Why bother with all that then? If you don't want him then just delist him at full pay with a promise to fullfil the club's obligations of player care.

I'm pretty sure you're just making this up as go bb.

Why indeed !! its a more valid question than your sarcasm suggests.

That's all lovely Bub, but if I were St. Kilda I'd happily burn a spot on the rookie list for Jack Trengove if he nominated for the rookie draft. Even if you ignore all the so called "nicey nicey" stuff, the risk is by going down this path, you lose the player.

I looked up David Williams who played with us in the late 80's. Wikipedia said we traded him to the Tigers and then he did his knee - but my memory is otherwise. He did his knee - we delisted him with a promise that we would pick him in the PSD if he got through preseason. But Richmond used an early pick to nab him.

edit - on researching I looked at the 1989 draft - we were horrible at drafting even then ( our biggest haul was predraft of Stephen Clark from Essendon who played 21 games for us - the balance 4 players played a total of 3 games for us !!) but the Eagles in that draft took predraft - Ryan turnbull 129 games, traded in Wilson 117 games, pick 4 matera 253 games, pick 40 Dean Irving 43 games, pick 64 Evans 108 games, pick 92 Heady - 156 games, pick 112 McIntosh - 256 games !!!!! get me this recruiting team !!!!

Edited October 22, 201410 yr by nutbean

I looked up David Williams who played with us in the late 80's. Wikipedia said we traded him to the Tigers and then he did his knee - but my memory is otherwise. He did his knee - we delisted him with a promise that we would pick him in the PSD if he got through preseason. But Richmond used an early pick to nab him.

You are right NB

I looked up David Williams who played with us in the late 80's. Wikipedia said we traded him to the Tigers and then he did his knee - but my memory is otherwise. He did his knee - we delisted him with a promise that we would pick him in the PSD if he got through preseason. But Richmond used an early pick to nab him.

Pretty safe to think they wouldnt this time

For us to delist Trengove (any player for that matter) and pick him up in the rookie draft, they have to go through the National Draft from what I understand. They would also be considered a Delisted Free Agent. The player could always put a dollar figure on their head so that they try and put off other clubs picking them up, but it's literally out of our control, and a risk if we still want him on our list but in a rookie capacity.

If I were in charge of List Management, I'd put him on the LTI list for 2015, and reassess at the end of next season. I wouldn't stuff around with delisting at the risk of someone else picking him up.

JT's case is a fair bit different to Jetta's case last year. With Jetta, the jury was out about his ability, and it was a fairly safe bet no other club would pick him up. With JT, his ability won't be questioned, it'll be a matter of his recovery. If he comes back 100%, he's best 22, simple as that.

We're making this call presuming that his chance of returning to full fitness is minimal. I, and everyone else on here, are in no position to form an opinion on that. For the first time in many years, I'll be happy to trust the club on this one, which they will decide to keep or delist. I can't see a rookie option being a discussion point.

Pretty safe to think they wouldnt this time

They mightn't use an early pick B59, but they may use a pick in the 80's. A pick they otherwise would've passed on, would know a lot more about his injury than any other club, and could put him on a 1 year contract at minimal pay.

Not a huge risk for any club, but a bigger risk for us if we delist and he recovers.

Pretty safe to think they wouldnt this time

But not safe to say StKilda wouldn't

I think Strauss is coping a bum rap here. He never cemented a place but just prior to breaking a leg he was begining to show what he could deliver.

I could not disagree more.

This probably puts me in a bad light but when he did his leg - and it was obviously serious right from the moment he hit the ground - the unbidden thought that came to me was "as much as that is hurting him, it won't hurt us much".

As with Addam Maric, I never saw anything there. Blease at least gave us cameos.

Edited October 22, 201410 yr by pitmaster

Good luck to Strauss & Blease. Two talented draft picks we never saw the best of. BTW, how does Matt Jones escape scrutiny? Attracts the ball but skills are atrocious. Still remember that game he tried to kick 2 goals on the run & failed miserably. Think he even ended with 3 points only for the game. Rather see him out the door.

The discussion on here about placing Trengove on the rookie list confirms in my mind that rpfc's criticism of the rookie list (the concept, not the players) is valid. Clubs should not be able to even contemplate moving any contracted player from the main list to the rookie list whatever the circumstances. (And I'm not sure if I were a player from another club thinking about moving that I'd want to come to a club that does that to its players).

