On 18/11/2013 at 21:37, Satyriconhome said:

Nice to see you are convinced, any rookie spot is speculative, that is what they are there for, knowing Jason Taylor and Kelly O'Donnell, there will probably be a couple of left field in there anyway......can't see Nev being a waste

He has 5 years. He is less speculative than other would be rookies.

What about Nathan Stark? Should be standing up for him to be re-rookied.

One year, plagued by injuries, delisted.

I hate the rookie list.

  On 18/11/2013 at 22:01, jayceebee31 said:

I agree somewhat with your opinion/s in this regard. In watching training ( have not missed the opening training in the last 15 years.).Nev just does not have his attitude fully switched on .Knowing his position was on the line, I would ave thought he would have prepared himself for opening day in absolute pristine condition,he wasn't - therefore leaving the room for another.

Does not deserve a rookie position IMO.

Use my favourite phrase, twaddle, he was due back yesterday, 5 year player, but he already knew he was being delisted but was allowed to train on, were you there yesterday?....he completed the whole session without a problem, so not pristine condition?.....I know I talked to him afterwards

  On 18/11/2013 at 21:53, Nasher said:

I wouldn't have thought I was saying anything particularly controversial there, given that he's been on the list for 5 years and never came close to cementing his place. I'm not being critical, I've already stated in this thread that I like the guy and his attitude for the game, I just don't agree with hanging on to NQRs forever. Spots on the list are valuable - even on the rookie list - and should be treated as such.

I am believer in using the rookie spots for speculation, retaining players you don't want to lose (particularly but being the industry it is now, decisions have to be made). left field choices etc etc, you have 40 on the main list, like everybody not a fan of long contracts that tie a player to the list without the runs on the board, so the main list I agree with you, rookie no

  On 18/11/2013 at 22:02, CBDees said:

Are you sure that we are only eligible for four rookies as I thought that some teams had six? What is it that qualifies/limits teams for a specific number?

It is based on the number of players on your primary list. AFL clubs must have a minimum of 38 players on their senior list and a maximum of 40. Technically you are allowed then to top up with rookies up to a maximum overall list size of 47. But player 45 to 47 (any players above 44 players on the list) must be what are called category B rookies (academy players, international rookies, players who've been unregistered in football for 3 years et cetera)

In relation to Melbourne we will have a list of 40. Which enables us a maximum of 7 rookies - four rookies proper and 3 category B rookies. Likely we will have 4 rookie picks in the rookie draft and perhaps add Maia Westrupp as a category B rookie.

If a club has a senior list of 38 they can have 6 rookies and 3 category Bs. Some clubs could do this to massage its total player playments under the salary cap as rookie list contracts are less burdensome on TPP.

That is why we see different rookie sizes. Brisbane and Sydney's are usually larger because they can add their local state academy players as catagory B players. Other teams who have international rookies on their list will have larger rookie list sizes. Some clubs with one Irishman will have 5, clubs without 4 et cetera et cetera.

Gold Coast and GWS have different list sizes rules altogether at the moment as well.

  On 18/11/2013 at 22:32, rpfc said:

He has 5 years. He is less speculative than other would be rookies.

What about Nathan Stark? Should be standing up for him to be re-rookied.

One year, plagued by injuries, delisted.

I hate the rookie list.

Tsk tsk you should know me better than that, asked about him, as I thought it was a bit harsh, answer "not sure whether he could physically stand up to the rigours of AFL" , so one of those guys with injuries all the time and the subsequent removal from the rookie list

  On 18/11/2013 at 22:56, Satyriconhome said:

Tsk tsk you should know me better than that, asked about him, as I thought it was a bit harsh, answer "not sure whether he could physically stand up to the rigours of AFL" , so one of those guys with injuries all the time and the subsequent removal from the rookie list

I have my own answers about what happened to Nathan and from what I have heard it stinks.

Suffice it to say, those on the rookie list are treated like the underclass of the playing group and if you have the misfortune to be injured then you are ignored almost entirely.

The system has more to answer for than the club, but I hope Roos helps build a culture that is more inclusive.

And get rid of the Rookie List - any kid that gets taken in the ND gets an automatic 2 year contract, any rookie can end up like Stark - oft injured, and cast off after a year.

  On 18/11/2013 at 23:09, rpfc said:

I have my own answers about what happened to Nathan and from what I have heard it stinks.

