On 29/08/2011 at 04:05, nutbean said:

Are we really putting Tom's delaying signing to post season as a reason for our year ?

Absolutely not, it's a small part of things that have gone wrong, but a part nonetheless.

I didn't want to start a new Tom Scully thread. But I did want to make a point about journalists, after reading today that "FORWARD Taylor Walker says he never contemplated leaving Adelaide despite persisting reports linking him to several rival clubs, most notably newcomers Greater Western Sydney." (link)

I'm just wondering if we should be expecting the likes of Mike Sheahan, Jon Ralph, Mark Stevens et al to issue a public apology to the fans for continually reporting false information? Was it just me, or were all of them pretty much on the 'Walker is gone' bandwagon? Obviously this won't happen - but the point I'm making is about accountability, for which they are seemingly not held to any form of. The connection being that they have obviously all been saying exactly the same thing about Tom Scully.

it hasnt helped

  On 29/08/2011 at 04:18, Fan said:

Absolutely not, it's a small part of things that have gone wrong, but a part nonetheless.

Would you call it a major distraction as others have ?

Would you suggest that just as Jeremy Howe is about to launch himself to take a hanger he thinks to himself - bloody Tom Scully.

Barty lines up for goal and just as he goes to kick he thinks of all the ways he could spend a million dollars a season and bingo - a point.

Chip streaming out of defense and sees Tom on a lead - no way I am kicking to that defector.

I am sure it has proven a major distraction.

  On 29/08/2011 at 04:37, nutbean said:

Would you call it a major distraction as others have ?

Would you suggest that just as Jeremy Howe is about to launch himself to take a hanger he thinks to himself - bloody Tom Scully.

Barty lines up for goal and just as he goes to kick he thinks of all the ways he could spend a million dollars a season and bingo - a point.

Chip streaming out of defense and sees Tom on a lead - no way I am kicking to that defector.

I am sure it has proven a major distraction.

I said it was a "small" part so no I'm not saying it's a major distraction. TBH I don't know what sort of distraction it's been; do you??

Look I'm not being "smart" here but if Selwood said it was a distraction at Geelong I'd believe it is a distraction at Melbourne. It's not a matter of players "on the day" being distracted as they play the game but it's a matter of being focused on the preparation for the game.

I'm not making any judgement on Tom, he's entitled to act in his best interest, but to suggest it's not had an impact is to deny the bleeding obvious.

  On 29/08/2011 at 04:16, Fan said:

I thought I was responding to you when you asked

"I would love to know how waiting until the end of the year is inflicting pain on the club."

I'm not targeting Tom, you are by asking the question. Tom is within his rights. Tom has not helped the club.

All this begs the question - can one defer talks until the season is over and not affect the season?

If yes, what did Tom do wrong?

If no, does that mean a player can not defer talks?

And surely, that also means Sylvia and Morton are just as guilty of harming the club.

As was Watts last season.

  On 29/08/2011 at 04:54, rpfc said:

All this begs the question - can one defer talks until the season is over and not affect the season?

If yes, what did Tom do wrong?

If no, does that mean a player can not defer talks?

OK, so we agree it affected the season.

If Matthew Warnock deferred his contract negotiations til season end it wouldn't have affected the season so the answer to your first question is "yes". Could Tom? I'd suggest he couldn't.

I've never suggested Tom did anything wrong, in fact I've been at pains to say he didn't do anything wrong.

I'm assuming your last question is rhetorical.

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:01, Gareth Keenan said:

And surely, that also means Sylvia and Morton are just as guilty of harming the club.

As was Watts last season.

I don't agree. The speculation around GWS and the $1 million for a player clearly not worth that money in an ordinary market makes Tom situation unique. I think the players know that Sylvia and Morton will be payed normal market rates. I think that makes a difference as Tom has dilemma's neither of those boys face (AFAIK). It's not his fault. I don't blame him. But I also recognize it has had some impact.

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:01, Gareth Keenan said:

And surely, that also means Sylvia and Morton are just as guilty of harming the club.

As was Watts last season.

Not unless it turns into media circus and feeding frenzy for anyone with half an opinion.

So I suppose we have to tell all our players that

1/ It is ok for the club to delay talks until the end of the year because everyone must play for the club and bow to the clubs wishes and it is in the clubs best interest to do so.

2/ It is ok for the player to delay to the end of the season as long as the papers, supporters, TV and radio journo's dont turn into a huge "will he or wont he go" story - THEN

3/ If it does turn into a shark feeding frenzy then I'm afraid the player cant wait until the end of season - the player just has to make up his mind now.

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:02, Fan said:

OK, so we agree it affected the season.

Never said it didn't.

The issue I have is with people saying it 'damaged' the club.

Affecting this failed season in a minor way is not the same as 'damaging' the club.