Better to be rid of the rookie list and expand the senior list instead.

Good luck to Strauss & Blease. Two talented draft picks we never saw the best of. BTW, how does Matt Jones escape scrutiny? Attracts the ball but skills are atrocious. Still remember that game he tried to kick 2 goals on the run & failed miserably. Think he even ended with 3 points only for the game. Rather see him out the door.

He escapes immediate scrutiny on this thread (although he hasn't really 'escaped') because his contract runs for two more years.

And BB - Nasher is saying, and I agree, that if we think he is 1% chance of playing again and we don't want him - simply delist him and help him with his recovery outside of football. No need to keep up appearances by promising anything more.

If we, as a club, want to keep him and/or feel like the cultural hit of delisting him while under contract will be severe - then this decision is bloody tough.

It isn't as simple as cozy sentiment, or whatever. Culture in footy clubs turn on a dime and we have seen toxic examples of bad culture at this club over the past few years, and even instances of poor list management bringing it on.

It wasn't 'cozy sentiment' that led many to believe Junior should have been given another year or two - it was shrewd knowledge of the power of particular people in your locker room and how football clubs are made up of people and all the emotions that come with us.

Edited October 22, 201410 yr by rpfc

They mightn't use an early pick B59, but they may use a pick in the 80's. A pick they otherwise would've passed on, would know a lot more about his injury than any other club, and could put him on a 1 year contract at minimal pay.

Not a huge risk for any club, but a bigger risk for us if we delist and he recovers.

Billy... i'm thinking, and its not much beyond an educated extrapolation of the events as reported, that what the Richmond scans revealed was something a lot worse than obviously considered to b the state of Jacks foot as most parties understood it. This translates into a "Richmond....not even remotely interested ( now ) ....Melbourne "Oh F..K !! " moment . Not what anyone wants by a long shot.

As to recover :

Jacks foot has to 1) heal/repair 2) strengthen 3) take a sporting load 4) be able to function properly/completely /lastingly at an elite level ( afl )

we havent even got back to 1 yet !!

Jacks future is in many respects about damage control. I think its a testament to himself he can push through and think strong. He'll need to

In some respects I think he'd be better off on the Rookie list anyway. There he ought not be ascribed the same expectations or pressure to justify his station. On the primary list i think its a warranted question to ask , " why are you there ?"

If its about giving him the best opportunity to 'make it' reduce the pressure.

Any which way we have to pay his original contract. Thats fair and reasonable. Any which way the club should /will be providing support, medical and otherwise. Again , that's the right course. is Jack likely to play in 2015 ? Very doubtful.

So when you assemble all those into the best thing for the club...what becomes the choice of preference?

I understand all the sentiment associated with l' Jack and the various 'potential' scenarios that might play if other clubs were to sniff but i just think reality is if he can get back to walking running as for a normal life hes winning. I dont see much of a long term future in footy for him, and thats a shame. I likes his footy and rated him when fit and firing.

He escapes immediate scrutiny on this thread (although he hasn't really 'escaped') because his contract runs for two more years.

And BB - Nasher is saying, and I agree, that if we think he is 1% chance of playing again and we don't want him - simply delist him and help him with his recovery outside of football. No need to keep up appearances by promising anything more.

If we, as a club, want to keep him and/or feel like the cultural hit of delisting him while under contract will be severe - then this decision is bloody tough.

It isn't as simple as cozy sentiment, or whatever. Culture in footy clubs turn on a dime and we have seen toxic examples of bad culture at this club over the past few years, and even instances of poor list management bringing it on.

It wasn't 'cozy sentiment' that led many to believe Junior should have been given another year or two - it was shrewd knowledge of the power of particular people in your locker room and how football clubs are made up of people and all the emotions that come with us.

RPFC I agree... a reasoned path may be to delist and pay out..( provide support of course ). The Idea of Rookieing is only if the club thinks there is the slimmest of possibilities he may come good. There is also the notion of appearances. Yes, cras as that may seem to some.i.e "looking to do the right thing".......maybe this goes to the idea of the club not being totally mercenary. i see it as the middle ground; between reason , and sentiment. ( but not necessary...as you allude )

My reference to cozy sentiment is in the main the stance by many here and as supporters that there seems to be some ethereal nature to a football club. That exists because of how the public positions sport and how we adulate our beloved Footy....up on that pedestal etc..In the end its a 'mortal as anything" entity. There are limitations and realities.

