No tgheres nothing wrong with th eClub lookiing after the welfare of ITS players and putting whatever resources to bear. But why on earth would you take on someone elses problem ?? I like RR see this as a football club first and a sanitorium last.

If whatever efforts that some would have us put into someone like Peterson imagins the same results put into players without his situation.

Wish the bloke all the luck and help he can get to work his situation through.....theres lots of health professionals out there.....let him seek them... not us.

Whats next...stray cats and dogs ?? Yes Im being ridiculously sarcastic... This isnt "Boys Town" its the MFC !!

But what has Petersen shown to date?

Are you serious? B) You obviously dont watch Hawthorn games!

However, the bigger question is what have the alternatives at say pick 50 onwards in this draft have shown?

Lets stack them up against one another.

Clearly you would only take Peterson if there was no one better. Considering we're probably going to have several rookie picks my opinion is the club could do alot worse than Peterson. There's nothing wrong with a club putting extra time into certain players, it would happen all the time. Colin Sylvia anyone! Here's a guy with talent to play AFL who clearly has his troubles. Let's rookie him, send him off to reach and see what we can do for him. Novel approach helping others but in my opinion it's what good clubs should do.

Why are we expected to be such a benevolent force in this man's life?

I agree that Reach should be involved - I mentioned it earlier, but the footy club is just that.

Krakeour is getting a second chance because of an attitude adjustment AND incredibly good football.

Peterson needs to reassess, get out of the game, and come back when he has his mind right.

Clearly you would only take Peterson if there was no one better. Considering we're probably going to have several rookie picks my opinion is the club could do alot worse than Peterson. There's nothing wrong with a club putting extra time into certain players, it would happen all the time. Colin Sylvia anyone! Here's a guy with talent to play AFL who clearly has his troubles. Let's rookie him, send him off to reach and see what we can do for him. Novel approach helping others but in my opinion it's what good clubs should do.

Depending on the extent of the problems I am not sure I would take him.

Clubs only put extra time into players where there is a feasible and reasonable assessment that the player will be able to turnaround and become a positive input into the Clubs objective relative to alternative options in the market place. A Club has a finite resource base to "develop" players. If they dig deep for one player they must take away from the remaining players who would otherwise draw upon those resources. The FD would want to be sure that there is a reasonable prospect that the player can develop the mindset to exploit the talent.

I am not sure Sylvia is a good example of what your saying. We took Sylvia as pick 3 in the 2003 draft. As we move into 2011 we are awaiting Sylvia's big breakout year. Lots of promise and some great one off games but I wonder if MFC would have drafted Sylvia with that pick if they knew about the LT injury/fitness that would give rise to a long lead time of performance which at the end of 2010 is still to be fulfilled.

The FD should be in the best position to assess this situation and they have a history of being more judicial and considered than many poster here in their preparedness to often "punt" rookie picks.

Are you serious? B) You obviously dont watch Hawthorn games!

However, the bigger question is what have the alternatives at say pick 50 onwards in this draft have shown?

Lets stack them up against one another.

So far he has been a flash in the pan. If he is that good then why have Hawthorn discarded him? It must be serious for them to eject him.

The bigger question is the player and where he is at. rpfc is correct in saying he probably needs some time out of the AFL rat race to determine thats where he wants to be. And a bloke like Krakouer is doing that.

If Petersen issues are serious and he is serious about dealing with them then he should undertaking Reach or other services to his own benefit.

We don't even know what Peterson wants to do

He was apparently out-of-contact with Hawthorn at season end.

We don't know if he intends to go into the Draft

I haven't heard any comments from his manager

As it stands it looks like he (for whatever reason) has voluntarily opted out of AFL footy???

Not saying anything one way or the other, but there is a story here not being told

Edited October 21, 201014 yr by daisycutter

Yeah, can't remember if I posted it earlier & can't bothered checking, but they are my thoughts too.

The guys has shot through and not even attended his end-of-season exit review with the coach.

