Is Jetta still a chance to be rookied?

Anyone know.

I think I read somewhere that he is still training with us.

By a whisker

Bennell/Jetta - 98 games

Cook/Gysberts - 19 games

Not THAT much of a whisker...

The inference that he is a supporter at training and will get equivalent information as a 'good source,' and if you trust me you will take it as impeccable, is ridiculous.

Given this is an internet forum, I take most of what I read as unproven but interesting.

I don't really expect anyone to divulge the source of their information.

But when the information alludes to something (eg Stark's mistreatment), I would kind of expect some level of detail.

Else why bother to bring it up?

Is Jetta still a chance to be rookied?

Anyone know.

I think I read somewhere that he is still training with us.

Yeah, according to afl.com.au, Nev is still training with us.

Are we looking to rookie him, or even re-draft him with pick 57 (given the apparent shallowness of this draft)?

We are still in need of a small crumbing forward, and he isn't afraid of the rough stuff, nor does he shirk a contest.

Bennell/Jetta - 98 games

Cook/Gysberts - 19 games

Not THAT much of a whisker...

I was suggesting stuie that all of them were very ordinary.

IMO at any other club Bennell would have got a quarter of the games he did at the MFC.

Excuse the pun but we are splitting hairs

An ordinary lot.

I was suggesting stuie that all of them were very ordinary.

IMO at any other club Bennell would have got a quarter of the games he did at the MFC.

Excuse the pun but we are splitting hairs

An ordinary lot.

No disagreement there OD!

Given this is an internet forum, I take most of what I read as unproven but interesting.

I don't really expect anyone to divulge the source of their information.

But when the information alludes to something (eg Stark's mistreatment), I would kind of expect some level of detail.

Else why bother to bring it up?

I bothered to bring it up to highlight that Rookies get treated differently to those on the Primary List and it happened at the MFC and I was not happy about it, I have bit my tongue for months but thought I would share my views as we were discussing the Rookie List with regard to Jetta. I hadn't wanted to jeopardise any chances that Stark had to retain his spot, should any poor soul at the club read this site.

I gave 'some level of detail' when I said the source is impeccable.

possible rookie option ... rookie pick 50 ish.

The club asked him to continue training with the boys.

Being rookied was not mentioned.

I bothered to bring it up to highlight that Rookies get treated differently to those on the Primary List and it happened at the MFC and I was not happy about it, I have bit my tongue for months but thought I would share my views as we were discussing the Rookie List with regard to Jetta. I hadn't wanted to jeopardise any chances that Stark had to retain his spot, should any poor soul at the club read this site.

I gave 'some level of detail' when I said the source is impeccable.

I didn't realise you were in the ACT, impeccable meaning the same sort of source that emanates from that white [censored] pile on the big hill there?

I agree with what somebody else wrote, your stated categorically, you do need to back that up, otherwise it is a rumour

For all the posters who love having a dig at me, quite simple don't read what I write, as I said last year as well, I skim over some posters "thoughts"

I didn't realise you were in the ACT, impeccable meaning the same sort of source that emanates from that white shit pile on the big hill there?

I agree with what somebody else wrote, your stated categorically, you do need to back that up, otherwise it is a rumour

For all the posters who love having a dig at me, quite simple don't read what I write, as I said last year as well, I skim over some posters "thoughts"

People make claims about information all the time without giving any details about where it comes from. It's then up to the reader to decide how much weight to put on that post.

Surely it's obvious why people can't say where they get their information from sometimes.

People make claims about information all the time without giving any details about where it comes from. It's then up to the reader to decide how much weight to put on that post.

Surely it's obvious why people can't say where they get their information from sometimes.

Nasher, Saty told us what Stark had told him, to which RP shot him down, only to follow it up with a comment that we are "meant" to believe that has come from an "impeccable" source, yet he hasn't informed us of any details let alone the source he heard it from. Sure, RP might have information about the treatment of rookies, but I'm sure if he has a little think about it, he can see why some are questioning his posts.

Generally I understand that criticism of Saty, but I think this time the poor little bugger has a valid point.

Bennell/Jetta - 98 games

Cook/Gysberts - 19 games

Not THAT much of a whisker...