Suffice it to say, those on the rookie list are treated like the underclass of the playing group and if you have the misfortune to be injured then you are ignored almost entirely.

The system has more to answer for than the club, but I hope Roos helps build a culture that is more inclusive.

And get rid of the Rookie List - any kid that gets taken in the ND gets an automatic 2 year contract, any rookie can end up like Stark - oft injured, and cast off after a year.

I had three or four conversations throughout the year with Nathan Stark, never seemed 'isolated', more concerned with the run of injuries, would be interested to know what you have heard, I am only repeating what I was told, which if truthful, not really "dumping"

  On 18/11/2013 at 23:09, rpfc said:

I have my own answers about what happened to Nathan and from what I have heard it stinks.

Suffice it to say, those on the rookie list are treated like the underclass of the playing group and if you have the misfortune to be injured then you are ignored almost entirely.

The system has more to answer for than the club, but I hope Roos helps build a culture that is more inclusive.

And get rid of the Rookie List - any kid that gets taken in the ND gets an automatic 2 year contract, any rookie can end up like Stark - oft injured, and cast off after a year.

I think the AFLPA is pushing for this. Just one list, everyone equal on it.

  On 18/11/2013 at 23:32, Satyriconhome said:

I had three or four conversations throughout the year with Nathan Stark, never seemed 'isolated', more concerned with the run of injuries, would be interested to know what you have heard, I am only repeating what I was told, which if truthful, not really "dumping"

Well, let me attempt to say this delicately - the players are unlikely to spill to a stranger at training are they?

I was quite impressed that with all the disharmony with Neeld - the players never publicly let there feelings known. It helped to not have to deal with that during this awful year.

Nathan had to endure some issues that I hope can be rectified, but I don't think they will be fully rectified until the Rookie List is abolished.

  On 18/11/2013 at 23:41, titan_uranus said:

I think the AFLPA is pushing for this. Just one list, everyone equal on it.

They could have got rid of it already if they put a priority on it.

I'm kinda surprised the rookie list is still in place, because it doesn't actually now serve the purpose it was originally intended for, but at the same time I can see why it still in place - money.

Suddenly the minimum wage and minimum length of initial contract for every single player would increase.

Makes the now speculative rookie picks a lot more costly to clubs.

  On 18/11/2013 at 23:46, rpfc said:

Well, let me attempt to say this delicately - the players are unlikely to spill to a stranger at training are they?

I was quite impressed that with all the disharmony with Neeld - the players never publicly let there feelings known. It helped to not have to deal with that during this awful year.

Nathan had to endure some issues that I hope can be rectified, but I don't think they will be fully rectified until the Rookie List is abolished.

So let me put this indelicately, how is it what you are saying is the truth.

Are you part of the inner sanctum of the club, if so, then you need to identify yourself as such, because if you are not this will colour how people take what you are posting

Most posters know who I am, and that I have regular conversations with the players, I actually put what they said to me

eg as in the training report yesterday, Chris Dawes is rather peeved with all the naysayers and I asked if I could put what he said on twitter and this board and he said feel free, so not a 'stranger' as you would say

Some of what you said in the past has turned out to be unfounded

Note I also had feelings expressed to me last year, but I don't put that on a public board, I had something said to me yesterday as well 'in confidence' so I respect that

If what you know doesn't have those caveats then feel free to share

  On 19/11/2013 at 00:09, Satyriconhome said:

So let me put this indelicately, how is it what you are saying is the truth.

Are you part of the inner sanctum of the club, if so, then you need to identify yourself as such, because if you are not this will colour how people take what you are posting

Most posters know who I am, and that I have regular conversations with the players, I actually put what they said to me

eg as in the training report yesterday, Chris Dawes is rather peeved with all the naysayers and I asked if I could put what he said on twitter and this board and he said feel free, so not a 'stranger' as you would say

Some of what you said in the past has turned out to be unfounded

Note I also had feelings expressed to me last year, but I don't put that on a public board, I had something said to me yesterday as well 'in confidence' so I respect that

If what you know doesn't have those caveats then feel free to share

Don't get so defensive. I am telling you that a supporter at training may not get the whole truth - hardly groundbreaking. And I can confirm that is the case with Stark.

And what have I said in the past that was unfounded?

I rarely claim inside knowledge, and I am struggling to think of such an instance that was so erroneous.

