Heard the same regarding Strauss, Roos did not speak a word to him the entire year. I think that is really poor from the senior coach, at some point you still need to give those players hope of promotion and opportunity.

Good luck to Pickles in the future, hope all goes well in life after the Dees...

Could have sent the coach an email.

Interesting that while Tapscott is on Melbourne's "permission to train" list, Evans is not

Thanks for pointing that out Jack.

Did anyone else think the article on the website was unusually brief? Makes me wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye but probably not.

Yes I do wonder.

That is rubbish, where did you hear that, I spoke to Straussy towards the end of the year, he was disappointed in himself he couldn't put it together, and besides that I actually saw Roos speaking to him at training

You do know there's a difference between the coach speaking to a player at training and having a sit down and explaining the reasons they aren't in the team as well as that senior coach actually getting to Casey to watch the games (something which Roos did little off I'm led to believe).

I also don't expect any MFC player to lean over the fence and tell the overly curious old guy that's it's all the coaches fault. I would hope none of our players are that gutless. If they didn't make it, it does come back to them. But the Casey situation was poor last year, as it has been for a long time.

Interesting that while Tapscott is on Melbourne's "permission to train" list, Evans is not

geez give it time to see what eventuates, only happened today

I understand Evans already has a Commerce degree and has been studying Law part time. I could see that he might believe his future is best served concentrating on a non-football profession rather than spending countless hours in the gym and on the paddock for no guarantee of a successful football career. And good luck to him, whatever he chooses to do.

There's a lot of law students, not a lot of lawyers. Evans' old man is a lawyer. He's a bright kid. But a long successful AFL career then spun in to a legal career can lead to so many openings - see Al Nicholson, Brendan Gale, even Mike Fitzpatrick.

I get that he's not Mitch Robinson, he's got other options.

But think of how much work he's done for footy at this stage of his life. You wouldn't give that away if you believed you'd make it next year.

I don't think any Hawthorn players would be walking away. They'd back themselves that with a year of A grade development they were a shot (even behind a strong team) of making it as AFL players.

I'm not blaming Evans. I'm blaming the MFC for not creating a brain washing culture of excellence. Because that's what the Hawks have. Battlers line up to play for Box Hill because they think the system will make them stars. MFC half decent players don't want second opportunities on the rookie list.

There's a lot of law students, not a lot of lawyers. Evans' old man is a lawyer. He's a bright kid. But a long successful AFL career then spun in to a legal career can lead to so many openings - see Al Nicholson, Brendan Gale, even Mike Fitzpatrick.

I get that he's not Mitch Robinson, he's got other options.

But think of how much work he's done for footy at this stage of his life. You wouldn't give that away if you believed you'd make it next year.

I don't think any Hawthorn players would be walking away. They'd back themselves that with a year of A grade development they were a shot (even behind a strong team) of making it as AFL players.

I'm not blaming Evans. I'm blaming the MFC for not creating a brain washing culture of excellence. Because that's what the Hawks have. Battlers line up to play for Box Hill because they think the system will make them stars. MFC half decent players don't want second opportunities on the rookie list.

Hence the importance of Plapp, McCartney, Byrnes to bolster Casey and development.

Don't think we could get a better football dept.

We now need a charismatic onfield leader to come through.

Could we replace Pickles with a different version of Pickles in the draft?

Billy Evans?

Interesting that while Tapscott is on Melbourne's "permission to train" list, Evans is not

At a club function on trading and the draft this evening, Todd Viney said Tappy was continuing to train at the club (with no guarantees of being rookied) while Pickles had elected not to continue to train with the club.

I get that he's not Mitch Robinson, he's got other options.

But think of how much work he's done for footy at this stage of his life. You wouldn't give that away if you believed you'd make it next year.

I don't think any Hawthorn players would be walking away. They'd back themselves that with a year of A grade development they were a shot (even behind a strong team) of making it as AFL players.

I'm not blaming Evans. I'm blaming the MFC for not creating a brain washing culture of excellence. Because that's what the Hawks have. Battlers line up to play for Box Hill because they think the system will make them stars. MFC half decent players don't want second opportunities on the rookie list.

Dayle Garlett sends his regards

Secondary fallback position - blame Schwab

l blame Schwab first

That it came to this is terrible list management.

But it was probably a good decision for both parties. Evans wasn't a part of our future which means he's no longer locked into playing for Casey in 2015.

If it doesn't work out for him hopefully he can make something of his law/commerce degrees. Good luck to him.

I'm going to miss him.

What was his name again?

That it came to this is terrible list management.

But it was probably a good decision for both parties. Evans wasn't a part of our future which means he's no longer locked into playing for Casey in 2015.

If it doesn't work out for him hopefully he can make something of his law/commerce degrees. Good luck to him.

I am not sure we can blame list management, they obviously saw some improvement in Evans near the end of his last contract so we gave him a new contract based on what they saw and what they thought he may develop into, unfortunately he did not step up to the mark. Had he actually developed then we all would have been pretty pleased that we still had him locked into a contract. If we were not in such an aggressive rebuild process then we probably would have seen him coast along on the list next year, instead they took the hard option of trying to move him to the rookie list which to me means they still rate him as a chance otherwise we would have cut him straight away. He obviously declined the rookie spot at this time. In a month or so we will see if we still rate him high enough to rookie him if he is available.

