nutbean

didnt you know that the club is bigger that the player and whilst the club reasonably delay contract negotiations with players and coaches as it see fit it is high treason if a player does the same. (this is not a shot at the club - just posters)

So in summary 1/ At the end of the season we put in offer, they put in an offer 2/ He accepts our offer or he accepts their offer 3/ He stays at the club or he leaves the club 4/ Up until the time - nothing to report It isnt that hard is it ?

So a challenge to you - which ruthless clubs would you be talking about ? Collingwood with speculation still rife surrounding Thomas who hasnt signed and Pendles on a 1 year contract only which is completely designed to keep him in the GWS window and put the pies over a barrel next year as well? Travis Cloke who put the Pies over a barrell with an Essendon counter offer before signing and has still keep him in the GWS window by signing for two years instead of the 3 that the pies wanted? Geelong last year with GA Jnr ? You keep referring to how it has "unfolded" - nothing has unfolded except one player with huge media pressure on what he will do next year. Is Hawthorn a ruthless club ? When Danny Frawley suggested on Fox that TS be given a deadline - the Director of Football at Hawthorn Jason Dunstall looked at him if he was on a different planet. He made it clear his thoughts on setting a deadline. This fantasy notion that the club is bigger than the player is just that - fantasy - and it is a fantasy that is espoused by supporters but certainly not by AFL footballers. Each season numerous players contracts are not finalised until post season and the reason people are so worked up over Scully is the ease of which he can now can go to a club which is offering the big bikkies. Our current captain dangled a very large Collingwood contract in front of the club but that didnt attract over 2000 posts because of the difficulties involved ( ie having to trade) in Green getting there. April 24 2009 - who said this ? "I'd love to captain the Geelong Football Club one day, it's just something that would be great to do, it'd definitely be an honour. I love the club." - Gary Ablett October 9 - 2009 - who said this ? " xxxx received rapturous applause after telling the Dockers faithful that despite speculation he never wanted to be traded back to Melbourne and pledged to seek another contract with the WA club once his current deal expires at the end of the season." Chris Tarrant June 20, 2010 - who said this ? "I love Hawthorn," he said. "We have built with a lot of the same guys. We have almost grown up together and played a lot of footy together, so I love this club, no doubt about that." - Campbell Brown Feb 3 - 2007 - who said this ? "And I barracked for the Crows when I was younger so it's hard to say what will happen. For the next 12 months, at least, I'm the captain of the Fremantle Football Club. "I took the captaincy saying, 'We'll see after 12 months - how I feel in the captain's role, how the players perceive me and how the club goes'. We'll wait and see." Isnt this the kind of talk you want from your loyal captain ? march 28 - 2011 - who said this ? - on weighing up options and to field offers from other clubs ? "There’s no problem with that, that’s the way of commerce and that’s professional football." - Of course it was Ruthless Eddie Macquire. So to all those who ask TS to spell out his undying love for his club - take note of the above. For all of those reading into body language and what has and hasnt been said - read the Pavlich comment - and for all those demanding "loyalty" have a look at Eddie's comment. In summary - what will be will be.

Man crush on this post (I did notice that when you posted this your eyes shifted to the left and the right in quick succession - you didnt seem 100% committed to what you posted ...wait a second....I think your mum signed a HOA for nutbean to go to the GWS supporters forum and nutbean's mum signed a HOA for you. Hardtack - I will personally boo you every time you post here.)

correct

Hmmm 1/ he aint gone until he is gone 2/ Other clubs cultures - apparently Richmond are paying in excess of $700K a year to Dustin Martin to keep him, Pendles has signed a 1 year contract (nothing smacks of mercenary more than this signing) and Thomas hasnt signed at all..

The report say 1st quarter.... As an aside, I saw Ricky dive into a contest from three back, head first in front of the members - it was kamikaze poetry in motion and the reason I love him ( in a very blokey way)

$1.2M and head out of the sandpit in the same post - wow !!!

On Fox this morning - Petterd reported for something on Crowley (sort of only half heard!) Did anyone see it?

surprised by the booing post - all I heard was generous applause every time he ran to the bench

I can fathom restrictions thats are FAIRER - if the AFL has decided a line in the sand for free agency then they could have done the same for GWS and GC17 rules governing uncontracted players especially since these clubs were given a further concession of so much more money to spend. Early draft picks are given to a team in recognition of poor performance - the poor performance being by existing players. Allowing the transfer of 1st and 2nd year players, flies in the face of a tiered drafting system. At least with players that GC17 took you can make a case that all of them had given "service" to their clubs. So if you draw the line at 25 years old - at least you had 7 years of service from a player of which the last 3 years you would hope would be near enough to their mature playing level. Any system is not perfect but Gary March was 100% right - allowing the targeting of 1st and 2nd year footballers is not right.

My point - either lack of foresight ( I hope not) or lack of noise by CS on his disapproval of the rules - there are no other explanations. We ridicule Gary March but at least he straight out admitted lack of foresight.

