hemingway

Agreed Diamond

A useful iteration thanks DJ. I suppose my main point is that recently we have had a whole string of ""go home"" reasons and if devalues the importance or even relevance of a contract, unless you have the application of basic minimum standards. Despite your comments, unless you have some consequences for breaking a contract, the latter becomes just a memorandum of understanding without any legal force. Perhaps the Kelly case is more to the point where you have a club and its supporters envisaging a 2019 season and beyond with a gun player and then overnight he's gone. Geelong have reason to feel cheated irrespective of the reasons.

What is the worth of a contract in terms of tenure? Not much if you consider what has been happening recently. The emotional notion of a player wanting to "go home"" seems to be an acceptable reason and clubs take a pragmatic view that they do not want to keep a player who is not committed. This encourages the club to get a good trade deal. In other words, clubs become opportunistic in their view of the whole thing. One thing feeds the other. How do you change this behaviour or indeed do you want to? My point is that if you think contracts are important then you need to hold both parties to his terms at least in regard to tenure. Otherwise, the whole contract thing is a charade, and not worth the paper its written on. Signing a player for a specific period of time is meaningless. The only way for this to change is for clubs -not to recruit interstate players so that the go home factor does not become an issue. -include further provisions in the contract that make it clear that both parties will be held to its terms other than in the case of death or disability -include cost penalty provisions where a party is in breach. -to ensure that all clubs hold to the terms of the contract and not take the expedient view of trading out the unhappy player. These suggestions may appear unrealistic but the alternative is to have an industry where the importance of contracts becomes totally devalued, thereby destabilizing player lists, club planning and coaching strategies. There is acceptance by supporters that top players become targets for other clubs and that players can try and get the best deal for themselves. Yet at the same time, supporters will become disillusioned if there is the sense that players can just move club at the drop of a hat, on the grounds that they want to go home. Sure they can go home but consistent with the terms of their contract.

It appears to be an open marriage But in my experience, it rarely works, as one side or the other feels jilted and cheated. However, sometimes it allows each side to see that the grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence. And when they munch on that green grass it can be downright disappointing.

Fair point DJ. Your comment about Riewoldt is also fair. Some footballers can turn it around but many don't. That's the dilemma with Hogan. Unfortunately, its not about equivalent trade. I wish it was. I agree that getting May for Hogan and another pick does not seem equitable. However, Hogan has indicated a desire to return home and will not extend his contract beyond 2018, suggesting that if he does not go now, he will go in 12 months. Like others, I would love for Hogan to stay but at the same time don't see the point of having him around only for another season when he has telegraphed his intentions. Hogan returning for only one more season is the worst of all scenarios, unless you speculate that he will help win a flag in 2019. So you go to the May trade scenario. The Club obviously believes that is our best possible deal. However, May is not of equivalent vale. Its simply about getting the best trade possible and avoiding the predicament that Hogan stays for another season knowing that he is gone in 12 months.

Hogan will never be a defender. He does not play like one, his defensive pressure is poor, he has a turning circle like the Queen Mary and his second efforts are non existent. He is simply not agile enough. Put him down back with Oscar? I don’t think so. Poor old Nev would have to cover both. A gun forward who could kick 100 placed down back for team balance playing on forwards with half his capability. Hogan would be delighted! How to demotivate a player in one move. Your playing at CHB this season son for reasons of team balance. That ok? Don’t worry you will still get 850k per year. Take it for the team!

Perhaps the biggest get. I spent a good part of the year worrying about Max going down. Every time I saw him in a heap on the ground, I would look to see if he got up without a limp or injury. We were seriously exposed without a backup ruckman particularly at finals time. Just hope that Preuss has what it takes.

Modesty Lucifer, that's your game, also Red. Leave bragging rights and egos to the rabble.

Always on the cards

What entertainment. Anyone taking this circus seriously needs to join my psychotherapy group. I recommend it.

Thanks Bub , I had not seen Langdon's comments when I posted.