You clearly have not seen OD cat then

The club is doing the right thing by him.

Letting him train keeps his fitness up and a chance to be drafted deep by another club or even Rookied by us or another club.

It shows how close he was to being retained.

I guess it all depends on how the cards fall and who is available at 57 for us.

If there is no-one suitable he may be redrafted at 57.

Nasher, Saty told us what Stark had told him, to which RP shot him down, only to follow it up with a comment that we are "meant" to believe that has come from an "impeccable" source, yet he hasn't informed us of any details let alone the source he heard it from. Sure, RP might have information about the treatment of rookies, but I'm sure if he has a little think about it, he can see why some are questioning his posts.

Generally I understand that criticism of Saty, but I think this time the poor little bugger has a valid point.

I 'shot him down'?

I gave information, the source of which I will not disclose but am very comfortable with, and made a larger point about the Rookie List.

S-home then said that he had talked to Stark and had only divulged he was frustrated with his injuries - as if that was the end of it.

Again, players are not going to divulge the same information to fans at training that they would to their own family and friends.

If s-home wants to continue to question me on this he absolutely can, but the inference that he knows what is going on because he talks to the plaeyrs at training would be laughable if it wasn't for the disaster that 2013 was that occurred while s-home contended vociferiously that 'he spoke to the players' and all was well, and that everyone was just frustrated 'that they didn't take their training form out into games.'

In a weeks time we are going to get 4 more rookies and I want the MFC to treat them like the other 40 players on the list. You can take this as warning or myth but know that I feel so strongly about this and am so sure of the information that I will be emailing the club prior to the Rookie Draft.

I 'shot him down'?

I gave information, the source of which I will not disclose but am very comfortable with, and made a larger point about the Rookie List.

S-home then said that he had talked to Stark and had only divulged he was frustrated with his injuries - as if that was the end of it.

Again, players are not going to divulge the same information to fans at training that they would to their own family and friends.

If s-home wants to continue to question me on this he absolutely can, but the inference that he knows what is going on because he talks to the plaeyrs at training would be laughable if it wasn't for the disaster that 2013 was that occurred while s-home contended vociferiously that 'he spoke to the players' and all was well, and that everyone was just frustrated 'that they didn't take their training form out into games.'

In a weeks time we are going to get 4 more rookies and I want the MFC to treat them like the other 40 players on the list. You can take this as warning or myth but know that I feel so strongly about this and am so sure of the information that I will be emailing the club prior to the Rookie Draft.

Instead of emailing, why don't you just tell Saty, so that he can bring i tup with the appropriate personnel when he is at training next?

Either method, your views will be ignored/laughed at/not read/generally dismissed.

In all seriousness though RP, it sounds like there needs to be more clarity with the rights and responsibilities of rookie-listed players as well as the club. At a quick look, I would imagine that someone like Magner went above and beyond what was required/expected of a rookie, and he wasn't rewarded. That's not to say the club weren't doing less than what they should. Maybe the rookies felt they deserved more, but maybe according to the minimum requirements of the club, they were doing what was expected?

I'm quite sure that if any rookie-listed player were treated less than what was required of the club, that they would be well within their right to discuss the issue with the AFLPA. If anything was out of place, the AFLPA would be emailing the club (which I'm sure carries more weight than your words - no offence).

Unless you know otherwise, I think that's where the story ends.

I 'shot him down'?

I gave information, the source of which I will not disclose but am very comfortable with, and made a larger point about the Rookie List.

S-home then said that he had talked to Stark and had only divulged he was frustrated with his injuries - as if that was the end of it.

Again, players are not going to divulge the same information to fans at training that they would to their own family and friends.

If s-home wants to continue to question me on this he absolutely can, but the inference that he knows what is going on because he talks to the plaeyrs at training would be laughable if it wasn't for the disaster that 2013 was that occurred while s-home contended vociferiously that 'he spoke to the players' and all was well, and that everyone was just frustrated 'that they didn't take their training form out into games.'

In a weeks time we are going to get 4 more rookies and I want the MFC to treat them like the other 40 players on the list. You can take this as warning or myth but know that I feel so strongly about this and am so sure of the information that I will be emailing the club prior to the Rookie Draft.

