2 hours ago, Nasher said:

Do you reckon Dusty would have knocked 'em over in the interview?

Nope. Addressed that in a later post.

6 hours ago, Night Crawler said:

To be fair, I don't think an interview would have changed BP's mind one little bit. Scully and Trengove were the obvious choices at the time.

But having the chance to draft the best 2 kids in the country and not even bothering to interview a candidate shows how inept BP was. If you do not do your due diligence with pick 1 and 2 then what is the care factor with later picks?

 

Feel sorry for Trenners but it is a tough caper filled with spent bodies. Only the gifted and the lucky make it. 

Despite his lack of speed, Trenners has footy smarts.

I still feel he should be given a go. But he needs a couple of consecutive games to show his stuff. 

But it looks unlikely. 

Would hope that there is good and honest communication going on between coaches and Trenners.

He deserves honesty, because he has been a great club man. 

Thread title could do with an edit. Despite not thinking he has a future in the team I still get excited by the prospect of seeing Jack named again. Not sure why they haven't shifted him to HF at Casey as one last roll of the dice.

He has been incredibly unlucky as far as his career has gone. Aside from the injuries,  he was thrust into leadership when we had none, and asked to do the heavy lifting early on in his career.

At this stage of his career he should be consolidating his game and be in his prime. Instead younger talent has passed him and he has not been able to develop his game at the top level.

I remember hearing that the Crows were offering us two first round picks to take him at pick 2. I can't help but think his career would have been entirely different had we made this deal. He would have even able to ease into AFL footy at the Crows. Maybe that could have prevented his body going through what it did.

I would love to see him get one more crack, but I think his good form at Casey has been ignored by Goody because he has already moved on from Trenners.

17 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Nailed it beautifully Ron. 

Then BP left and went to work for another club....

no probs for him

No care-no responsibility.

Perfect job.

 

22 hours ago, praha said:

That was weird because the club must have known his status. Either they banked on him passing the medical on any given day, or Trengove fluffed it which is extremely doubtful and not in his character. 

That said we'd have gotten pick 12 or whatever for him, which would have been AMAZING and a typical Richmond trade. May have been the best for both parties though so in hindsight it's probably sad for Trengove that the trade didn't go through.

Trenners didn't fluff anything, his foot exploded again.

18 hours ago, DemonOX said:

I don't c the point in signing him for another yr and leaving him in the reserves even though his is playing well. 

It frustrates me so I can only imagine how frustrating it is for Trenners. 

To reduce any future compensation claim for mismanaging his foot? 

To see if with one last full, preseason if he can play a role in the 1s.

To show leadership to a young list.

Edited June 4, 20178 yr by Cards13

1 hour ago, Cards13 said:

To reduce any future compensation claim for mismanaging his foot? 

To see if with one last full, preseason if he can play a role in the 1s.

To show leadership to a young list.

Or cut your losses and move on...

3 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Trenners didn't fluff anything, his foot exploded again.

Yes, I know. I was simply highlighting the nature of the situation. Either Melbourne purposefully understated the significance of his injury, or Trenners fluffed it. We know the latter isn't true.

22 hours ago, Ron Burgundy said:

I don't think that's the point Nasher. I don't expect he would have.

I think the issue is that he was universally considered worthy of a very high draft pick, and is now considered one of the best players in the league, and BP didn't properly consider him at all. He went pick 3 and we had the first two picks. Not speaking to him wreaks of arrogance and, with the benefit of hindsight, absolute incompetence/negligence.

 

1 hour ago, praha said:

Yes, I know. I was simply highlighting the nature of the situation. Either Melbourne purposefully understated the significance of his injury, or Trenners fluffed it. We know the latter isn't true.

Or no one realised the crack had flared again...

1 hour ago, deanox said:

Or no one realised the crack had flared again...

ive heard this was indeed the case...

On 03/06/2017 at 6:58 PM, hemingway said:

Feel sorry for Trenners but it is a tough caper filled with spent bodies. Only the gifted and the lucky make it. 

Despite his lack of speed, Trenners has footy smarts.

I still feel he should be given a go. But he needs a couple of consecutive games to show his stuff. 

But it looks unlikely. 

Would hope that there is good and honest communication going on between coaches and Trenners.

He deserves honesty, because he has been a great club man. 

Watching the performance against the Suns, couldn't understand how there is not room in the team for an intelligent footballer who uses the ball well

Matt Jones is an advocate: 

 

 

13 hours ago, Adzman said:

He has been incredibly unlucky as far as his career has gone. Aside from the injuries,  he was thrust into leadership when we had none, and asked to do the heavy lifting early on in his career.

At this stage of his career he should be consolidating his game and be in his prime. Instead younger talent has passed him and he has not been able to develop his game at the top level.

I remember hearing that the Crows were offering us two first round picks to take him at pick 2. I can't help but think his career would have been entirely different had we made this deal. He would have even able to ease into AFL footy at the Crows. Maybe that could have prevented his body going through what it did.

I would love to see him get one more crack, but I think his good form at Casey has been ignored by Goody because he has already moved on from Trenners.

It was Port that offered the 2 picks and I think they were about 4 and 10, but I stand to be corrected. JT was that highly thought of by Port, that they offered a great deal, which we knocked back.

There is no doubt that the blokes we took at 1 and 2 that year, would have been taken by every other club if they had those picks.

Then the Tigers offered us pick 12 if JT passed his medical, which of course he didn't. We would have taken Lever with that pick.

We took Brayshaw at 3 as would most clubs and he has had concussion problems.

We lost Petracca for his first year with an ACL.

Jesse has had a horrible year.

