1 minute ago, ProDee said:

Found one...

I reckon that's a bit weak as an example, doesn't mention Rocky once and comes days after someone in a similar role at a different club categorically stated a player wouldn't be moving, only to trade them a couple of days later.

surely you can understand why posters wouldn't let it rest based on what a club official says under these circumstances, and given it's a rumor thread i don't think there is really any huge issue with it. 

 

2 minutes ago, Abe said:

surely you can understand why posters wouldn't let it rest based on what a club official says under these circumstances, and given it's a rumor thread i don't think there is really any huge issue with it. 

 

No.

And I'm still waiting for a poster to give me one example where a player has ended up at a club in trade week after that club has publicly said in trade week that they have no interest in said player.

Just one will do.

I admire the tenacity of those still willing to believe this.

2 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I admire the tenacity of those still willing to believe this.

4 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I admire the tenacity of those still willing to believe this.

gullibility

18 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I admire the tenacity of those still willing to believe this.

Is it tenacity?

 

10 hours ago, Powell said:

Hahahaha how does this rumour keep getting legs when Josh Mahoney explicitly stated yesterday that "we are not interested in Tom Rockliff". 

That is not what he said. It was "I am not interested".

I'm glad if it aint a happening thing. Wouldn't want us out of the top 20 next year, can't see someone I'd wanto trade to get into it, and he seems a bit on the nose. Anyway if we are going to go 1st round 2017, then a decent ruck that can rest forwawrd really needs to be the priority now.

 

54 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I admire the tenacity of those still willing to believe this.

From day one?

based on all this denial i reckon rockliff is in the bag

Now the 2nd round is gone - dead in the water...

He's dead?!?!?!

OK. No better that pick 103 then

As I made people aware on Sunday evening, the Rockliff trade was definitely on the cards, but was 90% ...the 10% was dependent on how the cards fell. Unfortunately, we used what we had as bargaining tools on other deals. Probably why we wanted to give Essendung our next year 2nd rounder. I think this deal has fallen over and we weren't as keen once we knew Lewis was a done deal

10 minutes ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

As I made people aware on Sunday evening, the Rockliff trade was definitely on the cards, but was 90% ...the 10% was dependent on how the cards fell. Unfortunately, we used what we had as bargaining tools on other deals. Probably why we wanted to give Essendung our next year 2nd rounder. I think this deal has fallen over and we weren't as keen once we knew Lewis was a done deal

No.

Melbourne never approached Brisbane. 

You've either been had or are mischievous. 

Edited October 18, 20169 yr by ProDee

9 minutes ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

As I made people aware on Sunday evening, the Rockliff trade was definitely on the cards, but was 90% ...the 10% was dependent on how the cards fell. Unfortunately, we used what we had as bargaining tools on other deals. Probably why we wanted to give Essendung our next year 2nd rounder. I think this deal has fallen over and we weren't as keen once we knew Lewis was a done deal

We were never interested. Full stop.

3 hours ago, ProDee said:

Found one...

Is it covered in white feathers?

2 hours ago, ManDee said:

That is not what he said. It was "I am not interested".

exactlyit never said we weren't intersted. & they don't give out their inner thoughts anyhow.

5 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

We were never interested. Full stop.

like we never interviewed Jack darling... rubbish.  Not being interested enough to have a talk is garbage, or irresponsible.

Mahns will be on trade radio shortly so no doubt he'll get asked about it for those who are interested

30 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

We were never interested. Full stop.

Well a current listed player had heard otherwise 

Is conjecture alright? Or not? Why the intensity of negativity?

Tom Rockliff is a free agent as of the end of next year (2017)........... perhaps a realisation we didn't have the currency this year may not preclude an interest that we could look to fulfill next year.

45 minutes ago, ProDee said:

No.

Melbourne never approached Brisbane. 

You've either been had or are mischievous. 

With all due respect mate i think you're treating an educated guess as a fact. 

every AFL club would have an extensive list of players they'd be keen to keep track of going into the off season and Tom Rockliff would 100% be on our list, so i have little doubt that we'd have made a phone call, at least did our due diligence here.

so to say we never approached Brisbane full stop or there was zero interest is insane in my opinion, there is little doubt there would have been interest, and conversations had.

but i appreciate that i am also treating an educated guess as a fact.

having said that the trade mentioned by Gen Dee was a joke and flat out never going to happen.

he's not the type of player we need and i think the club has made the right decision.

 

Mahoney on Trade Radio: "We never spoke to Rockliff".

The end.

 

is  "we never spoke to rockliff"  like saying "the coach has our full support" or "he is a required player" etc