Evans retires

good luck mate

Does this answer any questions people had between the differences between the Primary List and the Rookie List? And the fact that some players would baulk at the decision to be demoted?

I am not saying it was an incorrect decision, in fact his retirement affirms the decision, but there were some on here that felt contracted players would walk willingly and magnanimously onto the Rookie List.

I read the attached article and would like to pull up Peter Ryan on his last sentence.

Billy Stretch is a similar type of player as Dom Barr !!!! I understand his intentions but he could have outlined Stretch's attributes without any reference to Barry !

Evans retires

good luck mate

This is the last line in that story

"It has also used pick No. 42 on father-son selection Billy Stretch, a similar type of player to Barry."

Gee I hope he is way better than Barry.

This is the last line in that story

"It has also used pick No. 42 on father-son selection Billy Stretch, a similar type of player to Barry."

Gee I hope he is way better than Barry.

Very different player to Barry 'old dee', for a start he gets a lot of the ball. Not having a go at Dom but he wasn't a big possession winner and to me wasn't a natural footballer, not his fault. Stretch is a natural footballer and knows where to go and find the ball.

Does this answer any questions people had between the differences between the Primary List and the Rookie List? And the fact that some players would baulk at the decision to be demoted?

I am not saying it was an incorrect decision, in fact his retirement affirms the decision, but there were some on here that felt contracted players would walk willingly and magnanimously onto the Rookie List.

Honestly, what would be the difference? He still gets paid the same, he is still (roughly) the 38th best player on the list and he still only gets a game if enough better players are unavailable. If you were desperate to keep playing at this level, you would do whatever it takes.

A question for someone in the know - does a contract specify that a player be allocated a position on the senior list for X years, or is it just an agreement that we will pay you X dollars for X years, even if you are no longer at the club?

Honestly, what would be the difference? He still gets paid the same, he is still (roughly) the 38th best player on the list and he still only gets a game if enough better players are unavailable. If you were desperate to keep playing at this level, you would do whatever it takes.

A question for someone in the know - does a contract specify that a player be allocated a position on the senior list for X years, or is it just an agreement that we will pay you X dollars for X years, even if you are no longer at the club?

Not entirely certain of what you are asking. The CBA is below.

http://www.aflplayers.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/CBA-2012-2016-FINAL.pdf

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwnnnnnnnnnnnn !ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

Does this answer any questions people had between the differences between the Primary List and the Rookie List?

Maybe for you but not for me. I'd say his heart wasn't in it because if it was he'd have taken the rookie spot as the majority of others have in the past.

Evans would have known he was a marginal play on the list. He would have known that no other club had any interest in him. He would have seen himself behind a bevy of younger and better players and from last year he would have known that he struggled to play Roos' game plan.

I reckon there was a good chance he was going to coast through the year and concentrate on his studies anyway - only playing for the money. When the rookie list option was put to him he just thought "you ripper, full pay to study for the year".

Good outcome for both parties.

I am not sure we can blame list management, they obviously saw some improvement in Evans near the end of his last contract so we gave him a new contract based on what they saw and what they thought he may develop into, unfortunately he did not step up to the mark. Had he actually developed then we all would have been pretty pleased that we still had him locked into a contract. If we were not in such an aggressive rebuild process then we probably would have seen him coast along on the list next year, instead they took the hard option of trying to move him to the rookie list which to me means they still rate him as a chance otherwise we would have cut him straight away. He obviously declined the rookie spot at this time. In a month or so we will see if we still rate him high enough to rookie him if he is available.

I'd heard a rumour that he was drafted injured(?) in the Bailey era and was promised a spot on the senior list when he got his body right, which was honoured under Neeld's tenure. From memory he hadn't done much on the rookie list (due to injury) to earn that upgrade...

A question for someone in the know - does a contract specify that a player be allocated a position on the senior list for X years, or is it just an agreement that we will pay you X dollars for X years, even if you are no longer at the club?

It's an agreement to pay you a base of $X (+ any relevant match payments/ incentives/ bonuses) over Y years, you earn that base payment whether you are main list, rookie list or injured (obviously the incentives are based on you playing games).

From the clubs point of view - they have to pay him whether he plays or not (unless he agrees to a reduced payout). Better to pay him his full wage on the rookie list than to pay him his full wage to play elsewhere/ pursue a career in a different industry. The club now has to pay another 50k+ on top of Evans payout to get a rookie in (who will most likely provide the same impact Evans would have).

From Evans point of view - He'd realise he's way down the pecking order and unlikely to play. Considering he gets paid whether he stays or not, why delay starting the next phase of your life to stay at an organisation likely to fire you at the end of the year? Unless he thinks he's a serious shot of making it wouldn't it be better to be paid an AFL players wage to finish his law/ commerce degree?

Maybe for you but not for me. I'd say his heart wasn't in it because if it was he'd have taken the rookie spot as the majority of others have in the past.

Evans would have known he was a marginal play on the list. He would have known that no other club had any interest in him. He would have seen himself behind a bevy of younger and better players and from last year he would have known that he struggled to play Roos' game plan.

I reckon there was a good chance he was going to coast through the year and concentrate on his studies anyway - only playing for the money. When the rookie list option was put to him he just thought "you ripper, full pay to study for the year".

Good outcome for both parties.

As I said in my post - his retirement affirms the decision.

But the trigger of his retirement was this proposed demotion to the rookie list. That should give one pause IMO.