a chance. Buckley could be an option for the RL. McNamara is reportedly homesick.

Trade week might change this with new homes for one or two of these players or Bell and Newton.

Johnson, Buckley, and McNamara would be my bets at this stage.

[WonnaJurah 5]

what about Buckley,though has been injured this year

[Wolfmother 182]

Just trying to look at who can be delisted as everyone wants bell and newton gone but they are contracted....

[deeflog 679]

I think the other 3 should be Buckley, Bartram and if we can't trade McNamara then delist him.

buckley has plenty of competition in his position now, and i don't think his decision making or disposal are up to it.

batram also has plenty of competition in his spot and i think Bennell and Cheney has over taken him in the preferance stakes

All reports are Mvnamara is home sick, so send him home, either by a trade or delisting

[RalphiusMaximus 6,012]

I can't agree on getting rid of Buckley. He's still a kid and has a heap of potential. Give him at least another year, maybe two to get himself settled and see what he becomes. It's easy to write him off after he hasn't played for a season, but I think he's got a huge upside and can learn to use the ball better. Bate had a similar problem when he first played in the senior team, but now he's turning into a genuine gun for us.

[CarnTheDees 52]

Pretty sure PJ is contracted

[hoopla 418]

We probably need 6 spots on the list this year for recruiting.... where are they going to come from????

Wheatley

Robbo

Whelan gives us three

But who is out of contract and can be delisted

Miller

Dunn

McNamara

Cheney

Bartram

Buckley

Johnson

The following are contract and cannot be delisted only traded

Bell

Newton

I thought it would be worth having one thread for the info as it seems a bit scattered at the moment

Can anybody confirm that this list of contract dates etc is complete and accurate?Interesting that only seven are out of contract

If this list is right, Bartram' s gone. He is a good hard-working bloke - but he simply hasn't got the skills to be part of our future.

PJ is a useful member of the squad - Buckley has genuine pace to break the lines (if he can get himself fit)- Cheney must be safe for a 20 yr old - McNamara at 19 should be safe ( unless he's really hankering to go home as some suggest)

I wouldn't want to give Miller and Dunn away for nothing

One name you don't mention here is Meeson - who has another year to run on his contract. Big big question mark over him

Very interesting times ahead

[GIRO 63]

Bartram, Dunn, cheney

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

PJ is contracted for 2010. Dunn is also contracted for next year. Meesen is contracted for 2010.

I cant see MFC paying any contracts out.

Miller is not contracted.

My delists: McNamara, Bartram, Miller. Buckley should count himself lucky to make the cut.

I think rpfc is right

1, 2, 18, 34, PSD1, and Spencer would be my 6.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

You could well be right RR.

However, I think it is more likely we keep Miller (unless traded) and redraft Buckley in the Rookie Draft.

Even if Dunn was out of contract he would be safe.

Also I am very close to a very senior person at Carton (will not tell you who, so don't ask). I was told by him that Miller wanted to leave the Dees. I told him "you can have him". But they have no interest.

[Guest hangon007]

Also I am very close to a very senior person at Carton (will not tell you who, so don't ask). I was told by him that Miller wanted to leave the Dees. I told him "you can have him". But they have no interest.

Sadly there in lies the problem ... drumming up interest in our players when the whole footy world just wants to bag them ... Melbourne supporters included.

You dont respect them ... they wont respect you. We will never be a serious threat until this culture changes.

Edited September 8, 2009 by hangon007

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

Sadly there in lies the problem ... drumming up interest in our players when the whole footy world just wants to bag them Melbourne supporters included.

Trust me hangon007, I only said this after establishing they had no interest. From my memory the comment was that there was only room for one Cloke on the Carlton list.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Sadly there in lies the problem ... drumming up interest in our players when the whole footy world just wants to bag them ... Melbourne supporters included.

You dont respect them ... they wont respect you. We will never be a serious threat until this culture changes.

True. Will fall on deaf ears though...

The next few years are going to see some players squeezed out that I think many would prefer to keep. You wouldn't want to get hurt or have a bad season in the next 22 rounds, or you're gone. There's just not enough room, and not enough upcoming retirements that will give us space.

[beelzebub 23,191]

True. Will fall on deaf ears though...

The next few years are going to see some players squeezed out that I think many would prefer to keep. You wouldn't want to get hurt or have a bad season in the next 22 rounds, or you're gone. There's just not enough room, and not enough upcoming retirements that will give us space.

ahh... here lays the rub !! its definitely 5 into 4. There will be howls as the various favouites get moved on. we al want to better the team but not apparently at anyones expence. Oh for sure some of the more obvious underachievers will go next year...but in order for more to come in then others must go.

I would think that with possibly fewer picks left ( even after WS and GC trade ) that the club will realy have to be focussed and selective on who gets picked. In turn they have to make some dificult decisions as to who stays.

[drdrake 3,117]

I'm interested to know why Newton was the only senior player to play for Casey on the week end. The two rookies Zomer and Valenti I can understand, IMO both won't be at the club next year, but Newton is a strange one, I believe he is contracted next year maybe he had something to prove.

[Wolfmother 182]

What are the rules regarding rookie listed players.... I thought if you were on a senior list and had played senior football you couldn't be placed on the rookie list....

anyone know??? as some have mention Buckley and Mcnamara as potential rookies

[Wolfmother 182]

I'm interested to know why Newton was the only senior player to play for Casey on the week end. The two rookies Zomer and Valenti I can understand, IMO both won't be at the club next year, but Newton is a strange one, I believe he is contracted next year maybe he had something to prove.

The only players that qualified and weren't injured

[Guest hangon007]

The next few years are going to see some players squeezed out that I think many would prefer to keep.

I'm actually coming to the same conclusion and wish people would stop posting all these stupid threads about "essentially giving player x away for nothing"

If he is worth nothing to us ... hello!!! Time to start thinking and doing the opposite ... hopefully both from a media & fan base perspective.

IMHO I'm not sure what comes first ... the media being disrespectful to your players and the fans following or the fans being disrespectful to their team & the media picking it up.

Either way its time to change ... now I'm not saying dont trade (for the hard of hearing) what I am saying is not all players are trade-able and we just have to accept that.

The annual "all players are trade-able" IMHO is disrespectful and damaging to our list.

Now I know I will get the "normalls" trying to bring me down ... but imagine a unified forum where we talk our boys up and value the opposition players for a fair and reasonable price. The best way to get a discount is treat you opposition negotiators with respect.

IMHO - trading must be a win-win or it wont happen.

Just a thought ...

Edited September 8, 2009 by hangon007

[deeflog 679]

IMHO - trading must be a win-win or it wont happen.

Just a thought ...

i would have thought thats how clubs have looked at trading for the past 100 years, its the fans and media that make biased and unreasonable trade scenarios

[beelzebub 23,191]

What are the rules regarding rookie listed players.... I thought if you were on a senior list and had played senior football you couldn't be placed on the rookie list....

anyone know??? as some have mention Buckley and Mcnamara as potential rookies

You cant be rookied by a club you have been senior listed for. Another club can Rookie you though as per ZacDawson by StKilda after being delisted by Hawthorn

[Guest hangon007]

You cant be rookied by a club you have been senior listed for. Another club can Rookie you though as per ZacDawson by StKilda after being delisted by Hawthorn

Here is the wikipedia link ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rookie_list ... might help with a few questions

[beelzebub 23,191]

Here is the wikipedia link ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rookie_list ... might help with a few questions

thankyou....just a tad more encompassing

Was just rtying to answer the question..hehe..but htis answers them all.

Cheers