I talked to a former player whose career was ended by the same injury, after a number of operations similar to Jack  In his case everything was fine at training but unpredictable match conditions were too much and that's where he broke down.

Let's see what happens.  Good luck Jack!

9 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I talked to a former player whose career was ended by the same injury, after a number of operations similar to Jack  In his case everything was fine at training but unpredictable match conditions were too much and that's where he broke down.

Let's see what happens.  Good luck Jack!

Yep. So much different and we have no room for weakened once the white line is crossed. 52 years....

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. So much different and we have no room for weakened once the white line is crossed. 52 years....

I'm not sure what you are worried about 'SWY', if his form is not good enough he won't play.

Most of us here are hoping he can get back and play, if he does and is injury free he is easily best 22.

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. So much different and we have no room for weakened once the white line is crossed. 52 years....

Have you got a problem with Jack, SWYL?  It seems you have no wish or hope that he gets better and returns to the field, and that makes no sense to me.

dunno why people bother going to medical school. couple of years lurking on demonland would be quicker  and cheaper

7 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. So much different and we have no room for weakened once the white line is crossed. 52 years....

Might as well delist him now, he's not worth the risk! Same goes for Petracca! 

3 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Has Jack started kicking a footy yet ?

all in good time beez... this is not something to rush..   JT won't be costing us too much in the scheme of things,  but will be giving a lot to our culture of  'loyalty &  team'...

I was just asking has he started kicking a ball yet. 

6 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I was just asking has he started kicking a ball yet. 

Not on his left.

That will be an anxious moment for him.

2 hours ago, rjay said:

 

Most of us here are hoping he can get back and play, if he does and is injury free he is easily best 22.

Not sure that is a given, with the new players we have brought in. We will see.

3 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. So much different and we have no room for weakened once the white line is crossed. 52 years....

For the record, that is not what I am saying.  If Jack's foot holds up in full training then he'll play at Casey, and if it holds up there and his form warrants it then he'll play for MFC.  If he breaks down at any of those stages, I won't be thinking about "52 years".  I am 100% behind him

Let's stick to the subject and not abuse other posters please.

 

2 hours ago, dee-luded said:

all in good time beez... this is not something to rush..   JT won't be costing us too much in the scheme of things,  but will be giving a lot to our culture of  'loyalty &  team'...

The club showed him no loyalty and we can only assume by that the current coaches don't rate him. 

What a situation, we had him out the door but then he had to stay because of his injury and still under contract. Then we're nice enough to offer him one more year, an each way bet....

Edited January 26, 20169 yr by Bombay Airconditioning

Just now, Bombay Airconditioning said:

The club showed him no loyalty and we can only assume by that the current coaches don't rate him. 

I wouldn't go that far.  The club saw an opportunity to land an extra first rounder and Trengove was the player the Tigers wanted... of the players who were available that is.

Clearly the club were happy to move him on but it's a bit simplistic to simply suggest the coaches don't rate him.  He wouldn't have gotten another contract and another year to get healthy otherwise.

29 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

The club showed him no loyalty and we can only assume by that the current coaches don't rate him. 

What a situation, we had him out the door but then he had to stay because of his injury and still under contract. Then we're nice enough to offer him one more year, an each way bet....

By trading Trengove to Richmond (which I was against at the time) the MFC would have drafted Jake Lever; who were into in a big way.  The fact that Richmond were willing to offer up pick 12 shows that he is/was a very highly regarded player.

4 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I wouldn't go that far.  The club saw an opportunity to land an extra first rounder and Trengove was the player the Tigers wanted... of the players who were available that is.

Clearly the club were happy to move him on but it's a bit simplistic to simply suggest the coaches don't rate him.  He wouldn't have gotten another contract and another year to get healthy otherwise.

(I just edited my initial post whilst you were replying)

Yes but why did we want an extra pick? We were after an extra first rounder for what many of us believed would be part of a deal to land a Luke Parker or similar, and if that was the case many of us wouldn't have cared because we would have brought a gun to the club. I don't think a deal with any club fell through because of our inability to offer two first round picks, (we already had 2&3 but we wanted to keep one of them, so it would have been 3&12) I think we failed to entice someone to want to come to us. So then the question is who did the club want at 12, we're not talking a top five pick but 12, the club knew what Trengove's skill set is and and were more than happy to move him on in favour of a kid. So they we're more than happy to back themselves in to land a player in the draft at 12 that they thought would bring more than what Trengove had produced to date, hence they don't rate him.

13 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

(I just edited my initial post whilst you were replying)

Yes but why did we want an extra pick? We were after an extra first rounder for what many of us believed would be part of a deal to land a Luke Parker or similar, and if that was the case many of us wouldn't have cared because we would have brought a gun to the club. I don't think a deal with any club fell through because of our inability to offer two first round picks, (we already had 2&3 but we wanted to keep one of them, so it would have been 3&12) I think we failed to entice someone to want to come to us. So then the question is who did the club want at 12, we're not talking a top five pick but 12, the club knew what Trengove's skill set is and and were more than happy to move him on in favour of a kid. So they we're more than happy to back themselves in to land a player in the draft at 12 that they thought would bring more than what Trengove had produced to date, hence they don't rate him.

