nutbean

Its a non issue. My belief is to take TS at face value and he hasnt signed. Doesnt make logically sense for TS to do it now. Taking the polar opposite - if he has signed with GWS he will still sit down and go through the motions until the season is over and then move on ( not my belief) Only Bock and Krak tipped their hand about GC17 before season end and that was a week or so before seasons end and both promptly did not play for the seniors again. However - before TS makes any commitment either way - negotiating with the stance "either sign now or play for Casey" would be the same as showing him the door - I wouldnt stay if that was the way the MFC wanted to negotiate.

Thats where Ned Kelly got it wrong. Had he been wearing a Pies jumper at Stringbark creek he could have gone up before the MRP and had his 3 shooting charges downgraded from intentional to reckless

As long as i live i will never understand the Trengove decision - Selwood has hit Ablett miles off the ball. Thomas has hit Jones after the ball is gone. I semi understand the MRP classifications of impact but as far as I am concerned what Campbell Brown, Selwood and Thomas did was off the ball and considered "dirty" to varying degrees. What Trengove did was deliver a brutal tackle that in itself was not aimed at damagingthe head ( as opposed to jumping off the ground with hip and shoulder to the head) Just shaking my head in disbelief

thats how i saw it too - i dont see any VFL so all i can go on is reviews and Strauss seems to be labelled a little timid at the contest. Even though he was caught ( albeit by the shorts) - he went straight at a player much bigger and heavier without the slightest hesitation. I wasnt pleased with the end result but cant question the application.

I dont get too excited by U18 packages (if you'll pardon the pun). Having said that - let me say this ! I was over excited by Davis's package ( if you'll pardon the pun again) - he looked so calm and composed. Again i know it is a stretch but if he can develop and bring this to AFL level wow

The leopards can change their spots. It is not about winning or losing and never has been - we are decimated with injuries and will struggle to win games until we can field a competitive team I can live with some skill errors I can live with inexperienced mistakes I can live with a little bit of outmuscle by more mature bodies in the right circumstances ( Newton against Gwilt was embarrassing) I cannot live with soft efforts and half hearted chases. If Howe gets a guernsey - he may spill marks or run to the wrong place - but i expect him to go hard either at the ball or the man with ball. What they have to do on a weekly basis:- Go hard at the ball or the man with ball - even me as a hack footballer can do that.

And i think there is a little history re-writing - Robbie F said later he could not have played in the GF ( had we won the prelim) he was so injured and Wilson was also out - we were the walking wounded. As it proved to be the case - no one was going to beat Carlton - much as i would like to think we could have .

I am sort of betwixt and between. We cannot function with the amount of cattle we have missing - by the same token i expect more from the playeres we do have playing. I will ask on this post - your first two points makes allowances for the injuries which I agree with - but then your last comment say he will be judged on Collingwood game etc that is two weeks away and the injury list will be just as bad. We will have trenners and maybe Scully - in the meantime we have lost Davey for 8 weeks. So which one is - injuries no excuse or they are an excuse ?

I'll give you one out of four. Farmer and Thompson were specifically "go home" players - not money - as opposed to Scully - if he was contemplating leaving he would be a "leave home - for money" Jolly - was not considered a good enough player to keep so we traded him - how he has turned out now is beside the point Healy - was absolutely a move away from home for money player. Besides Healy, we actually havent lost a big name player to a rival - dont know if that says something about our retention rate or that we didnt have any good players !

My only question mark would be returning a player with leg injuries straight into AFL with no slower paced VFL games where some match day pressure can be placed on the legs. Frawley, for example was running for a few weeks before he came back - before his shoulder was declared ok to go. IF I am understanding correctly, Tom has done little to no leg work in 8 weeks. Last thing we want is rushing him back to full on AFL with limited preparation and see a hamstring go. The rust/touch aspect doesnt overly concern me - I will leave this to medicos smarter than me

I here what you say about being able to factor in the new payment arrangements that are going to come into play however I wouldnt be advising a client (if I was a player manager) to sign in the current climate 1/ We are five weeks away from the deadline for completion of player payment negotiations 2/ The AFLPA walked out on discussions with the AFL and are by media reports are a fair distance apart 3/ We have the NFL on strike and for the first time AFL players asking if they would strike It is obvious that Tom wants to make sure he gets a slice of increase player payments but it is hardly a settled enviroment to be putting in terms into a contract on getting extra percentages on what may or may not happen. Why not advise waiting to start negotiations in 5 weeks time when there is certainty on the payment deal. Thats my thoughts

how would he get there ?