Truly interesting. Brinkmanship at its best. It is possible that Freo love Jessie and are just playing hardball as a negotiation stance. Most negotiators will stick by their ambit position for as long as possible. What they have put is only ridiculous if you think Hogan is a star. Unlike your stars of the game, he has not proved himself in a sustained way. More likely is that Freo would like Jessie but like others in the footy world (including the Dees) have their doubts about his value and longevity. Also Jessie may seem less than enthusiastic about joining Freo creating further doubts about the deal. Not good if you offering him mega bucks and he seems a little detached and not jumping for joy. They want him but are not prepared to sell the farm. If I was Freo, I would not change my position. See how he goes next season and if he does okay then come knocking. The Dees are the loser because they end up with a player that is not switched on, maybe on the side lines with injury, and is not going to remain integral to their game plan in the future. Unless, Jessie gets his act together, plays great footy, falls in love with the Dees and commits to a Demon future. Now that would be something!

including your good self.

Quite right Dragon. We do make assumptions but perhaps we are only trying to make some sense of it all. Given our performance in the last 4 games, it obviously raises questions as to Hogan's role in the team. Your proposition is valid and lets hope correct. When an employee is thinking of leaving an organisation it can affect commitment and motivation. At the moment we have 22 players who seem totally committed to the Club and each other. If Hogan came back switched on that would be fantastic. But the doubt is there and at very least will continue to be an unwanted distraction to player and club particularly toward the end of the season.

Love your last line, a line that most of us occasionally use or would like to use, until common sense prevails. And that common sense tells us that rarely do you get your wish, indeed, by using your famous last line, you may well get something but less than what you want at a cost or something that is even worse.....you get nothing. I like your spirit but I would much prefer a negotiated outcome that all parties including Hogan desire. That Flag tilt you refer to may not be assisted by Hogan's return particularly if he has not invested in the future of the team and the Club. .

Unfortunately it’s not that simple. Most would agree that he is a gun forward and can kick goals. But there are so many other considerations which posters have already discussed. Contract length and cost, the need to gain some players to fit gaps, the need to keep existing valuable players by paying them top dollar, team structures and game plan, injury, attitude, the potential cost and liability of him on a long term contract, the potential cost of him playing one more season and then walking. If it was just about ability, potential etc there would be no debate

My many years spent around negotiating tables with some of the toughest and best wheelers and dealers have taught me that there are some fundamental principles: -Every one recognizes that there is always "ambit"" -That successful negotiation needs to take place leaving personal egos aside. -That you need to place yourself in the shoes of the person on the other side of the table. You may not accept their claims or position, but you need to understand and accept that a resolution requires accommodation on both sides. -That there is no deal or successful deal without compromise. -Unless the person on the other side is incompetent, you never get your best outcome, but you get an outcome that you can live with. -Both sides need to feel that they have had a win and that the outcome is acceptable to their constituents.

Chook, you are being generous in referring to these guys as journalists. Footy journalists, you have to be kidding.

Can you change your name to Double Entendre. No perhaps Explicitly Opportunistic would be more accurate.

We are in a difficult position with Hogan. We have discovered that team success is not reliant on Hogan. Second, his foot is an issue. We all know about feet and that serious injury can not only seriously interrupt careers but end them. You don't want a bloke on $800 plus on the sidelines for a season or more. In terms of wise money management, a long term Demon deal with Hogan carries the risk that his foot remains an issue. Indeed, how many games can he string together without his body letting him down? We have a conundrum. We don't want Hogan hanging around for another season with an injury and poor attitude, yet we would not want to sign him to a long term expensive contract without being very confident that his foot injury is not going to impede his future. For me, there are too many ifs and buts with Hogan. Probably Freo and other clubs have the same concerns. Best that we plan a future without him, which means we need to compromise on the trade and accept less than what many feel we should get.

A bigger asset would be if he kicked with both feet, and at least kicked accurately with his preferred.

It really is a minefield in regard to total club salary management. A job for cool clear heads.

well I hope your right. and if you are, just don't brag about it.

I don't know why it is amusing, unless you think your cleverer than the next person. Like looking at someone's CV, you can form an impression or an opinion based on a person's track record. In the KK case, his injury history, lack of games, and GC's willingness to trade provides an uninspiring track record. The other reasoning relates to his untapped potential, which is always debatable. In the past, we have had a litany of names with potential on our list. And we all have opinions on those names.

Hope your right rjay so I will bow to your greater knowledge. Apropos of another post of mine, I should heed my own words and have confidence in our selection and selectors.