9 minutes ago, The Jackson FIX said:

Wonder what Trac thinks of the Bont sticking fat with the Dogs - they have parallel stories in so many ways but I wonder if Trac admires his courage to stay or thinks he’s just not reaching/cashing in on his potential   

Yeah the dogs went thru similar issues after winning the flag in 2016 though Bont hadn’t suffered the injury that Trac has .. just puzzled angry frustrated when you see Gawn Viney extended and wanting to be part of the solution as this is ripping the club apart..  

So in the pages and pages of this thread it seems like the truth is somewhere along the lines of:

- Petracca in unhappy and apparently wants to leave the club, but has not formally requested a trade. 

- his management from Connors have told him it's not possible

- his other management, the "brand" arm are pushing the issue anyway. 

- it's very unlikely Connors are leaking to the media because that would ruin their relationship with the club, so more likely someone else from his camp are leaking. 

- someone from the club is leaking because they are frustrated, which is understandable but making it worse.

- Petracca is remaining silent because he is waiting to see whether a trade can be done. 

- the board at Melbourne have a communications issue.

 

Just now, Jjrogan said:

What would be best offer we'd get for kossie?  from Port? Or Crows?  He'd be scary good in that Port team. 

Apparently his management reached out to Freo

They have 3 first round picks this year, and a future picks to trade

But if they're committed to Bolton and Baker, it might be impossible

9 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

What would be best offer we'd get for kossie?  from Port? Or Crows?  He'd be scary good in that Port team. 

Kossie is scary good in our team. We beat PA by 7 points earlier this year and they beat us by 2 in the return match. I don't see them as being far superior to us.

1 hour ago, Tracca said:

whilst that may not be the case the president herself said she hasnt spoken to christian

 

Incorrect. 

15 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

Even Gerard Whateley, with all his gravitas, failed to hear what Kate Roffey was actually saying! Post interview he immediately sprang to the conclusion that she was claiming that the whole issue was a media beat up. That served the narrative that he was looking for... Unfortunately, a very superficial analysis of her response to his Producer prepared questions. 

When Whateley asked her if she was troubled by the stand off between Melbourne and CP, her answer was:

'I don't think this is a stand-off, that's a media portrayal of it'

Before Whateley asked her later on '“It feels like you're deflecting this as a media construct rather than a reflection of truth' (which she went on to deny she was implying), she had mentioned the media, 5 times.

“I don't think this is a stand-off, that's a media portrayal of it'

“The first thing I just want to point out to people, and I think this sort of gets lost in the media world, because we're dealing with the people, the individuals and when you're looking at it in the media you're not actually seeing the person.

“It's an incredibly difficult time for Trac. Full stop. Incredibly difficult time. What he's been through is significantly traumatic and now what's playing out in the media is very difficult for him as well.

“So again, I'm not going to comment on the media issues. He's a contracted player at our club.

It's not a completely outlandish thing to say something like 'If melbourne think this is a media issue then that amounts to  denial' which I'm pretty sure Whateley went on to say, after a (in crises) club president kept littering the word 'media' in answer to issues between CP and the club.

She dropped that word so many times that for Whateley to even have a run up to ask the 'media construct rather than a reflection of truth' question is ludicrous and the interview was failed right when he asked that. Unless you come back with a zinger of a response, you just look suspicious and like you ARE trying to deflect, even if you're not.

37 minutes ago, adonski said:

I reckon trading Trac fast trac's (sorry) a rebuild, if we run it back next year with the same group we're probably in the 6th - 12th no mans land area, plus the added media pressure and [censored] show of Trac speculation 

You're also taking a punt his value holds in 12 months time if he has a down year given the injury, should he want out then

I know it's a very Americanised take to blow it all up, but if you can sell high (ish) on Trac, and also get multiple first round picks for Pickett (who's return home seems an inevitability at some stage of his career), I'd do it

Trac is 28 nearly 29, recovering from a serious injury.  I still don’t have enough info, but I can see why selling high - IF he doesn’t want to be there - makes sense.

Pickett on the other hand is 23, about to hit is prime, I just can’t see any value in trading him for picks.  If we did it would be a huge loss, similar to losing Jackson, simply a player that you never really replace.  