'Damage' is loaded language that isn't warranted in my opinion, certainly not for a distraction.

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:16, rpfc said:

Never said it didn't.

The issue I have is with people saying it 'damaged' the club.

Affecting this failed season in a minor way is not the same as 'damaging' the club.

'Damage' is loaded language that isn't warranted in my opinion, certainly not for a distraction.

Yes, I remember these discussion. They turn into semantics don't they. You start with "inflicting pain" and finish with "damaging".

Then we probably agree.

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:16, rpfc said:

Never said it didn't.

The issue I have is with people saying it 'damaged' the club.

Affecting this failed season in a minor way is not the same as 'damaging' the club.

'Damage' is loaded language that isn't warranted in my opinion, certainly not for a distraction.

I agree rpfc. I have no idea if it had an effect on the players, you'd have to ask them but it would be minimal at most. I would of thought the biggest impact it would have had was the media interviews with Dean Bailey throughout the year.

Let's not forget that it's Scully's right as a player if he wishes to wait until the end of the year to consider his offer from the club. Other players are allowed to make that decision and he shouldn't be forced into something because it's seen as 'best for the club.' Of course he could still decide to go to GWS, it's his life to choose what he wants to do but he shouldn't be forced into anything because a bunch of supporters are feeling anxious.

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:38, Fan said:

Yes, I remember these discussion. They turn into semantics don't they. You start with "inflicting pain" and finish with "damaging".

Then we probably agree.

Great...

I wasn't the first to use the word 'damage.'

It's incendiary language, it's unnecessary, and I am getting sick of posters targetting a 20 year old with the vitriol they have been recently.

He is still a Demon, and will be until he isn't.

Respect should be shown.

That is it.

I won't get into a semantical war of words, I don't care about semantics.

  On 28/08/2011 at 12:21, Sylvia Saint said:

As for Scully the player, I think we're all judging him a little harsher than we normally would given the circumstances. I think he played a reasonable game today and is progressing quite well for a 2nd year player. I'd expect a big 2012 from him. If we pay him 700k to stay put then the fans will be expecting a lot from him in the coming years.

Never thought I'd contribute to this thread!!

Unfortunately the premature intervention of GWS has set an expectation that no 2o year old kid without a proper pre-season could ever be expected to meet.

To keep Tom we are going to have to pay him more than his form warrants - and distort the salary structure that Tim Harrington has been developing. This will put the harmony of the playing group at risk for as long as Tom remains at the club .... particularly if his troublesome knee ever curtails his output (as it has this year)

The fact is that he hasn't earned a Judd-like salary - and that we can't afford to pay him in the hope that he'll be able to lift his output from Round One next year to Judd-like levels every year until at least Round 24 2021.

Left alone he might have become a star for the MFC. As it is we need to move on without him - and use the compensation picks wisely. Unless he is prepared to stay on the same sort of salary we are giving his (better) performed peers , then we need to cut our losses and let him follow the dollar.

He may become a wealthy man - but whether he will get the satisfaction he could have got if the GWS window had never been open is problematical

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:53, hoopla said:

Never thought I'd contribute to this thread!!

Unfortunately the premature intervention of GWS has set an expectation that no 2o year old kid without a proper pre-season could ever be expected to meet.

To keep Tom we are going to have to pay him more than his form warrants - and distort the salary structure that Tim Harrington has been developing. This will put the harmony of the playing group at risk for as long as Tom remains at the club .... particularly if his troublesome knee ever curtails his output (as it has this year)

The fact is that he hasn't earned a Judd-like salary - and that we can't afford to pay him in the hope that he'll be able to lift his output from Round One next year to Judd-like levels every year until at least Round 24 2021.

Left alone he might have become a star for the MFC. As it is we need to move on without him - and use the compensation picks wisely. Unless he is prepared to stay on the same sort of salary we are giving his (better) performed peers , then we need to cut our losses and let him follow the dollar.

He may become a wealthy man - but whether he will get the satisfaction he could have got if the GWS window had never been open is problematical

Once again we are speculating. The club has made him an offer and that is the end of it, no more will be offered to him. We do not know exactly what the offer is what clauses are in it for bonuses relating to on field performance, B&F, AA, Chas etc. I don't believe they would risk long term jeopardy of club or list to keep Scully and furthermore we really don't know what he is thinking or if he is driven by money alone.

Please whatever the decision is either way can we ban all threads to do with him from either the he's going or he's staying telling the other "I told you do so". The morning after the decision is made the sun will come up MFC will still be here with a future and a new coach on the Horizon

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:53, hoopla said:

Never thought I'd contribute to this thread!!

Unfortunately the premature intervention of GWS has set an expectation that no 2o year old kid without a proper pre-season could ever be expected to meet.

