bing181

Plenty here wanted Goodwin, Pert, Roffey etc gone, OK. Add to that the departure of a couple of assistants and a handful of players ... doesn't exactly reek of stable club. Perhaps all necessary in the longer term, but it's inevitable that there'll be short-term pain when all that we have to sell is "a vision". The Age headline sums up what most outsiders are probably thinking: "What the hell is going on at the Demons?".

You only hold players to a contract if you want them to stay at the club. In this case, we don't.

There is no world in which Petracca is playing for us next year. And GC know it.

Third in our Best and Fairest in his first year with us. Was a key player in shifting the culture that eventually led to the flag.

There were media reports linking Flanders to St Kilda as far back as June.

As above, this has little to do with Clarry the player. Whether he's cooked or not is irrelevant, clearly the club feels that the cost of keeping him is too high. There may also be some performance data behind all this, but time will tell if he really has lost a yard or not. None of us really knows.

Understatement. FWIW, this is also what might have been said to Clarry, but both he and his management would understand exactly what the intent was. Equally, so much of what goes on at this time of year is optics.

As a slight aside here ... There's been a lot of mention of mental health in this thread. Clarry apparently has ADHD. ADHD, like autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia etc. is not a mental health condition. Or any kind of health condition. These are a neurological differences which impact how these people treat information and interact with the world. They're disabilities, though as with all disabilities, support and environment can help reduce how disabling they are. On the other hand, many people with these neurologies do indeed experience poor mental health because life can be a real struggle, even at the best of times. So sure, Clarry needs to take responsibility for his actions, but he'll always be banging up against the way his brain is wired, which he can no more undo than anyone with a mobility impairment can get out of a wheelchair and walk. Good luck to him at GWS, they seem to do OK at supporting players who don't always fit the AFL mould.

Delusional. We are 100% forcing him out.

No we can't. It would be toxic for the playing group and undermine everything King and Guerra have been saying. For better or worse Trac is gone. Sure, we have to go through the motions (the offer needs to turn our heads etc. etc.), but the reality is we'll end up accepting whatever we have to. Yes, [censored] situation, but it is what it is.

Absolutely this. Almost certainly we were never in it, and meeting with us and others was as much about pushing up his contract with St Kilda as anything. (See also Windhager.) None of these trades happen overnight, nor in a vacuum.

?? No trades are easy, as everyone at the club has always acknowledged. Odd post, not actually grounded in any kind of reality.

Laughable. People are easily swayed by performative BS.

Sure, but what does "throw a fair bit at getting Trac" mean if it doesn't involve Humphrey? We don't want picks.

Maybe. But you missed the "high profile player" bit. Trac will just about pay for himself in extra memberships and ticket sales. Sure, they have some great players, but they haven't had a superstar since Ablett left.

I suspect the club was being polite in terms of why they want May gone.

They organised that pretty quick ... pre-planned? Why would Oliver spend a couple of days in Sydney before heading to the U.S.?

We don't. Though at the moment, the presumption is that Mihocek comes in, Petty takes May's place, which leaves Adams is still knocking on the door - well, at least while Tom Mac is there.

If I'm GC, I'm fighting tooth and nail to keep Humphrey. Can't see it happening myself, and this site would go into meltdown if the boot were on the other foot and we traded away our equivalent. (Kozzie?)

Getting Humphrey in is only half of the equation. Need something for Gold Coast back the other way.

Typo?

And that's not going to change, he is what he is.

You didn't get them wrong. The info was correct at the time.

Not necessarily. Maybe we're trying to create opportunity for players like Rivers, Langford, even Windsor and Linsday, backing them in to get the job done. Sure, baptism of fire and all that, but if they're our future midfield they need to start getting serious midfield minutes.

I think you can see the logic in all this. For a while I’ve felt that all those close games we "just lost" (without even starting on the St Kilda game!) point to a lack of on-field ownership, not just leadership. It’s not that we don’t have leaders — we do. But sometimes strong leaders can dominate so much that others stop stepping up. Who do we really have behind Max and Viney? Petracca has shown he isn’t that type of leader. Not a knock — he contributes in his own way. But in that final centre bounce against St Kilda, Petracca was in the middle: standing there with his arms out. Asking the question rather than taking it upon himself to find a solution. Same even moreso with Oliver. We need the Rivers, Chandlers, even younger players like Lindsay to see themselves as leaders, to take responsibility and own what happens on-field. But for that to happen, the environment has to let them. Rivers is never going to call out Petracca. Max mentioned Turner as a good young leader - but is he going to be the on-field leader he could be with May out there? The King interview was revealing - one of his points is that there's little difference across the league these days in terms of what's possible. But then it turns on culture, leadership, belief, ownership. So rather than just try and fill the team with star players, he's looking to build these other qualities.