Roosy was saying in a round about way imo how can a bloke retire one minute ( big name best player at the club a lot of work in the retirement deal ) and then be keen again 2 months later. In a way questioning his current mental health or motives and value at the club.

And then keeping his value up by mentioning him as equal best player at start of the season.

I have no idea what is going on.

Gut feel is that we don't need the distraction again.

There was clearly doubt from Roos on whether Mitch's comeback was either the right decision or likely to be successful.

We would be extremely naive to think that this was the first dialogue between Clark and the club re the comeback. He has been training under our watch for some time. The MFC are in the best position to predict the likelihood of success of any comeback.

Mitch's actions and the actions of his manager may have been reflecting the possibility that the club isn't just going to fling open the door, roll out the red carpet and start writing cheques.

Fascinating stuff. Misson, Roos etc are driving this train. I don't think we have been blindsided at all.

Edited September 8, 201411 yr by jabberwocky

I don't think he was ambivalent, just resigned to the fact we have lost him

Not going to Hawthorn - a short angry man in charge hates him

A team with Frawley and Clark at either end looks much stronger than a team without them.

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.

I thought you had very little hope anyway?

A team with Frawley and Clark at either end looks much stronger than a team without them.

A team with a couple of spare picks in the top 5 looks fairly strong too

A team with Frawley and Clark at either end looks much stronger than a team without them.

Agreed - assuming Clark gets on the park and Frawley would need to be a lot more interested than for most of this season for that to be 100% accurate.

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."

I wonder if anyone asked him what clauses he put in the payout agreement in case Clark tried to nick off to another club at the end of the year.

I wonder if we aren't willing to pay him what he wants, and maybe Roos thinks he is coming back for the wrong reasons: eg.- Money

Paul Roos and Peter Jackson are the only things I trust about football right now. I have lost all faith in the system, and now in the players.

It seems nobody is loyal anymore.

Not going to Hawthorn - a short angry man in charge hates him

How do you know this?

Roos knows he is gone and I bet they have had an idea this might happen for a while. So, they go to the league to put the PP out there, then this comes along a couple of weeks later.

If he walks, we wouldn't have got anything for him but the AFL can't possibly deny us 2, 3 and 4 now. Would be a travesty not to get a PP anyway, let alone if Clark goes somewhere else.

To be honest, not sure Roos really cares. He knows that at least one of those picks can be turned into an established player who might not have as much upside as Clark but sure as hell doesn't have any of the risk.

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

Well he can't win either way. If he knows he's gone, coming out and lavishing praise upon the guy (after such a despicable betrayal) and saying how desperately we want him to stay just make the club look utterly pathetic. He's clearly resigned himself to the facts and the next step will be compensation, which he mentioned several times.

Saying he's our best player is complimentary enough. And frankly, given the way this is all painfully unraveling before our eyes, unworthy praise for a man with such a dearth of character.

A team with a couple of spare picks in the top 5 looks fairly strong too

presuming they know what to do with them and how to develop them :-(

Needs to be black and white and shot at a dutch angle.

Edited September 8, 201411 yr by The Song Formerly Known As

I dont think Roos is ambivalent, I think he is mightily disappointed Mitch is the sort of player virtually any side would scramble to get. I think he is gutted in loosing possibly his best player for a second time, i.e. lost him to retirement to then find there maybe a chance of a return to now find he wants to go somewhere eles. But what can he do about it on national tv that will not either come back on him, the club or mitch. he played it cool as he could. It now about where we go from here,

i have to question the depression bit, for a guy who quickly went into depression he seems to have quickly found his way out again as well, and in doing so have negotiated not only a healthy settlement to his multi year contract with the MFC but possibly a nice healthy new contract with another club. Gee things seem to have really worked out well for Mitch and his manager financially. If mitch was really seriously depressed then my deepest apologies to him, but unfortunately the world is full of unscrupulous people/managers who take advantage of other peoples good will and good intentions. I hope this is the former case, but fear it is probably the later.

Seemed to me that Roos knows he's gone (whether Mitch doesn't want to play for Melbourne, Melbourne don't want the risk - or a combination I cannot tell), and knows we aren't likely to get much even if we are able to trade.

Roos seemed to indicate the club wants to be compensated for losing 'our best player'.

Well he can't win either way. If he knows he's gone, coming out and lavishing praise upon the guy (after such a despicable betrayal) and saying how desperately we want him to stay just make the club look utterly pathetic. He's clearly resigned himself to the facts and the next step will be compensation, which he mentioned several times.

Saying he's our best player is complimentary enough. And frankly, given the way this is all painfully unraveling before our eyes, unworthy praise for a man with such a dearth of character.

Wayne Carey ????

I dont think Roos is ambivalent, I think he is mightily disappointed Mitch is the sort of player virtually any side would scramble to get. I think he is gutted in loosing possibly his best player for a second time, i.e. lost him to retirement to then find there maybe a chance of a return to now find he wants to go somewhere eles. But what can he do about it on national tv that will not either come back on him, the club or mitch. he played it cool as he could. It now about where we go from here,

i have to question the depression bit, for a guy who quickly went into depression he seems to have quickly found his way out again as well, and in doing so have negotiated not only a healthy settlement to his multi year contract with the MFC but possibly a nice healthy new contract with another club. Gee things seem to have really worked out well for Mitch and his manager financially. If mitch was really seriously depressed then my deepest apologies to him, but unfortunately the world is full of unscrupulous people/managers who take advantage of other peoples good will and good intentions. I hope this is the former case, but fear it is probably the later.

Agreed. What kind of world do we live in where you have to hope someone has depression because the alternative is that he is a lying scumbag with no morals.

Seemed to me that Roos knows he's gone (whether Mitch doesn't want to play for Melbourne, Melbourne don't want the risk - or a combination I cannot tell), and knows we aren't likely to get much even if we are able to trade.

Roos seemed to indicate the club wants to be compensated for losing 'our best player'.

Clark up and running is our best player, so I am glad Roos is speaking up about compo.

Needs to be black and whit e and shot at a dutch angle.

Plus a few more Instagram filters and a vignette.

Clark playing for another Melbourne club does not pass the smell test, so now that it's out the manager has shifted to damage control. Can he get the optics right? Only if he can hit the right notes. He needs to sell a touchy feely message which may fall on deaf ears if he can't salvage Clark's brand.