GOODBYE MITCH CLARK

[Guest]

Very disappointing if true. We can't force him to come back or stay retired but to see him go elsewhere after all the bollocks we have put up with is a kick in the guts.

[Supermercado 2,617]

So his manager didn't say anything of the sort and Bagbag Barrett put his own spin on it. This is the same guy who claimed we were about to unveil Scott Burns as coach - avoid at all costs.

[What 18,810]

Would someone please confirm we will be able to trade him?

Please!

[Deez 298]

Apparently we will be trading him because his contract would still be running had he not retired.

Someone on fb posted that there's negotiations between melb and collingwood regarding Clark for lemumba.

Which I think is herrendous.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Age reporting channel 9 saying that Clarke's comeback WON'T be with Melbourne:

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/mitch-clark-eyeing-afl-comeback-20140907-10dkpu.html

There isn't a direct quote there saying not coming back to Melbourne.

You win, Barrett. You have successfully toyed with our frail emotions. Well done.

[dazzledavey36 48,816]

I am yet see an exact quote saying he officially wont be playing at the dees.

[thevil1 421]

IF TRUE..... Then he turns out to be a weak lying prima donna dog imo. Although, we already know that is what Barrett is, so I have faith that's not the case with Clark. I really really hope Clark doesn't prove me wrong. I will be sure to voice it loud and clear if he does.

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,934]

Apparently we will be trading him because his contract would still be running had he not retired.

Someone on fb posted that there's negotiations between melb and collingwood regarding Clark for lemumba.

Which I think is herrendous.

cant be serious surely.

[Tyson_Viney_Toumpas 269]

I am yet see an exact quote saying he officially wont be playing at the dees.

Just as we have not seen the same saying he'll be playing for us mate.

The joys of being an emotional train wreck Dees supporter.

The more I think of it, the more I just know we're about to be kicked in the guts again.

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,934]

If he plays for an WA club fair enough but if he plays for another Melbourne based club well....

[Dwight Schrute 16,799]

The annoying thing is this might be little more than a cheap shot from Barrett, he will be the last person to put his hand up next year if Mitch is playing for MFC next year

[TheoX 1,218]

If this isn't true, he or his manager will come out and make a statement soon. If we don't hear anything, he can GAGF.

[ViaLoop 11]

The never ending ride of being a Melbourne supporter! A bit of good fortune would be nice.. Please?

[Forest Demon 4,681]

Greeeeeeaaat. Isn't this fun.

[Gorgoroth 12,325]

If we swapped Mitch for Floggy O we will be a bigger laughing stock than we already are.

If and I mean IF Mitch wants to play at another vic club, we either get a top 10 pick for him, or he can go to any club he wants, when his contract expires at the end of next year.

Time for this club to become a strong club.

[Dockett 32 1,213]

Who knows what the real story is? What if Melbourne for example were in a position to secure a younger gun forward say a Reid or a one of the GWS crew of forwards? Maybe we have a position on this and the risk of a Clark return? If a trade to Collingwood secured us a running back we so desperately need for essentially free, might this not be a bad option?

Happy to leave it with Roos and Co.

[daisycutter 28,567]

who said the off-season was a mfc supporter's best time

[jabberwocky 2,301]

If he plays for another club there seems to be an assumption that it would be by his design. I wouldn't assume anything.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,465]

Add Mitch Clarke to Freo's forward line and they are a much more serious flag threat. Adding a 200cm power forward to a team with an open premiership window is an opportunity not to be sneezed at. Particularly when your head coach is a known "go for the flag and leave the club in a shambles if you miss" kinda guy...

Yeah IF he can get on the park- that's the point.

[chook fowler 18,277]

Clarke for Lamumba?

[bing181 8,169]

He's contracted till Oct 31. If he's go to a club of his choice, that would have to be via a trade, which would have to be during the trade period, which is prior to the expiration of his contract.

On the other hand, if that fell through, I would presume he could go to a club of his choice in the delisted FA period, where we'd get nothing.

The latter would appear to reduce our negotiating power - this would be on the assumption that both sides (Melb and Mitch) think it's best to "move on". As such, and given his recent history and the uncertainties surrounding it - including whether or not his body can stand up to the rigours of AFL footy - I don't know that we'd be able to get much more than a second round pick for him.

The trade with Collingwood for HL - a player who's still averaging 20 disposals a match, is only a year older than Mitch and has no injury issues - may not be as inequitable as it sounds.

[Gorgoroth 12,325]

I'd rather Mitch on our list and not play a game than HL on our list period.

[Supermercado 2,617]

The annoying thing is this might be little more than a cheap shot from Barrett, he will be the last person to put his hand up next year if Mitch is playing for MFC next year

He will be reminded I'm sure!

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

He's contracted till Oct 31.

2015, not 2014.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,465]

The other option, unfortunately, is that he walks out to another club as a delisted player and we get diddly squat.

Or PSD.