To keep Tom we are going to have to pay him more than his form warrants - and distort the salary structure that Tim Harrington has been developing. This will put the harmony of the playing group at risk for as long as Tom remains at the club .... particularly if his troublesome knee ever curtails his output (as it has this year)

The fact is that he hasn't earned a Judd-like salary - and that we can't afford to pay him in the hope that he'll be able to lift his output from Round One next year to Judd-like levels every year until at least Round 24 2021.

Left alone he might have become a star for the MFC. As it is we need to move on without him - and use the compensation picks wisely. Unless he is prepared to stay on the same sort of salary we are giving his (better) performed peers , then we need to cut our losses and let him follow the dollar.

He may become a wealthy man - but whether he will get the satisfaction he could have got if the GWS window had never been open is problematical

We have reportedly given him a "best offer we can give" offer, and that is that.

So it tacit to say it is within our wage structure (to borrow an EPL term).

He will be paid more than if the GWS didn't exist. Yes and?

You play the cards you are given. If these boys are resentful of Tom, then maybe it will inspire them to do as much as he does to prepare himself for football. We were always going to have to pay 'overs' for a few of our players after we assembled the list we have assembled.

You play the cards you are given. Or you can fold?

But that's just giving up on a decent hand not knowing what the other person has - or whether he is bluffing (the 'he' is GWS in this metaphor).

Scully will be gone next year, post after post we try and rationalise it .. he is gone and lets just move on

  On 29/08/2011 at 06:18, cat attack said:

Scully will be gone next year, post after post we try and rationalise it .. he is gone and lets just move on

I think this is an ironic post...

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:52, rpfc said:

Great...

I wasn't the first to use the word 'damage.'

It's incendiary language, it's unnecessary, and I am getting sick of posters targetting a 20 year old with the vitriol they have been recently.

He is still a Demon, and will be until he isn't.

Respect should be shown.

That is it.

I won't get into a semantical war of words, I don't care about semantics.

+1

That's exactly where we stand now as we did when this saga began and unfortunately some posters are about as patient as my 2 year old when their are lollies on offer. Roll on end of season and Thursday 13th October 2011 because by the end of that day we will know if the above has changed.

  On 28/08/2011 at 12:14, Jimmi C said:

Disagree Fyfe was the logical choice for number 1.

With all the hype Scully got in 2009, can you imagin the reaction BP would have got if he'd pick someone other than Tom...At the time the logical choice was Scully..... He might have gotten away with not picking Trengove at 2, but not Scully....

  On 29/08/2011 at 05:16, rpfc said:

Never said it didn't.

The issue I have is with people saying it 'damaged' the club.

Affecting this failed season in a minor way is not the same as 'damaging' the club.

'Damage' is loaded language that isn't warranted in my opinion, certainly not for a distraction.

I agreed with the term damaged, i dont see how if he has "affected" the team negatively throughout the year, then saying it has damaged the club is appropriate,

The extent of the damage is another issue

Has media got anyone right about who GWS will get next year.

Why am i saying this?

Because Alipate Carlile resign with Power. http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/122247/default.aspx

And for a fact only GWS signing Davis came into media attention just week before his announcement.

So who do you believe scully or media?

I think the answer is simple, because there hasn't been any proof yet that scully lied to anyone so I trust scully.

  Quote

"You guys (media) were the ones that were talking it up," Walker said of the speculation.

"I was clear in my mind what I wanted to do."

"I was always in talks with the club and so very relieved to have done a deal."

Walker said his manager had not told him of any other offers and wanted to stay with the Crows because "I love the club".

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/i-never-wanted-to-leave-crows-walker-20110829-1jhgs.html#ixzz1WTq8Bk8N

What's that ticking sound?

  On 30/08/2011 at 03:35, Dees said:

Has media got anyone right about who GWS will get next year.

Why am i saying this?

Because Alipate Carlile resign with Power. http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/122247/default.aspx

And for a fact only GWS signing Davis came into media attention just week before his announcement.

So who do you believe scully or media?

I think the answer is simple, because there hasn't been any proof yet that scully lied to anyone so I trust scully.

I am happy for Port, if those guys weren't coming to Melbourne I am glad they stayed. It was the same with Walker.

The media just go with anything they hear. They never commit saying 98% sure to give themselves an out. No reason not believe Scully.

Problem is everyone nowadays seem to read the papers and watch Tv news and thinks it's 100% true. Look at choppergate on channel 9, they even lie about a live broadcast for news!

The only people I think would know if Scully is going would be Tom and his manager and family. Not sure they would be telling Schwarze and barrett etc.

We also need to remember we have 3 key players out of contract. Scully, Sylvia and Morton. I dare say GWS are chasing all 3. Almost certain Sylvia will stay, will take a lot for him to leave.