Since I have no insight as to what CS and others did and didnt fight for/against I will go as far as saying I am disappointed in CS's response to Gary March's statement. Gary March flagged in March 2010 the targeting of 1st and 2nd year players. "We were all led to believe that the new clubs could take uncontracted stars, but we weren't aware their targets would be first- and second-year stars. If you suddenly allow that, then it defeats the whole purpose of the system. I'm not just talking about Dustin Martin. I haven't spoken to Melbourne or West Coast, but I would feel the same way about Jack Trengove, Tom Scully or Jack Watts or Nic Naitanui. As a football person, I don't think it's right.'' We can all take a shot at March and say he was very short sighted but CS's response to this was ''Gary March does not speak on behalf of our club,'' Schwab said. ''We understand what the rules are and Tim Harrington is working hard to make sure we keep all of our players and we are comfortable with that so I don't need Gary March speaking on behalf of the Melbourne Football Club. ''It's his concept, he can take it forward. We know what the rules are and will work within the rules.'' I am disappointed for one of two reasons and since we are not privvy to the goings on at the time of rules being set up I cannot determine which I am upset at. I am either upset because CS foresaw the possible outcome of the rules in place, foresaw who could be targeted and did not shout it from the highest rooftop "not fair" so we know he was fighting the fight. Even if he changed his above statement to "we knew what the rules were and were always UNCOMFORTABLE with them but unfortunately have to work within them" gives me some belief that he fought the fight and lost. OR I am upset because CS did not foresee the implications of the rules. Either way - I am upset at CS.

I didnt think about it at the time - but can i say at the least, I am retrospectively appalled that these rules were not closely examined and challenged?

I agree 100% - it is a disaster. But i see those two differently. We are essentially in violent agreement - you believe the CEO's involved in formulating the rules should have seen this coming. I believe they didnt but agree they should have.

Im not letting the administrations off the hook - I honestly think that this wasnt thought thru and should have been. Why didnt any club assess the rule ? North with Bastinac Richmond with Martin MFC with Scully Trengove etc These three clubs are at least negligent in the questioning of the rules at the time. Maybe Cam was incensed at what March said after the event because he didnt want to look like a dick

Not sure on Grant - you may well be right on him. However you decided to completely disregard what is documented about White to Melbourne and Buckley - they are both in no way shape or form comparible to what is being discussed here

I agree with you on the insane. I may be proven wrong but i see irony in calling pathetic - an oversight of the rules that have allowed this farcical situation with young players to happen, yet we are not questioning - GWS in the league at all - WTF ???????????

name them - name first year players ? second year players ? even third year players ? name them

Are you on the White and Buckley bandwagon as well... This is so different. 1/ Buckley stated upfront that he wanted to play for Collingwood - wrongly or rightly there was a get out clause in his contract 2/ Jeff White was miserable and wanted to come home ( you dont remember him being ridiculed for crying on the phone to his mum ?) - he was never going to stay in Freo - if he didnt come to the Dees he would have gone to another Victorian club

Well pathetic may be the word - but March brought it up and was then supported by two other clubs - after the event. The press didnt bring it up before the event when the concessions were discussed and there has only been shock horror after the event. The first rumblings was from Richmond when Martin was apparently approached which was late year - not evident early in the year because all of GC17's approaches were to mature players So pathetic maybe, but wouldnt be the first oversight by clubs and it wont be the last

On your first observation - I agree and if we agree that free agency is ok at 8 years then the same rules should apply to uncontracted players. GWS anc GC17 are getting an enormous leg up with the draft picks they have access to

Gary March by his own admission says they didnt think they would target first and second year players. And whilst you should never discount anything - the concessions did give (s) access to the best youth in the land via the draft - i can understand the thinking that they would have been targeting more experienced uncontracted players ( and in reality - that is exactly how GC17 went). I also understand the cap concessions that GWS has but these are only temporary and with Free agency coming in i think they are wise in offering a 20 year old the touted money that was apparently on offer for Martin. It is would be bad for our structure making a 20 year one of the highest paid players at the club and the same must apply to them. ( i would have thought)

I am going to bleat and not about umpiring and the MFC but in general 1/ The holding the ball when dragging the ball in rule. If you drag it in and make no attempt and there is a way to release then ok but as it is being umpired at the moment - as soon as you drag the ball in it gives the opposition carte blanche to dive on top of you, pour fifteen tonnes of cement on the contest and keep the ball under you with no chance of release and the result will be holding the ball. It is breeding a game full of stalkers and lurkers. 2/ as an umpire ( especially on this rule) if you cant really see - DONT GUESS. The amount of times the ball is dragged in but pops aways from "draggee" but the umpire is to the back of the congestion and cant see and still pays the free is in infuriating....unmpires - if your not sure - then do nothing. I thought they umpired well Geelong/Hawthorn on this but were horrible at other games i saw.

I know ! I know !