bing181

A player with ongoing personal/behavioural issues who has been average at best for the last 18 months and who's on a massive contract until he's 33. None of that is going to help his worth. The other question in all this that hasn't been brought up anywhere, would Oliver be prepared to take a pay cut to help this go through?

Also no surprise that these issues arise in off-season. And just in regards to all this: seeing what we've seen over the last 18 months I'd be surprised if Oliver can make it through the remaining 6 years of his contract, regardless of where he's playing.

Only goes so far with ADHD (though can certainly help), and there can be side effects which might be incompatible with elite level sport. But biggest issue is consistency, with many people stopping their medication or not taking it as required.

Unless I'm missing something, we don't know who was contacted but it wasn't just Geelong.

None of this information is public so we have no real info, but from what's available elsewhere Goodwin would just be one vote amongst the 4. Which is to stop coaches driving the list off a cliff for short-term gains. In any case, putting two and two together, whatever Goodwin's feelings are he has to support Oliver publicly in case none of this goes through and they have to work together going forward.

That would be the List Management committee that every club has. Ours includes Lamb, Taylor, Goodwin and presumably Richardson.

Even deciding over the course of a few days and a couple of visits that you want to change clubs after nearly a decade is classic ADHD. (Plenty of reports that up to a week or two ago he was all in and full of love for the Dees).

Not a theory.

People really need to remember that Clarry has ADHD. And always will have, his brain is hard-wired that way. So … difficult to suppress impulses, may not stop to consider a situation, or consequences before pursuing a course of action, etc etc. It may come across as immaturity, but it goes a lot deeper than that. I for one want him gone, unfortunately, but I really feel for him.

Yes sad. But it seems the club from top to bottom has been “sorting this out” for 18 months or so (that we know of …) and for whatever reason we’ve reached the end of the road. The internal review may have played a part in bringing issues to a head, or in unearthing problems that we’d thought were behind us, but whatever. Here we are. Time to move on, thankful that we got the best years of Clayton’s career.

Pert hasn’t gone rogue. This is club-wide, from the board down. There’s enough info out there.

Demonland: we need a review, we need heads to roll. Club implements review, Clayton Oliver is shown the door. Demonland: not that kind of review

Across the AFL all coaches’ jobs are always on the line but yes. And this is why you don’t give your head coach too much say in List Management. Short term vs long term/big picture goals. Clarkson spoke about it re his time at Hawthorn, that he was only one voice on the List Management Committee.

You're assuming he's calling list managers. (Reportedly the Oliver-Geelong meeting was with their CEO and President.)

There's not much that goes on within clubs that other clubs/players don't know about - regardless of what comes out in the press or on social media.

Not sure who's talking about a rebuild. If you get the balance right you can still be competitive. It's the difference between bringing in the Dan Houstons to stake all on another flag with this group but then falling off a cliff in 2-3 years time, as opposed to going all out to bring in the next generation now to smooth out that curve. The only problem with that scenario for us though is the loss of leadership in ANB and Gus, which isn't ideal.

Because if you're going to build a team around young players you need leadership and you need experience.

Seriously? There's even a radio station talking about nothing but trades.

Publicly the club has to deny deny deny. If Richardson comes out and says "we've suggested to Clayton that he explores his options", we'd be lucky to get a future second-rounder for him, especially on his salary.

On the basis of what we know, the review is into the Football Department.

Or perhaps not.

If he's being shopped around, I don't know that any of us know the reasons. The internal workings and the internal dynamics of a playing group and club are not generally accessible to the wider public. But to throw my own baseless speculation into the ring, I do wonder whether deep down here at some level the club has decided to close-off on this playing group and look to rebuilding around the next group down (JVR, Rivers, Judd, Windsor etc) plus going to the draft - and in particular this draft which apparently has plenty of talent. We've got Pick 5, perhaps we can massage our way into a second first-round pick. But if we could get a third first-rounder as well, it could go a fair way to setting us up long-term. So ... Oliver: getting older, would get us some decent picks plus clear salary space. Also, much as we love him, he's not bringing leadership or a wise head either - and this when we've lost Gus and ANB. Random thoughts.

Not sure the article says it was started by Pert, simply that Pert's been ringing around. For whatever reason. But perhaps because a trade at the level of Oliver goes way above a list manager so better to go directly to the other CEO's? Of course, I'm just guessing, just like everybody else here.

Bit of a non sequitur there? If you're not sure of her suitability, how can you assert that the board are basically just inserting their mates? Perhaps she was chosen because she was a strong candidate? Has plenty of board experience - as opposed to the current president for example. https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-angela-williams-ab717181/details/experience/