GOODBYE MITCH CLARK

[manny100 1,557]

Looks like we will be bent over again!!!!!! Occchhhhh.!!! Roos basically said we will get under compensated for Clark in a trade. Lets hope for a 1st rounder for Frawley. Surely we could not done over twice in a draft season!!!!!

[Gorgoroth 12,954]

Roos does answer questions like that, think of his own contract questions, he answered all of those like he answers the MC question.

[Moneider96 1,045]

Will you guys boo him next year? If he does leave

[Whispering_Jack 30,140]

My viewpoint this morning ~ nothing that's be revealed since has changed it -

I'm not sure that people are reading the situation properly and perhaps I'm not either but it's worth considering a few facts which might possibly be related.

1. The club applied very suddenly after the GWS game for draft assistance from the AFL;

2. Paul Roos recently commented in relation to our fortunes over the past season that, among other things, we lost the services of most probably our best player, Mitch Clark, due to unusual and unforeseen circumstances; and

3. At the "Bluey" Night, Roos said we should never look back (or words to that effect).

One interpretation of these three points taken together is that perhaps the club has already decided that Clark is not in its plans (either through its own choice, that of Clark or the circumstances where both might have mutually agreed that it's best to part ways), that it wants to move forward and take other options with regard to regenerating its playing list and that it's seeking any draft assistance and possible trade benefits to cover the loss of the player.

Anyway, time will tell.

[JTR 2,846]

For anyone without Foxtel, I recorded the audio from 360 on my phone and uploaded here: https://www.mediafire.com/?nsgng603ss1p69k

~7mb file

[Deestroy All 14,266]

So Clark out.

Lumumba in.

Depression must be contagious, I feel a bout coming on.

[Davos 921]

Will you guys boo him next year? If he does leave

Unquestionably.

[Deestroy All 14,266]

After watching Roos on 360 tonight, I have very little hope that Clark will be playing for the Dees next year.

But, I don't think Roos is too upset by this, but did throw in that Mitch Clark is our best player. This conflicting information makes me think there is another layer to this that isn't obvious yet, and that Roos is starting to position the club to get the best compensation it can. Would it be possible that the club had an inkling that this was going to happen when it lodged its application for a priority pick? I remember Peter Jackson mentioned Clark when he was discussing the priority pick in the media.

This. My thoughts exactly.

[Deetective Sgt. Taggert 389]

Doro wat??

I opted for farenji food today, besides Doro Wot is overrated and I'll get plenty of chances to eat that come Ethiopian New Years later this week...

P.s. every-time I see your alias I have to double check its not Axum!

[Sir Why You Little 37,038]

Would Mitch Clark survive the upcoming preseason at the MFC?

I think we all just found out it is going to be hard as hell.

Roosy needs to know how mentally strong he is after over a year out.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

MC... it actually is worse than the Scully betrayal. What a dirty day for the AFL.

This league really is an absolute joke. I don't see it improving within 5-10 years.

[pantaloons 2,019]

Will you guys boo him next year? If he does leave

It depends on what comes out about the whole saga. I won't boo him if it turns out that Melbourne didn't actually want him and preferred the compo return. If he's just completely stooging us though, I'll cheer with great vigour if he blows out both ACLs against us in front of Section M50 while simultaneously being mauled by an escaped grizzly bear from the circus.

[Deecisive 1,709]

He is gone, Roos knows it but is not saying so, possibly in the hope that that may change his mind. One thing I found interesting is that Roos mentioned that Mitch's agent orchestrated the payout earlier this year. that would obviously have been money in his pockets also, you would have to think he would have had in the back of his mind being able to get Mitch back playing and earning another high wage sometime in the near future hence double dipping. Another thing I found interesting was bomber thompsons comment which were along the lines of that Mitch got a payout from melbourne therefore does not owe melbourne anything. A few seconds later my son said their was a rumor of mitch going to Essendon, it certainly had me thinking a lot more about bombers stance.

Lastly there has been a lot of talk about compensation, i am wondering under what rule melbourne would be considered eligible for compensation, after all we did not get it for the last few years when we met the guidelines for compensation for poor performance. So can someone please advise why we would be eligible for compensation.

[Oneday 248]

After watching 360 it simply shows us the reason Roosy is in control and it gives me the utmost confidence that we have the right people at the top now. He gave away nothing either way and I felt all he is now concerned about is what is the best for the MFC moving forward. I am now sitting back enjoying the ride knowing that whatever decisions are made we are in very capable hands.