Everyone (I presume) rates Trengove on talent. But a club might rate him as a great talent but also a great injury risk.  Looks like at the end of 2014 MFC thought the risk plus possible benefits of the draft outweighed keeping him and Richmond thought the risk worth taking (initially).  So your conclusion does not automatically follow unless you widen the usual definition of 'rate' to include injury issues rather than just talent.  Perhaps that is what you meant in which case who could disagree.

You still trade players you 'rate'.  You just ask for a higher return.  

I rate Dean Kent very highly, but I'd trade him for Jake Lever in a heartbeat.

29 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

(I just edited my initial post whilst you were replying)

Yes but why did we want an extra pick? We were after an extra first rounder for what many of us believed would be part of a deal to land a Luke Parker or similar, and if that was the case many of us wouldn't have cared because we would have brought a gun to the club. I don't think a deal with any club fell through because of our inability to offer two first round picks, (we already had 2&3 but we wanted to keep one of them, so it would have been 3&12) I think we failed to entice someone to want to come to us. So then the question is who did the club want at 12, we're not talking a top five pick but 12, the club knew what Trengove's skill set is and and were more than happy to move him on in favour of a kid. So they we're more than happy to back themselves in to land a player in the draft at 12 that they thought would bring more than what Trengove had produced to date, hence they don't rate him.

We'll never know, and we can assume all we want, as to what happened.  Was there someone out there we could entice?  Possibly, but we don't know.  I'd like to think the club was still happy to throw picks 3 and 12 around and see what came up - if nothing did then we just take it to the draft.

But to get something, you need to give up something.  We weren't getting Pick 12 for Matt Jones.  Trengove may have been expendable at the time compared to other players, but that didn't mean the club didn't rate him.  They just saw the bigger picture and felt that getting another pick to dangle around at clubs, or go the draft, was worth more to us at the time.

The fact Trengove was given another year tells me we still DO rate him and believe he is worth persisting with.

1 hour ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

The club showed him no loyalty and we can only assume by that the current coaches don't rate him. 

What a situation, we had him out the door but then he had to stay because of his injury and still under contract. Then we're nice enough to offer him one more year, an each way bet....

IMO, giving him a new contract, and excellent medical and rehab. support, is a pretty decent show of loyalty on the part of our Club.

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

Not sure that is a given, with the new players we have brought in. We will see.

A fit Trengove is easily best 22 'Red', my opinion of course but there was a reason the Tiges were after him. A couple really, his playing ability and much needed leadership.

1 hour ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

By trading Trengove to Richmond (which I was against at the time) the MFC would have drafted Jake Lever; who were into in a big way.  The fact that Richmond were willing to offer up pick 12 shows that he is/was a very highly regarded player.

Richmond thought/still think they are in their premiership window, they saw Trengove as a ready made player to add to their midfield rotations as opposed to waiting for another kid to develop. 

36 minutes ago, Deeoldfart said:

IMO, giving him a new contract, and excellent medical and rehab. support, is a pretty decent show of loyalty on the part of our Club.

Loyalty?

Talented player, ex captain and was shown the door at a time when our culture was at possibly its lowest point. 

A one year contract is an each way bet. 

1 hour ago, rjay said:

A fit Trengove is easily best 22 'Red', my opinion of course but there was a reason the Tiges were after him. A couple really, his playing ability and much needed leadership.

I don't care about the Tigers chasing him, I just disagree that a fit JT is easily in our best 22 ATM.

He hasn't played for 2 years and we have improved our list. He needs more than fitness, he needs to show in games for Casey that he is in our best 22.

I hope he can,  but I disagree that merely by getting fit, he is in our 22.

9 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Exactly. And Trengove played on his dodgy foot for 2 seasons....

such elite management back in those dark days..

So, SWYL, you know exactly what investigations he had, and the results of these, and which specialists he saw and their opinions??  

His injury is one that is notoriously difficult to diagnose, and many players suffer foot pain for a variety of reasons.

I am glad that his injury was eventually diagnosed and treated and I, like the vast majority here, wish him well and sincerely hope he makes a full recovery and regains his pre-injury form   We also know that is a big ask, and that were he not prepared to put in a hell of a lot of hard yakka he would have no hope: he has done that work so has some hope.  Only time will tell.

8 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. So much different and we have no room for weakened once the white line is crossed. 52 years....

If he isn't up to it he will not play   Pure and simple   Are you suggesting otherwise?

8 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Have you got a problem with Jack, SWYL?  It seems you have no wish or hope that he gets better and returns to the field, and that makes no sense to me.

My thoughts exactly.