Doesn't sound like he is particularly committed to playing AFL football in the future.

Seems like his priorities lie elsewhere.

No sense trying to convince the guy to play AFL.

He has to want it.

Yeah, can't remember if I posted it earlier & can't bothered checking, but they are my thoughts too.

The guys has shot through and not even attended his end-of-season exit review with the coach.

Doesn't sound like he is particularly committed to playing AFL football in the future.

Seems like his priorities lie elsewhere.

No sense trying to convince the guy to play AFL.

He has to want it.

Yes, that's the difference with Krakeour. Pick up troubled players who want to change, don't pick up troubled players and try and change them.

The best therapy for Petersen may be life outside the AFL without the advantages of AFL base pay and the social cred conferred by being on an AFL list. He needs to help himself first and want it - Krakouer appears to have made this step. Not everyone is cut out to make the very significant sacrifices required to be an AFL footballer.

Edited October 22, 201014 yr by old55

How about picking up troubled players who want to change and helping them. No one really knows what is going on with Peterson and we probably never will as another talented player drops off the radar. Where I come from helping those less fortunate is a given not a choice so I look at these matters differently. No doubt he has to want it himself but you'll find very few troubled kids want to remain troubled kids. Personally I think clubs and the AFL with their massive budgets should be helping as much as possible and I'd love to see the MFC at the forefront of this. It surprises me little that neither richmond or hawthorn could help. You can harp on all you like about the club not being a hostel or such but the fact remains these kids need help and the clubs are in a position to help. So stick your reasons why we shouldn't help and maybe look at ways we can help.

I'll hop off my soapbox now and let you go on justifying why we shouldn't help a troubled kid.

...

Not that I know much about the situation, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that the AFL have support systems in place for people such as Carl and that these avenues may have already been presented to him.

How about picking up troubled players who want to change and helping them. No one really knows what is going on with Peterson and we probably never will as another talented player drops off the radar. Where I come from helping those less fortunate is a given not a choice so I look at these matters differently. No doubt he has to want it himself but you'll find very few troubled kids want to remain troubled kids. Personally I think clubs and the AFL with their massive budgets should be helping as much as possible and I'd love to see the MFC at the forefront of this. It surprises me little that neither richmond or hawthorn could help. You can harp on all you like about the club not being a hostel or such but the fact remains these kids need help and the clubs are in a position to help. So stick your reasons why we shouldn't help and maybe look at ways we can help.

I'll hop off my soapbox now and let you go on justifying why we shouldn't help a troubled kid.

I appreciate your passion for this bloke.

But we are a footy club, not the Reach Foundation.

Footy is not more important than your life and he needs to get his right.

I appreciate your passion for this bloke.

But we are a footy club, not the Reach Foundation.

Footy is not more important than your life and he needs to get his right.

It's not just this bloke but we all have an obligation to shoot out a hand when we can.

It's not just this bloke but we all have an obligation to shoot out a hand when we can.

Of course, but it doesn't mean Cameron Schwab has to get out his chequebook.

Of course, but it doesn't mean Cameron Schwab has to get out his chequebook.

We rookie list him on peanuts, send him off to reach at no cost to us. The chequebook would only need to come if he plays some good footy for us. Look I'm not saying we definately take him. I'm of the opinion it would be worth talking to him about his intent. If the club was convinced he wanted help and wanted to play football then we rookie list him. I have never said we just pick him so we can help him. I mean we rookie listed Healey and Hughes for several years at zero return so what's to lose.

I'd rather contract the mumps.

We don't need bloody Carl Peterson.

I don't care what hardships he has gone through or how everybody deserves a 24th chance.

A simple cost-benefit evaluation should be enough.

On the other hand, if it's a player who's capable in the ruck that we're looking for while Spencer, Fitzpatrick and Gawn develop, then why not North Ballarat's Orren Stephenson?

I for one have recommended him over a month ago- but Skipper is now another that must be considered.