I am easily seduced by glimpses of "something". Sylvia teased me as did the likes of Gysberts, Petterd and even Jamie Bennell . With Neville, I love his hardness at the ball but this is pretty much all I have seen. He lacks a yard of pace or evasiveness required by someone his size. Seen 5 years of Neville and I wouldn't be keeping him on any list.

  On 19/11/2013 at 00:40, nutbean said:

I am easily seduced by glimpses of "something". Sylvia teased me as did the likes of Gysberts, Petterd and even Jamie Bennell . With Neville, I love his hardness at the ball but this is pretty much all I have seen. He lacks a yard of pace or evasiveness required by someone his size. Seen 5 years of Neville and I wouldn't be keeping him on any list.

Nev has done one full pre season which was last year, he is in the same boat as Strauss, Tapscott and Blease, only difference being he was out of contract, the club has asked him to continue training with them, no promises (as I was told), but obviously he thinks there may be rooke spot at the end of it, but the club must have asked for a reason.

Would assume if nothing eventuates, he could easily pick up a spot in the WAFL

  On 19/11/2013 at 00:30, rpfc said:

Don't get so defensive. I am telling you that a supporter at training may not get the whole truth - hardly groundbreaking. And I can confirm that is the case with Stark.

And what have I said in the past that was unfounded?

I rarely claim inside knowledge, and I am struggling to think of such an instance that was so erroneous.

I don't get defensive, old and ugly enough to stand by what I type, you are already stating that there were other issues behind the Stark delisting, if so what are they? and how do you know.....I know Dawes is [censored] off with certain sections of the Melbourne supporter base who have written him off, he told me to point out he is fine and ready to go this season, which I did....slight difference

  On 19/11/2013 at 01:18, Satyriconhome said:

I don't get defensive, old and ugly enough to stand by what I type, you are already stating that there were other issues behind the Stark delisting, if so what are they? and how do you know.....I know Dawes is [censored] off with certain sections of the Melbourne supporter base who have written him off, he told me to point out he is fine and ready to go this season, which I did....slight difference

Difference to what?

I am not following you.

And while I am not going to reveal where I got this information - it is not about his delisting, it is about the year he spent on the Rookie List at Melbourne. It was a story I found unacceptable as a fan of the MFC and the AFL and a lot of it can be relieved by removing the Rookie List. The remainder is up to what culture Roos instills amongst the club.

You are the one that wants to go in the alley and measure sources - you need not bother - I am certain of the information. I don't want to go into it further as the kid is no longer at the club.

Yes, satyricon...

We all know you'll aggressively defend against any perceived slight or attack directed at the club, whether logical or not, on either side of the argument.

People are going to have different opinions to you.

Seriously man, let it go.

  On 19/11/2013 at 01:18, Satyriconhome said:

Nev has done one full pre season which was last year, he is in the same boat as Strauss, Tapscott and Blease, only difference being he was out of contract, the club has asked him to continue training with them, no promises (as I was told), but obviously he thinks there may be rooke spot at the end of it, but the club must have asked for a reason.

Would assume if nothing eventuates, he could easily pick up a spot in the WAFL

Interesting other three. I don't see Neville in the same light as the three you mentioned. These three are exactly the teasers I alluded to. Not to say any of the three will make it but Blease has explosive pace as a major weapon, Tapscott has not bad pace but with a body to run through brick walls and Strauss ( I have been led to believe) has exquisite foot skills.

For any of these to be rookied, I'd get it - but I just haven't seen Neville offer anything to hang his hat on. ( and yes he may have a fabulous desire and attitude)

I've heard Stark aside, if you weren't in the best 25 at the MFC 2012/2013 you were completely deserted. No feedback from line or head coach, at one point a player went to MN asking for extra one on one training, and he was told to practice it at Casey.

It's in the past, so we all move on but the cancer had spread throughout our club, and thankfully due to PJ, Glenn, us as committed supporters the ship has been righted.

Pretty poor analogy, when "cancer that spread throughout the entire organisation" can be eradicated by bringing in a handful of new people in key positions...

  On 19/11/2013 at 02:26, Arrow said:

I've heard Stark aside, if you weren't in the best 25 at the MFC 2012/2013 you were completely deserted. No feedback from line or head coach, at one point a player went to MN asking for extra one on one training, and he was told to practice it at Casey.

It's in the past, so we all move on but the cancer had spread throughout our club, and thankfully due to PJ, Glenn, us as committed supporters the ship has been righted.