Joel Smith looked ready to bloom and did his shoulder in the first 10 minutes of the first game.

AVB has had foot problems for a couple of years.

Gawn has done a couple of ACL's and now a hamstring.

Tim Smith is injured in the first few minutes of his second game.

Garland does his ACL in the pre season.

Spencer replaces Gawn and goes down injured in his second or third game back. 

We have been unlucky.

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

It was Port that offered the 2 picks and I think they were about 4 and 10, but I stand to be corrected. JT was that highly thought of by Port, that they offered a great deal, which we knocked back.

There is no doubt that the blokes we took at 1 and 2 that year, would have been taken by every other club if they had those picks.

Then the Tigers offered us pick 12 if JT passed his medical, which of course he didn't. We would have taken Lever with that pick.

We took Brayshaw at 3 as would most clubs and he has had concussion problems.

We lost Petracca for his first year with an ACL.

Jesse has had a horrible year.

Joel Smith looked ready to bloom and did his shoulder in the first 10 minutes of the first game.

AVB has had foot problems for a couple of years.

Gawn has done a couple of ACL's and now a hamstring.

Tim Smith is injured in the first few minutes of his second game.

Garland does his ACL in the pre season.

Spencer replaces Gawn and goes down injured in his second or third game back. 

We have been unlucky.

Good sum up...

I look at 2016 though... we had ridiculously good luck with injuries. I was always afraid the old law of averages would catch up with us, and it has. What I'm relieved about is that there haven't been career ending ones (unless you count Brayshaw), and even the Gawn one hasn't ended his or our season. Being 5-5 with names that, going into the year, you just don't expect to hold us together... That's my glass half full take. Yes we've been unlucky... but I didn't see any of the following happening, and I wonder if any would have happened without all the injuries we've seen...

Hibberd was good already. But so much time away, and he's actually improved. Literally hasn't played anything short of a great AFL game this year. Smith stays in, does Hibberd have the same responsibility?

Frost I thought was a lost cause. I knew he'd come in and show dash, and therefore keep his spot. But I never saw him damaging teams. Again, yes, Smith looked really good... but I wonder if Frost is played as early as he has been if Smith keeps his spot.

Pedo is almost heart and soul now. When Gawn and Spencer are back, he's still best 22.

TMac adds forward string to his bow. Wouldn't see that without injuries. Likewise Watts, though we knew he ran in the ruck already.

Hunt is now actually talked about by opposition supporters. He's verging on stardom. Didn't think that was possible. He's another 20% better than last year.

ANB is becoming best 22. Wouldn't be getting a game if we didn't have injuries.

Garlett was in Slobbo's All Australian squad in the Hun today. We've been rotating Harmes, Hannan, JKH and others through there with injuries and form a problem, and he has been career best.

Hannan is going to be a valuable forward for years. Goes both ways. A big find... makes the AVB injury hurt a LOT less.

 

I'm pumped, TBH. We get all these injured guys except Garland and maybe Braysh back, and in full flight. We're in good shape I reckon.

 

 

Trengove returned to the 22 this time last year against the Pies on QB.

12 months on, can he do it again?

3 hours ago, McQueen said:

Trengove returned to the 22 this time last year against the Pies on QB.

12 months on, can he do it again?

With Salem and Jesse ( if ok ) automatic ins, coming off a win and a bye, I don't see more than 2 changes.

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

With Salem and Jesse ( if ok ) automatic ins, coming off a win and a bye, I don't see more than 2 changes.

And possibly Spencer.

There comes a point where it becomes pointless shuffling around the same names at the bottom of the team sheet each week - Bugg, Kent, Melksham, Harmes, etc. At some point Goodwin is going to have to give games to the likes of Trengove & White, otherwise why keep them around? Both could have been delisted last season, and nobody would have been upset.

As for Scully, as his name has been mentioned a few times recently, he is exactly the type of player we need at present to add some quality outside work to our plethora of inside mids. 

 

 

Trengove can reliably kick the ball to a player wearing the same jumper as he is which is a plus given the propensity of many of our players to collectively miss targets for entire quarters or halves.

 

I actually wonder what the club was thinking when they gave him the extra year. Were they seriously thinking he might be a regular/semi-regular player? Or did they already have names penciled in front of him on all positions he might fill and they just gave him a go because "why not, we've gone this far with him".

Given he's yet to play this year despite being consistently in the best for Casey lends me to thinking it's the latter. Which personally I think is a poor move. If he is regularly up there in the best, how is it fair on rewarding form to not give him a go?

Having said that, with this week's ins having Salem as a walk up start and the likes of Hogan, Spencer, and (probably not) Gawn potentially returning, and realistically no one begging to be dropped, I don't see him coming in for QB. Bugg would be the only one I can think of but Bugg has more forward pressure and has been in the game, he's just a terrible kick  

He surely could've come in for other games though. 

4 hours ago, poita said:

There comes a point where it becomes pointless shuffling around the same names at the bottom of the team sheet each week - Bugg, Kent, Melksham, Harmes, etc. At some point Goodwin is going to have to give games to the likes of Trengove & White, otherwise why keep them around? Both could have been delisted last season, and nobody would have been upset.

 

The solution to saving a sinking ship is to throw chairs overboard, not shuffle even more around on deck.

On 6/4/2017 at 0:51 AM, Biffen said:

No care-no responsibility.

Perfect job.

 

BP was forced to leave because he was the one that dobbed us in for tanking.

Edited June 5, 20178 yr by dee-tox

20 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

BP was forced to leave because he was the one that dobbed us in for tanking.

I thought that was Brock McLean.

Carlton tanked and rorted the cap if we are honest.