I have actually talked to quite a few rookies over time, Cameron Johnson, Danny Hughes, Rhys Healey, Mitch Clisby et al and this was the first I have heard that they were poorly treated, I have also gone to quite a few Casey games as well (including being in the changerooms), and have never seen it either so I thought I would question why you had reached this conclusion

I think you need to ask yourself why the players talk freely to me at training, as this may not be the only contact I have

As for last year that was what I was continually told by the players, all of them, yes perhaps it was a 'company' line, but you have to take it on face value, I was also told things and asked not to repeat, which I respected

I support the Club, so that means supporting whoever the incumbents are, I have no wish or the ability to be the CEO, Chairman or Coach, so I will also not criticise them, they are judged by better people than me and always get "found out", so I find bashing them on forums such as this is a bit pointless, of course some of the posters on this board need to do it and that is their right, but this also means that other posters can express an opinion about their 'bashing"

The players don't take ^^ this guy seriously.

It's completely feasible that given the players know you post and have an impact on such a public forum they would be divulge bad information to you. A rookie is never going to say this coach is a ****wit half way through the year to a source that will tell people and potentially ruin the small chance he had in making it.

Supporter conversations are like media interviews, a bucket load of cliches about how this year we're training hard, the coaching is great and there is great moral.

If you do have a great particularly close relationship with one like you seem to be suggesting at, you may get some accurate information from them, but the rest id take with a grain of salt. They say what they have too.

The fact that they know i post helps me talk to them, because I also chat to them about what is on here, they are 'encouraged' not to read it themselves, hence Chris Dawes giving me carte blanche the other day to tell the doubters that he is fine, which I did on here and via Twitter

Again I get told things I am asked not to repeat, which I don't, if some posters on here have a problem with what I post, don't read it, I'll be hopefully going to training on Monday as well, so may chat to one of the new draftees who will tell me of their dismay at being drafted to Melbourne

The players don't take ^^ this guy seriously.

Can't help yourself can you, from somebody who vehemently stated last season he was no longer going to read my posts, telepathy right?

As for last year that was what I was continually told by the players, all of them, yes perhaps it was a 'company' line, but you have to take it on face value, I was also told things and asked not to repeat, which I respected

You are talking out both sides of your mouth here.

For months you were saying everything was fine and that the players were frustrated about not bringing their training 'form' into games and you admit that it may have been a company line that you took at face value. But now you also contend that the players told you things you couldn't repeat - are you intimating they took you in their confidence about how bad things had become under Neeld?

My question is not why you didn't allude to that on here but rather - why did you argue the exact opposite - that all was well?

I think you simply get platitudes from the players that any fan would get and you should have learned from the facade that was put up by the players infront of you last year, that you repeated on here.

The fact that they know i post helps me talk to them, because I also chat to them about what is on here, they are 'encouraged' not to read it themselves, hence Chris Dawes giving me carte blanche the other day to tell the doubters that he is fine, which I did on here and via Twitter\

Wait, you told Dawes that people on Demonland were potting him? Oh dear. The more I read your posts the more I reckon you're borderline dangerous to this playing group. There's a good reason why the players are told to avoid these forums.

I struggle to believe that any player would take seriously a 60 + year old unkempt supporter that goes to training in his clubs footy clobber and jumper.

Wait, you told Dawes that people on Demonland were potting him? Oh dear. The more I read your posts the more I reckon you're borderline dangerous to this playing group. There's a good reason why the players are told to avoid these forums.

Yes, who the hell would tell a player what a loud 10% of the supporter base was thinking and an infinitesimal percentage was posting on a supporter forum about them?

Why?

Bennell/Jetta - 98 games

Cook/Gysberts - 19 games

Not THAT much of a whisker...

dude.. your argument is that we have the same return from indigenous players that we have had from non-indigenous, this is simply not accurate

fair enough that you consider the pick they were taken at, but what about these blokes:

Garland, pick46

Howe, pick33

T.McDonald, pick53

there are zero examples of this amongst the indigenous players, Davey gave us some good years though.. I concede also that obviously the non-indigenous late picks is a far bigger amount of players to come up with those examples.. also we should have had an absolute superstar in Jurrah but that didn't pan out

the point is there is little merit in having a drafting focus on this group based on our recent history