As somebody who watched training quite often last year, that is fanciful to say the least, the only beef I have had from the players is there was too much emphasis on running pre Xmas, the only time the squads broke up was in the session before the game, and the Club went as far as bringing the Casey players to train with the Melbourne guys....it is a new season, can we all just drop the past......let's look forward

If there is a story about Stark then I haven't read it, or heard it

  On 19/11/2013 at 02:30, Machsy said:

Pretty poor analogy, when "cancer that spread throughout the entire organisation" can be eradicated by bringing in a handful of new people in key positions...

I don't follow. There wasn't a single facet of us as a club that succeeded last year. The three we've bought in have righted the ship.. We have stability at board level for the first time in years, stability in an extended sponsorship deal which hasn't happened since LG, a component coach. This is the best we've looked off-field in nearly a decade. Now the last part is getting the on-field correct, but 15,000 before December agree with me that 'a handful of people in key positions' has done exactly that.

  On 19/11/2013 at 02:34, Satyriconhome said:

As somebody who watched training quite often last year, that is fanciful to say the least, the only beef I have had from the players is there was too much emphasis on running pre Xmas, the only time the squads broke up was in the session before the game, and the Club went as far as bringing the Casey players to train with the Melbourne guys....it is a new season, can we all just drop the past......let's look forward

If there is a story about Stark then I haven't read it, or heard it

It's public knowledge now that Magner was pi55ed with the club & said as such to the herald sun about how he was handled last year by Neeld & the coaches. If it happened to Magner I'm sure he wasn't the only one. Why do you have to blindly defend the club? They weren't, aren't & never will be a perfect organisation. This is a forum where people are entitled to voice there opinions or things they have heard etc. Your blind faith or one sidedness only diminishes your credibility IMO. I'm appreciative that you make posts about training etc & you have some good info to pass on about players you talk to, but you could be a little bit more objective when others have an opinion that doesn't match your own.

  On 19/11/2013 at 02:45, Bonkers said:

It's public knowledge now that Magner was pi55ed with the club & said as such to the herald sun about how he was handled last year by Neeld & the coaches. If it happened to Magner I'm sure he wasn't the only one. Why do you have to blindly defend the club? They weren't, aren't & never will be a perfect organisation. This is a forum where people are entitled to voice there opinions or things they have heard etc. Your blind faith or one sidedness only diminishes your credibility IMO. I'm appreciative that you make posts about training etc & you have some good info to pass on about players you talk to, but you could be a little bit more objective when others have an opinion that doesn't match your own.

It's because he thinks that because he attends training and chats to the players, he's one of the boys and knows all the issues going on at the club. In his mind, if he hadn't heard it, it mustn't have happened.

I wouldn't normally like to criticise people who go out of their way to report on things (like training) that I have no access to, but the poster you're responding to is completely deluded about his place in the world.

  On 19/11/2013 at 02:45, Bonkers said:

It's public knowledge now that Magner was pi55ed with the club & said as such to the herald sun about how he was handled last year by Neeld & the coaches. If it happened to Magner I'm sure he wasn't the only one. Why do you have to blindly defend the club? They weren't, aren't & never will be a perfect organisation. This is a forum where people are entitled to voice there opinions or things they have heard etc. Your blind faith or one sidedness only diminishes your credibility IMO. I'm appreciative that you make posts about training etc & you have some good info to pass on about players you talk to, but you could be a little bit more objective when others have an opinion that doesn't match your own.

Facts is what i am interested in, Magner's ego took a kicking and he vented, I don't blame him, he was putting good performances in at Casey and wasn't picked, ask Jeremy Laidler about that, but coaches don't play certain players for a myriad of reasons, this is all history, it's gone, move on.

I don't mind opinions as long as that is what they are, so you must lead with "in my opinion the club is [censored]", not the sister's uncle who is good friends with the barman who serves the drinks at the Bentleigh Club told me that the players are not happy.....so the club must be [censored]

I am looking forward to a new season, I am biased I wear nr 39 on my jumper, hopefully Nev will get a rookie spot

And I will repeat what I put last season..........I don't care what other posters think of me or my credibility.....I don't need anybody's approval

well said saty

most players NOT getting a game are usually upset and bag somebody

not many players get delisted and go on to stellar careers elsewhere

its anew start for all,so lets stop the bagging and go forward

I actually like your opinion and lots of other peoples also

its gives some interesting light on how people view our club

keep giving YOUR own view, I for one enjoy your thoughts