1 hour ago, Dee-tonator said:

Here are some facts.

Spleen trauma is graded from 1 to 5 in increasing order of severity.

Petracca had a grade 5 spleen injury.

Grade 1 is less than 10% of surface area involved in hematoma or capsule laceration less than 1 cm.

Grade 2 is hematoma 10 to 50% of surface or capsule laceration 1 to 3 cm in depth.

Grade 3 is hematoma of more than 50% of the subcapsular surface area or if the hematoma is known to be expanding over time, if the hematoma has ruptured, intraparenchymal hematoma either more than 5 cm or known to be expanding, or capsule laceration more than 3 cm in depth and/or involving a trabecular blood vessel.

Grade 4 is a laceration involving a hilar or segmental blood vessel if there is partial devascularization or if it is more than 25% of the spleen.

Grade 5 is either a shattered spleen or complete devascularization of the entire spleen.

Dr Google wins

11 minutes ago, BoBo said:

When Whateley asked her if she was troubled by the stand off between Melbourne and CP, her answer was:

 1) 'I don't think this is a stand-off, that's a media portrayal of it'
 

2) Before Whateley asked her later on '“It feels like you're deflecting this as a media construct rather than a reflection of truth' (which she went on to deny she was implying), she had mentioned the media, 5 times.

3) “It's an incredibly difficult time for Trac. Full stop. Incredibly difficult time. What he's been through is significantly traumatic and now what's playing out in the media is very difficult for him as well.

4) “So again, I'm not going to comment on the media issues. He's a contracted player at our club.

5) It's not a completely outlandish thing to say something like 'If melbourne think this is a media issue then that amounts to  denial' which I'm pretty sure Whateley went on to say, after a (in crises) club president kept littering the word 'media' in answer to issues between CP and the club.
 

Here's the relevant passage from my post ..." claiming that the whole issue was a media beat up".

I've edited your post (above) and numbered your points. Here's what I can offer on each of them

1) "stand-off" is an accurate account of what is being suggested in media reports. She merely disagrees that it is a stand-off

2) I've highlighted her denial because that is a direct answer to your accusation.

3) That is simply a statement of fact.

4) What do you think she means by "media issues"?

5) Nowhere in the Kate's response, or in the response from anyone at MFC, has it been suggested that it is all a media issue. That was Gerard's summation. To deny that there is a media component that is complicating the matter of reconciliation between the Petracca camp and the MFC is silly. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the word 'media' can't be used in a discussion about what Christian is confronted with.

I hope my response reaches the lofty good oil you seem to have annointed your thoughts on the matter with...  

1 hour ago, Flowergirl said:

Everyone should be posting that video on his and Sam McClure's twitter. 

Here is the link: 

 

Not just McClure's. It should be an automatic reply post by all Melbourne fans whenever they read any form of misinformation (Roffey's non-contact) or other unsubstantiated claim taken as truth but contradicted by Petracca himself. Unfortunately, it's many of the club's own supporters rolling with the narrative.

But it could however become critical, should the MFC wind up in a grievance tribunal and the damage which might result, and I think the video is clear enough to sway some minds and turn public opinion back our way somewhat, as there isn't the slightest hint of Petracca being disingenuous in his responses. 

54 minutes ago, BoBo said:

When Whateley asked her if she was troubled by the stand off between Melbourne and CP, her answer was:

'I don't think this is a stand-off, that's a media portrayal of it'

Before Whateley asked her later on '“It feels like you're deflecting this as a media construct rather than a reflection of truth' (which she went on to deny she was implying), she had mentioned the media, 5 times.

“I don't think this is a stand-off, that's a media portrayal of it'

“The first thing I just want to point out to people, and I think this sort of gets lost in the media world, because we're dealing with the people, the individuals and when you're looking at it in the media you're not actually seeing the person.

“It's an incredibly difficult time for Trac. Full stop. Incredibly difficult time. What he's been through is significantly traumatic and now what's playing out in the media is very difficult for him as well.

“So again, I'm not going to comment on the media issues. He's a contracted player at our club.

It's not a completely outlandish thing to say something like 'If melbourne think this is a media issue then that amounts to  denial' which I'm pretty sure Whateley went on to say, after a (in crises) club president kept littering the word 'media' in answer to issues between CP and the club.