The justification for him staying and not staying have been spelt out and dont need to be spelt out again. The main premise of your argument that the club comes first and not the individual died many a year ago. No club, including our own is immune to this. If a player has currency he will be able to hold the upper hand in negotiations, as opposed to players not in demand - Jmac, Paul johnson etc. Sorry to disappoint but this is the landscape that ALL clubs are playing in. Just about every other high profile player hasnt been more engaging and i would like to hear your opinion on how you believe the Pendlebury signing for one season taking him neither out of GWS clutches and also straight into free agency is putting the club ( Collingwood) before the individual. I see the Pendlebury one year signing as bending over Collingwood big time. As to the uncertainity - I think the most uncertainity and angst is on this board. Please point us all to the distabilisation of the club that his very clear and unambiguous path has created ?

There is not going in hard enough - which I sometimes see and sometimes dont and then there is blatently pulling out of a contest. It was diagonally across the ground from me and had to ask my mate if i saw what i thought i saw - knowing what the answer would be. It is unacceptable from a player of his years and being in the LG - when it is your turn to go - you go. It presents an unacceptable statement to the rest of the group. The two's it is for me

I think Jones has his limitations but the one thing I applaud him for is that he is not static. Bust his balls to run into space and give an option. When we have the ball and the player looks upfield and no-one is moving and I am yelling my guts out "GIVE HIM SOMETHING" , Jones is one that usually does.

I like being fed peeled grapes and having scantily clad beauty's waving palm fronds over me to keep me deliciously cool - Im figuring that this too may be dream.

I have no angst in TS waiting until the end of the season to negotiate. It would leave a very bad taste in my mouth if he signed for one year. It is an ugly message. If TS leaves it will be for one reason - $. If he stays it will be for a plethora of reasons that make up the difference between the extra money he would receive if he left. But when he is ready, I would like a firm commitment 2-3 years. One year contract by Pendlebury says - I want it all this year - and my options open to get it all next year too.

I think the Pendles signing for one year ( impending signing ?) gives our forum members insight that the Scully negotiations and strategy is not unique and all clubs ( even the all powerful Collingwood) suffer exactly the same problems as we do. It is surely not in Collingwoods interest to favour a one year extension to Pendlebury's contract - I would suggest the conclusion you would draw is that Pendlebury wants to go back to the negotiation table next year with GWS still on the radar and free agency commencing giving him even more bargaining power. Smart move by him. He has not committed to being a Magpie for life. He is a professional footballer and I would think he wants to stay at Collingwood but on his terms. I would expect same minded posters on here would be present on the Collingwood boards screaming "commit or play elsewhere - you either want to be a magpie or you don't. Players shouldn't hold us to ransom" - yet what has Collingwood done - realised that Pendlebury is a wanted commodity ( as is Scully) and agreed to his terms and marched to the beat of his drum. So as posted previously - demand and supply - as a footballer, if you are wanted commodity you get to call the shots in your negotiations. If you are Simon Godfrey you take what is on offer.

Actually I believe a delivery boy who was delivering Glicks bagels did tragically die but it was covered up by the Melbourne Establishment who thought that if it was too well publicised it would give Diamond Joe a reason to grandstand bringing him back into the public arena. Oy Gevalt!

