54 minutes ago, dpositive said:

Oliver is an indicator of the club performance.

He was traded to improve club performance. From a financial perspective the report at the AGM seems to indicate it has been handled well. How other (all) players perform will be the measure of how well this was handled.

this is a complex issue which requires far mor nuanced explanantion which requires far greater knowledge of facts than we have access to. I trust and support the club but certainly hope it works out well for both us and Oliver.

Fair comment!

22 hours ago, sue said:

1. He said 'you may have to play a new role'. OR:

2. He said 'you may have to play a new role and if you don't like it you'll be at Casey'. ?

Maysie was told this, therefore it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Clarrie was as well.

Wasn't May told to look for a new club.....and if he could not find a suitor, would be welcomed back? Not sure that he was told anything about positional changes.... unless that was all after he could not find any club interested?

So much revisionism....I don't know anymore ha.

10 minutes ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

Wasn't May told to look for a new club.....and if he could not find a suitor, would be welcomed back? Not sure that he was told anything about positional changes.... unless that was all after he could not find any club interested?

So much revisionism....I don't know anymore ha.

My read was May was advised that the club would look to play its core group of younger players to setup our team for its next window and as such, barring injuries, May would probably spend most of his time at Casey. As such it encouraged May to explore opportinities elsewhere while also letting him know that he is a Melbourne player.

12 minutes ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

Wasn't May told to look for a new club.....and if he could not find a suitor, would be welcomed back? Not sure that he was told anything about positional changes.... unless that was all after he could not find any club interested?

So much revisionism....I don't know anymore ha.

Having read through most threads and player, coaches quotes May was advised to have a look around to see if he could get a deal past 2026, when he asked can I come back if I don’t get an offer, he was told Yes but there are no guarantees, all positions have to be earnt. That applies to all players.

17 hours ago, picket fence said:

Sue, if this was threatened, then it was a MAJOR blunder by an inexperienced coach, not an experienced one, can you imagine Chris Fagan saying this??

You don't get to where King was at Geelong without being experienced and familiar with what a coach does. So if you want to nitpick, perhaps I should have said 'an experienced person in coaching circles'. He was even interim coach at GC for 7 games and his cv indicates he has had more senior coaching related experience than probably anyone here.

And sure, if anyone makes a blunder, its a blunder, uppercase or not. In the absence of independent evidence that King is blunder-prone, I'd assume he did not make such a blunder given the circumatnces I outlined.

40 minutes ago, Ghostwriter said:

Maysie was told this, therefore it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Clarrie was as well.

As I said it was of course possible Oliver was given the Casey ultimatum since we had no direct evidence either way. I just doubted it. As for May, ageing players during a rebuild are always going to be told that as part of caring remarks such as "maybe you should look somewhere else". His circumstances were different than Oliver's so it doesn't add much weight to our guesses as to what was said to Clarrie.

Edited Saturday at 00:582 days by sue

In the absence of anyone really knowing what was said at his exit meeting I'm happy to let the fact that we were willing to absorb up to half his salary for the rest of his contract to move him on speak for itself.

7 hours ago, Neil Crompton said:

This farewell for Oliver - at 101 pages and counting - is longer than Dame Nellie Melba's and KISS's farewells combined. I think I can easily summarise the gist of what has been discussed over the last 101 pages:

• yes he was - no he wasn't

• yes he is - no he isn't

• yes he will - no he won't.

  I think that about covers it.

  But just for @picket fence, he WAS a champion, one of the greatest Dee's ever. But sadly the last two years have shown how far he has fallen, and the fact that the Club was prepared to pay him to play elsewhere really says it all.

  Time to move on i believe - just like Clarrie has.

It’s embarrassing but we know it won’t end and possibly Demonland biggest fool will keep it going anytime Clarry performs well he will reignite this thread.

A man that old who refuses to consider the real reason Clarry was moved on, will never change their view despite the overwhelming evidence

Regular Demonland poster

“I know I’ll be right eventually”

10 hours ago, picket fence said:

Can't believe the animosity by some here denigrating Clarry, so again 4 B& F 2 time coaches award 3rd in Brownlow and yeah impact dropped last 2 years but still STILL his numbers for many metrics in those years remained ELITE!

I’m not discounting what he did but he has not been the same player for 2.5 seasons and the numbers do not tell the story. I don’t see him getting back to his best and whilst I still think he will have some good games, he will never reach the heights of his pre 2023 seasons

Clayton Oliver is gone

Must be remembered when a new coach is installed after the previous coach has been sacked after a decline in the clubs fortunes its not business as usual anymore. A new coach will identify toxic influences and remove them no matter how high in the club pecking order. Oliver has been identified as a toxic influence so be it.

If Oliver didn’t play a game in 2025, how many less wins would have we had last year?

If the answer is 0 to 1 less win, then perhaps that’s one of the reasons we traded him.

13 hours ago, Demons11 said:

I’m not discounting what he did but he has not been the same player for 2.5 seasons and the numbers do not tell the story. I don’t see him getting back to his best and whilst I still think he will have some good games, he will never reach the heights of his pre 2023 seasons

9 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

Must be remembered when a new coach is installed after the previous coach has been sacked after a decline in the clubs fortunes its not business as usual anymore. A new coach will identify toxic influences and remove them no matter how high in the club pecking order. Oliver has been identified as a toxic influence so be it.

These two comments tell the story strongly influenced by ignorance of what has really happened. The future will tell.

If Oliver gets back to paly a positive role it indicates our club still lacks some features of player management. If our team doea as well as i expect we will see that the change was needed. Our new coach seems to be progressing with a new team and a new attitude at the moment.

On 02/01/2026 at 17:29, picket fence said:

Sue, if this was threatened, then it was a MAJOR blunder by an inexperienced coach, not an experienced one, can you imagine Chris Fagan saying this??

Further to PF, is anyone in the know hearing silence in the air?

2 hours ago, dpositive said:

These two comments tell the story strongly influenced by ignorance of what has really happened. The future will tell.

If Oliver gets back to paly a positive role it indicates our club still lacks some features of player management. If our team doea as well as i expect we will see that the change was needed. Our new coach seems to be progressing with a new team and a new attitude at the moment.

Is it an automatic indictment of us though if he does well? What if he just needed a change?

On 02/01/2026 at 00:35, KozzyCan said:

Wasn't it reported that we basically paid our bit in a lump sum to get it off our books asap. Even if our cap is affected by it for a few more years. Same thing with Goodwin I think.

After the debacle with the Treloar trade to the Dogs, the AFL simplified the rules around this stuff. Essentially if you are traded to another club and the first club agrees to pay part of the contract. Their portion is put into it's own contract. So the new club can renegotiate things down the line it won't affect the agreement with the first club.

Same thing happened when we traded Grundy to Sydney. Collingwood were still left on the hook for their bit because they had a contract with Grundy, not us. Sydney were happy to pay him what we were so we didn't have to cover it at all.

Don't take this the wrong way as you do have some good input on this site but I'm undecided on whether you're actually a good poster. You seem to be more in the know than the regular person but sometimes it seems like your ability to write well and throw alleged facts in that no-one will bother to check leads people to believe you know more than you actually do about a subject.