She dropped that word so many times that for Whateley to even have a run up to ask the 'media construct rather than a reflection of truth' question is ludicrous and the interview was failed right when he asked that. Unless you come back with a zinger of a response, you just look suspicious and like you ARE trying to deflect, even if you're not.

Thank you Bobo for being one of the first to actually outline what you thought was wrong with the interview and not just waffle on about how pathetic it was.

I've listened to it 2 more times yesterday and I'll admit I did miss quite a bit of this deflecting to the media the first time round. She admitted there were issues but as you said, 5 mentions of the media trumps that.

I don't hate Kate but I do think she shot herself in the foot a bit. Compared with Max who did also mention the media once but also when on to take responsibility for ours and his own comms, our processes, and also showed the ultimate empathy for Trac.

Give me a Max Gawn in every leadership position.

That Fox Footy article was full of nonsense. 

I have no inside knowledge, just going by what I read in the media, online and my gut feeling.

If Petracca and MFC can't sort out their issues I would say that a trade with CFC could be possible. I would guess it would involve Pick 11, Adam Cerra, a future 1st round pick and Tracc taking a haircut on his contract. The Blues haven't poured any cold water over this story so the idea of a trade is probably being entertained, numbers crunched and calls being made ...

Silvagni isn't going anywhere, he has a destiny to fill ... two flags in Navy Blue like his grandfather and his father! 😁

Every time I read this thread my spleen hurts.

It seems that the timeline regarding the "Have you spoken/contacted Trac" question is getting quite confused. My understanding is that this line of questioning pertains specifically to her not having spoken with Trac since the situation escalated, particularly with the talk of him wanting to leave the club.

It’s possible that she, along with others at the club, might have reached out to Trac in the early stages, perhaps to check on his well-being, as is common in such circumstances. However, it appears that these welfare checks may have diminished during the Noosa break, with the players likely focused on their own football and the urgent task of trying to salvage the season. During this period, they may have started to question Trac's absence.

From what I gather, it seems that President Roffey has not made any attempt to contact Trac since the Tom Morris exclusive, which presents a poor image. However, this doesn't necessarily imply that she hasn’t been monitoring the situation or that others within the club haven’t been in touch with him.

Given her position as President, one would expect Roffey to have made an effort to reach out to Trac, perhaps to see if the relationship with the club could be mended. If she hasn’t done so it doesn’t reflect well on her leadership.

14 minutes ago, No. 31 said:

That Fox Footy article was full of nonsense. 

I have no inside knowledge, just going by what I read in the media, online and my gut feeling.

If Petracca and MFC can't sort out their issues I would say that a trade with CFC could be possible. I would guess it would involve Pick 11, Adam Cerra, a future 1st round pick and Tracc taking a haircut on his contract. The Blues haven't poured any cold water over this story so the idea of a trade is probably being entertained, numbers crunched and calls being made ...

Silvagni isn't going anywhere, he has a destiny to fill ... two flags in Navy Blue like his grandfather and his father! 😁

The Cerra part of the deal better come with a new pair of hamstrings otherwise we are getting shortchanged. No deal. 

7 minutes ago, Lefty said:

The Cerra part of the deal better come with a new pair of hamstrings otherwise we are getting shortchanged. No deal. 

I would be quite happy to keep Cerra, he is a good footballer who can step it up another notch or two I reckon. One of the few at Carlton who is a decent kick i50.

Take Pick 11 and Future First then.

I think Cerra is only being mentioned because he was keen on going to the Dees when leaving Freo, Carlton was his second choice back then. That may have changed now.

He has had hamstring issues this season but so have quite a few at Princes Park, S&C head, Andrew Russell is now leaving. Read what you want into that.

Adam Treloar had serious hamstring issues when at Collingwood, now at 31 at the Doggies he is flying and an All Australian in 2025. Just needed good treatment and training tailored to his needs.

29 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

Every time I read this thread my spleen hurts.

It's been a spleen splitter of a week.

33 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

Here's the relevant passage from my post ..." claiming that the whole issue was a media beat up".