Im not debating whether he deserved another crack or not ( I'm with you on all you wrote) - I am argueing that in the negotiation card game - Junior had a hand full of nothing. So decision made - thanks for the memories. Playing hold'em ? As most players with currency can and do and again agreed. And whats the pot ? A stack of money against lots of reasons not to go. The key is simply the value TS places on the lots of reasons to stay against the value of the dollar offer to go. My logical reasoning for him to stay is that if the dollars and not miles apart ( and way too good to be true) then as a professional footballer would I want to move away from everything I have in Melbourne ( family, friends, hometown etc) for 3-5 years of development football ? Im thinking the club will keep chipping away as Jimma is doing. Negotiation 101 - even though Velocity/TS has set the timetable I would still be gently pressuring him to come to the table sooner than later. Velocity has set the timetable but nothing to be lost by the MFC pulling the chair out from the table and inviting TDS/Velocity to sit and chat earlier than the timetable stated. But as opposed to others thinking on the board - I would logically argue that the MFC are not going to make an ultimatum to him - sign now or play at Casey

You see it was 7/11 - but the US government withheld the information and denied it every happening for two months. (Note - nutbean = dumbass) (actually it was a conspiracy of my fingers against my brain - my brain typed 9/11 and my fingers conspired with my groin, where my real brain is, to come up with 7/11) Alright....I'm not having a good day !!!!!!!!

And also man didnt actually walk on the moon - it was created in a studio in Hollywood. And 9/11 was perpetrated by zionists as there were phone calls to every Jewish person who worked in the twin towers telling them not to go to work. Not one Jewish person died in the towers collapse. And Elvis Presley is not really dead but living on a tropical Island with Michael Jackson as his toyboy Your point?

Agree with this up to a point - as an MFC supporter 100% agree but when I put my dispassionate hat on, truth be told, players whose star is in the ascendancy - TS, Cam Bruce for many years, Aaron Davey at last contract negotiation - will have us over a barrel. However can you say to me sitting in Juniors chair that he didnt deserve another year and maybe we forced him into early retirement. We axe players every year - some feel hard done by. Dispassionately, all negotiations and player decisions are governed by demand and supply - there is a demand for TS and an oversupply of Simon Godfrey's. The negotiations go accordingly.

OMG - prior to the press conference you continually went on about him not saying anything or answering any questions. Now he has answered all questions put to him, you didnt like the tone of his voice !!! For me there are only three possible outcomes 1/ He re-signs with the MFC 2/ He hasnt been approached, will weigh up the offer when it comes and take the money and run 3/ He has signed already, lied through his teeth and will play for the giants next year I tend to think that number 3 is for the conspiracy theorists only but its all academic - from a person that negotiates for a living I say to Velocity regarding Tom Scully - "well played Sir - wouldnt play it any differently myself". On behalf of the MFC I say - "please Tom sign up with us"

I haven't heard Tom say something comforting like "I will be playing for Melbourne next season. The contract details I'll sort out at the end of the season". Do not offer to negotiate a contract for me as refusal often offends. If you are serious about the above statement then you have successfully knocked $$$$$ off the contract. Or alternatively you have a player say something like that, for example - "I would love to captain Geelong" - quote Gazza Jnr late 2009 and we know exactly how that turned out. Words are cheap and of no comfort whatsoever. Here is the flipside to your argument belzebub - re signing now but with formula's for the new player payment regime. Whilst this is a consideration the bottom line is ( and here is my only bit of conspiracy theory), the longer TS's management leave the negotiation the better his outcome ( barring news that his knee is chronic). Whilst we hate to have players hold us to ransom we do the same with some of our players. We gave Cam Bruce an ultimatum and we told Junior his days were over when he thought he should play on. We told Newton that he was to be delisted and then offered only a rookie spot. There are two parties to all negotiations and in some we hold the upper hand in Cam's,Juniors and Juices case but in TS's case he holds the whip hand and is setting a timetable that without any fear of contradiction serves his cause, not the MFC. On the new player payment deal, the AFL has just walked out on the AFLPA. They have a six week deadline. SEN has already canvassed players as to whether they would strike like the NFL. We have 6 weeks to finalisation - why wouldnt you just say hold off and we'll talk after its put to bed ? I'll ask people to try and act dispassionately as a player manager and not Dee's supporters and state that it is not in TS best interest to hold off as late as possible to sign ? If you were Alistair Lynch you would be advising the same. Herein lies the problem - there are many on this board who cannot think this through without the emotion.