[SaberFang 7,151]

Would Mitch Clark survive the upcoming preseason at the MFC?

I think we all just found out it is going to be hard as hell.

Roosy needs to know how menially strong he is after over a year out.

One impression I got from Roos is that Clark might be underestimating the full extent of commitment required to be an AFL player. He said he had to tell Clark it's more than just game day glory he's missing out on, there's some bloody hard work involved off the field. Gave me the impression perhaps MC is being a little naive about his intentions to return to AFL, ESPECIALLY if his current mindset is "I'd rather go to a better team because it'll be easier for me, physically and mentally."

Get the feeling Roos may have given him a reality check, while also becoming somewhat uninterested in resigning a player who might be in it for the wrong reasons.

Plus all the talk about this being one massive preseason coming up. It all kind of adds up in a sad way.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

After watching 360 it simply shows us the reason Roosy is in control and it gives me the utmost confidence that we have the right people at the top now. He gave away nothing either way and I felt all he is now concerned about is what is the best for the MFC moving forward. I am now sitting back enjoying the ride knowing that whatever decisions are made we are in very capable hands.

Just makes me sad his time at MFC is finite.

[Cards13 9,117]

There is no doubt that Mitch Clark will play next year according to ROBO. He said it on the question and answer segment after Roos left

Play next year?! He has to be able to get on the park, his body and his mind have to allow him to do so.

[DemonOX 8,791]

I think roos knows his gone and doesn't want to make us look stupid by saying how we desperately want him back and saying we will do the best by Clark meaning if he needs to go elsewhere so be it

My thoughts exactly, unfortunately.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,219]

My take is that Roos knows he's gone and is pretty annoyed at how this has all transpired - its ridiculous to think we wouldn't want him if he was right to come back as Roos said he is the best/equal best player on our list! He is also a goal kicker something we clearly lack and can play on the ball.

There is clearly more going on than Roos was willing to divulge but after viewing that I'm pretty certain he's gone and not because we don't want him.

On another note Frawley is clearly gone and we are heavily into Lumumba, Roos was pretty glowing in his praise of Heritier.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I agree with those saying it felt like he is gone and now Roosy is just trying to get the best we can in return for him. He did say 'we'll talk to him again' so maybe there is some hope there. GNF was spot on I feel, in that Clark appears to have defaulted on a gnetleman's agreement at the last minute.. Who knows what they might have in mind for a trade for another established player. When one door closes another opens and we won't know for years if this is a shafting or not..

[Redleg 40,925]

I went there once, never been the same.

You are welcome.

[Whispering_Jack 30,140]

Tweets from 3AW on the Josh Mahoney interview:-

@3AWisfootball: Josh Mahoney: "Mitch has moved from five or six months ago being highly unlikely of playing AFL again to now being a possibility."

@3AWisfootball: Josh Mahoney: "We need to get as much information as we can about how serious [Clark] is about returning to AFL and how ready he will be."

@3AWisfootball: Matthew Lloyd: "I'm not sure that Melbourne feel like they need Mitch Clark back at their club. It's all about compensation now."

[Akum 2,660]

... I'll cheer with great vigour if he blows out both ACLs against us in front of Section M50 while simultaneously being mauled by an escaped grizzly bear from the circus.

A balanced and reasonable opinion.

Although, in all fairness, it does overlook re-injuring his Lisfranc.

[Sir Why You Little 37,038]

One impression I got from Roos is that Clark might be underestimating the full extent of commitment required to be an AFL player. He said he had to tell Clark it's more than just game day glory he's missing out on, there's some bloody hard work involved off the field. Gave me the impression perhaps MC is being a little naive about his intentions to return to AFL, ESPECIALLY if his current mindset is "I'd rather go to a better team because it'll be easier for me, physically and mentally."

Get the feeling Roos may have given him a reality check, while also becoming somewhat uninterested in resigning a player who might be in it for the wrong reasons.

Plus all the talk about this being one massive preseason coming up. It all kind of adds up in a sad way.

Thats the feeling i get.

If Roosy wanted him he would be staying.

[Goodvibes 3,596]

If Roos seems ambivalent, what message does that send to the other clubs who are reportedly interested in Mitch?