I've edited your post (above) and numbered your points. Here's what I can offer on each of them

1) "stand-off" is an accurate account of what is being suggested in media reports. She merely disagrees that it is a stand-off

2) I've highlighted her denial because that is a direct answer to your accusation.

3) That is simply a statement of fact.

4) What do you think she means by "media issues"?

5) Nowhere in the Kate's response, or in the response from anyone at MFC, has it been suggested that it is all a media issue. That was Gerard's summation. To deny that there is a media component that is complicating the matter of reconciliation between the Petracca camp and the MFC is silly. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the word 'media' can't be used in a discussion about what Christian is confronted with.

I hope my response reaches the lofty good oil you seem to have annointed your thoughts on the matter with...  

From memory, I don't think Whateley said that Roffey claimed 'that the whole issue' was a media beat up. That's you saying that's what he concluded. Is that what he said? If you can find a quote then I'll happily take your point. As I said earlier, my memory was that he said 'if melbourne thinks this is a media issue then that amounts to denial'. Again, going off memory so maybe I'm wrong.

1) "stand-off" is an accurate account of what is being suggested in media reports. She merely disagrees that it is a stand-off

So it is accurate, but she disagrees that it's accurate. Needlessly confusing position to take. Could be inferred as a deflection, especially in an interview as a club president of a club in crises.

2) I've highlighted her denial because that is a direct answer to your accusation.

My accusation isn't 'Kate Roffey is saying this is all a media invention' and she did a good job of denying anyone is saying it is a media invention, because that would be a ludicrous position. I wish she hadn't kept deferring to the media in her earlier answers so Whateley didn't get a 50 yard run up to be able to ask that question legitimately.

3) That is simply a statement of fact.

It is a statement of fact. I think it's the 4th and 5th time she mentioned the words media. Starts adding up in a short amount of time in an interview.

4) What do you think she means by "media issues"?

I don't know specifically what she means. I can only surmise she was talking about the fact that it is at this stage a claim with zero refutation from Tracc that he want's to 'go to a big club'. Would be weird if it was untrue and he still hasn't said anything?

5) Nowhere in the Kate's response, or in the response from anyone at MFC, has it been suggested that it is all a media issue. That was Gerard's summation. To deny that there is a media component that is complicating the matter of reconciliation between the Petracca camp and the MFC is silly. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the word 'media' can't be used in a discussion about what Christian is confronted with.

So you're saying that Gerrards summation was that this is 'all a media issue'. Again, if you can link me a quote that'd be good as I don't remember him saying that but could be wrong.

So again, Roffey left herself open to that question by repeatedly mentioning the media in totality. Wasn't necessary unless she was going to overtly refute incorrect claims made in the media. Which she also didn't do. Was a bad strategy because it comes across like you have something to hide (even when you don't necessarily) And thus, she became the story which I think is pretty obvious? If you disagree that's fine, but there is a reason why many people say this interview was really poor. You might not be one of those folks and that's A-OK.

'I hope my response reaches the lofty good oil you seem to have annointed your thoughts on the matter with...'

Dunno what I said to make you say this but I guess I'll just say: indubitably *smokes pipe*

35 minutes ago, layzie said:

Thank you Bobo for being one of the first to actually outline what you thought was wrong with the interview and not just waffle on about how pathetic it was.

I've listened to it 2 more times yesterday and I'll admit I did miss quite a bit of this deflecting to the media the first time round. She admitted there were issues but as you said, 5 mentions of the media trumps that.

I don't hate Kate but I do think she shot herself in the foot a bit. Compared with Max who did also mention the media once but also when on to take responsibility for ours and his own comms, our processes, and also showed the ultimate empathy for Trac.

Give me a Max Gawn in every leadership position.

I agree to an extent that Gawn has 'performed' better in his public responses than Roffey. But I don't think that it's fair to compare the two. While Petracca is important to both their aspirations, for Gawn he is a teammate and friend. 

For Roffey, he is one of many employees, and no matter how well-performed Christian is, she has an entire organisation to consider. Yes, he will be seen as more important to its success than her, which isn't much different to most workplaces. 

If the earlier rumours of complaints around favouritism have any substance, then imagine how all our other players will feel if we just bend over backwards to every demand, especially considering the way it has been approached, even if they recognise their place in the pecking order. 