IMO the simple facts are that IMO Evans & Tapscott are finished , had there years on our list and have been found wanting( delist both and pay out Evans)

I would much rather be picking up a Caleb Daniel with a late pick and or a Patrenko with our PSD2 selection than having either of these

I can't believe it! This could tear the club apart, they were both loyal.

I hope you were severely inebriated when you typed this!

As I said in the alternative JT can go LTI list and then Jetta could replace him. That would allow us to use 53 or PSD 2 and one more delisting would allow allpicks to be used.

I don't think you can do that. You have to use a pick to promote Jetta on the senior list and Trenners can only be replaced by a rookie when he goes on the LTI list.

Good luck to Strauss & Blease. Two talented draft picks we never saw the best of. BTW, how does Matt Jones escape scrutiny? Attracts the ball but skills are atrocious. Still remember that game he tried to kick 2 goals on the run & failed miserably. Think he even ended with 3 points only for the game. Rather see him out the door.

you just answered your own question mate. Jones finds the footy. sometimes his skills are poor but as a accumulator he does ok, feeding it out to other blokes. yes he's not great but he fills a role in this current side. if he's still playing in a few years then we won't be any good but he FINDS THE FOOTY. Blease couldn't find the footy if you attached 2 bose speakers to it had it calling his name. Strauss just can't think quick enough for afl footy.

It wasn't 'cozy sentiment' that led many to believe Junior should have been given another year or two - it was shrewd knowledge of the power of particular people in your locker room and how football clubs are made up of people and all the emotions that come with us.

Cannot downplay this point - When Junior was "retired" I was in agreement - IMO body was shot. Now I know that 32 year old plus players always think they can go longer than the club does but on reflection it was either a bad decision by the club or a good decision poorly handled. Either way it was a very bad moment for our club and had an impact on the club going forward. You just don't treat champions of the club ( not a champion footballer) the way we did. We talk about culture and this one was a culture killer.

Edited October 23, 201410 yr by nutbean

you just answered your own question mate. Jones finds the footy. sometimes his skills are poor but as a accumulator he does ok, feeding it out to other blokes. yes he's not great but he fills a role in this current side. if he's still playing in a few years then we won't be any good but he FINDS THE FOOTY. Blease couldn't find the footy if you attached 2 bose speakers to it had it calling his name. Strauss just can't think quick enough for afl footy.

I just can't see Matt Jones being in our best 22 & as far as delivering the ball to an opponent, would rather see the ball in the hands of Blease or Strauss. I guess they just don't figure in Roos long term plans, but with 2 years left to run, I hope Matt Jones proves me wrong.

Mitch might have a mate..

Blease may please Cats after Varcoe departure

IMO the simple facts are that IMO Evans & Tapscott are finished , had there years on our list and have been found wanting( delist both and pay out Evans)

I would much rather be picking up a Caleb Daniel with a late pick and or a Patrenko with our PSD2 selection than having either of these

Absolutely correct. It is one thing to make bad decisions on draft day, it is entirely another to prolong the pain by letting poor footballers clog up the list for years on end. Neither of the blokes you mention, and another 5 or 6 of their mates, will ever be a decent player and we should make the call now. I would rather take a punt with a late pick than keep the likes of Evans on the list.

So....If Mitch Clarke can overcome his foot injury and depression and get traded to where he wants....all on a pretty good wage.....

I don't see any reason why Trengove can't

We had MC for how many games????........How many soft tissue injuries did he have whilst attempting to make it back to footy?????

Yet there was no one calling for him to be traded, delisted or anything but good wishes for his recovery....

So many posters just can't wait to eat our own.......All in the name of being "Ruthless"???

Absolutely correct. It is one thing to make bad decisions on draft day, it is entirely another to prolong the pain by letting poor footballers clog up the list for years on end. Neither of the blokes you mention, and another 5 or 6 of their mates, will ever be a decent player and we should make the call now. I would rather take a punt with a late pick than keep the likes of Evans on the list.

And when that player doesn't make it you will be the first to complain....I suppose....

Just got word that Geelong are looking to sign Blease. They will make him a player, mark my words.
He has plenty of upside and i don't like his de-listing. Just making my stance on this known on Demonland, like i did with Stefan Martin when that happened too.

Mitch might have a mate..

Blease may please Cats after Varcoe departure

Who'd have guessed?

Ok, I'll admit it, picket fence told me...