A slightly different set of circumstance, and the people here screaming for heads would be the same complaining about the tail wagging the dog. 

 

2 hours ago, adonski said:

I reckon trading Trac fast trac's (sorry) a rebuild, if we run it back next year with the same group we're probably in the 6th - 12th no mans land area, plus the added media pressure and [censored] show of Trac speculation 

You're also taking a punt his value holds in 12 months time if he has a down year given the injury, should he want out then

I know it's a very Americanised take to blow it all up, but if you can sell high (ish) on Trac, and also get multiple first round picks for Pickett (who's return home seems an inevitability at some stage of his career), I'd do it

This 100%. Now is the time sadly.

I was receptive to moving Oliver and Petty last year and taking six first rounders to the draft last year which, in hindsight, might have avoided a few of the problems we’ve currently got but might have made some worse.

We just have to get used to this kind of rapid fire player movement and put together a decent environment so we can make it work for us the other way - Increased player movement isn’t a one way street. 

Edited August 30, 2024Aug 30 by Undeeterred

43 minutes ago, Lefty said:

Given her position as President, one would expect Roffey to have made an effort to reach out to Trac, perhaps to see if the relationship with the club could be mended. If she hasn’t done so it doesn’t reflect well on her leadership.

Not all. Not her position and there's nothing worse than Board Members overriding the relative staff to stick their oar in.

54 minutes ago, layzie said:

Thank you Bobo for being one of the first to actually outline what you thought was wrong with the interview and not just waffle on about how pathetic it was.

I've listened to it 2 more times yesterday and I'll admit I did miss quite a bit of this deflecting to the media the first time round. She admitted there were issues but as you said, 5 mentions of the media trumps that.

I don't hate Kate but I do think she shot herself in the foot a bit. Compared with Max who did also mention the media once but also when on to take responsibility for ours and his own comms, our processes, and also showed the ultimate empathy for Trac.

Give me a Max Gawn in every leadership position.

Oh I don’t hate Kate, I know basically nothing about her, haha

I just don’t want us to be a basket case and feel like her rhetoric was poorly chosen and as a result, (fairly or unfairly) just poured fuel onto the fire. Which we didn’t need right now. It’s up to her to choose her words carefully as obviously journo’s will latch onto phrases or words you repeat and use it against you if they can. 
 

Urrrgghhh

15 minutes ago, Skuit said:

I agree to an extent that Gawn has 'performed' better in his public responses than Roffey. But I don't think that it's fair to compare the two. While Petracca is important to both their aspirations, for Gawn he is a teammate and friend. 

For Roffey, he is one of many employees, and no matter how well-performed Christian is, she has an entire organisation to consider. Yes, he will be seen as more important to its success than her, which isn't much different to most workplaces. 

If the earlier rumours of complaints around favouritism have any substance, then imagine how all our other players will feel if we just bend over backwards to every demand, especially considering the way it has been approached, even if they recognise their place in the pecking order. 

A slightly different set of circumstance, and the people here screaming for heads would be the same complaining about the tail wagging the dog. 

 

The feeling around here is that Max did what Kate was meant to do, I didn't really feel it was fair to compare either but this seems go be the general consensus of the forum.

 

I completely forgot about this tweet, and I scoffed at it at the time, but it’s turned out to be true. Note the date of the tweet. Only 4 days after KBD and also 4 days before Morris reported that Petracca’s family were unhappy with the club’s treatment in the days following the injury.

The tweet could have just been a lucky strike for this acct, but If not, this has been a really long run up for Trac. Maybe the club has known since June too.

On 29/08/2024 at 15:47, Supreme_Demon said:

Pretty damning if Kate Roffey hasn't spoken to Christian Petracca and/or his family in months.

Simply not good enough as President of the Melbourne Football Club.

It may be unpleasant to bring up but do you think Eddie McGuire would do this when he was President of Collingwood?! If Nathan Buckley was injured Eddie would be at his bedside in the hospital!

People can joke about Eddie (and I am not a fan of his) but there is no doubt he cared about his players (at least most of them).

It's the ones he didn't care about that was the problem.