Lucifers Hero

imv Pert's contribution to the 2021 premiership was the the 2020 restructure of the FD, moving Mahoney out of the FD, recruiting Yze and supporting other coaching changes. I wasn't and still am not enamoured with the Richardson 'promotion' to FD GM but that aside Pert nailed the early years of his tenure. He put his own job on the line in supporting Goodwin early in 2021 when members of Board had doubts. He set up the environment for the coach and the players to be the best they could be. Without the above I doubt we would have won that precious flag,

The para I quoted above is now preceded by this comment in the latest version of the article by The Age: (Pert) had been discussing a mid-2025 retirement with Roffey before she stood down. Context is everything. We had planned an orderly succession at the top with both Roffey and Pert departing at the top. Circumstances changed and that plan has been brought forward. No drama.

Lots of leaking going on... At least these leaks aren't from Tom Morris!! But it would be better if the leaks stopped altogether.

Someone leaked it ...? From The Age: “I asked [Pert] what a succession plan might look like and the conversations flowed from there,” Green said. “I then asked him if he would consider staying on [to complete] Caulfield because we are that close to getting that high-performance centre done.” Green said he did not see the decision as a circuit-breaker for the club. “If you believe the outside noise people can see it that way but from our point of view it’s a normal transition. Not sure that clarifies much. Some will see it as Pert jumped before being pushed. Some will see it differently. We will never know.

The rules changed to allow players to stay Rookies for 5 years if they have played less than 10 career games. It makes no difference to AMW to remain a B-Rookie but it gives the club the chance to recruit an A-Rookie where the recruitment rules are less strict than for B-Rookies. AMW remains a B-Rookie which leaves 1 A-Rookie and 1 B-Rookie spot.

Uber professional.. But that contraption looks like a medieval torture device 😳 He will come out breathing fire next year. Can't wait to see him play again.

Every time I see Holmes play I rue the Cats for gazumping us with a last minute pick swap to draft him. What a sliding doors moment that was: we could have Holmes and Bowey. Holmes will probably be their next captain.😭

See revision below I'd say you both have a case. This is the team Goodwin inherited vis a vis the Premiership. Premiership Players Brayshaw, Angus Gawn, Max Harmes, James McDonald, Tom Neal-Bullen, Alex Oliver, Clayton Petracca, Christian Salem, Christian Viney, Jack Premiership Emergency Hunt, Jayden Hard Luck Jones, Nathan Could have been Hogan, Jesse Experienced Premiership additions since Roos: May, Lever, Hibberd, Brown, Fritsch The rest of the Premiership team were kids: Jordon, Sparrow, Petty, Bowey, Jackson, Spargo, Rivers, Pickett with only a handful of games. Summary: 9 of the 22 Premiership players were inherited. Take a couple of them out and we probably would not have won it. Its fair to say without injury Hunt would probably have played. Jones played a huge role in getting the team to finals. Without the experienced additions we probably would not have won it. So I reckon the inherited list was not premiership ready but most of the core 9 were top shelf. We needed the experienced defenders and forwards (...we still need the latter...) However, I suspect this topic will be discussed for a very long long time ...

Yes, as I said I think Southwick is simply doing the resident's bidding with the survey. I'm pleased the Caulfield project has taken a step forward. Nonetheless, my frustration is it is difficult to gauge what that means when Pert's release is vague and so many things one would expect to see in a feasibility study, at least at a macro level, have been pushed into the Business Case phase.

From next year a new system will be introduced. draft-bidding-revamp-and-future-pick-trades Broadly there is a scaling down of pick values and no points after ND 54 ie nominally end of round 3 (was ND 73) The smarter clubs will trade their 2025 4th round picks to clubs who need points this year because they will be next to useless in 2025. This is especially so for mfc as Taylor rarely uses a pick after ND40. Conversely, clubs who need points in 2025 will value 3rd round picks. It will be an interesting watch as to how the points changes affect the trading of 2025 picks.

That isn't a good sign. I hope the mfc didn't blindside him and other pollies/key stakeholders.. Pert's memo said: "...the feasibility study for our proposed new training and administration facility at Caulfield Racecourse Reserve has been successfully completed and approved to progress to the next stage... This phase of the process has focused heavily on stakeholder engagement and garnering local support for the project. The positive sentiment from so many local community organisations and groups has been wide-spread and the feasibility study has definitely highlighted the community’s desire to see this project come to life". Unfortunately he doesn't say who the 'stakeholder engagement' was with nor who approved the study to progress to the next stage. This is the survey Southwick has put online for residents. https://www.davidsouthwick.com.au/survey/caulfield-racecourse-funding It is fairly basic and the sort of survey one would include early in a feasibility study with variations for each type of stakeholder. It could just be a pollie being seen to do the resident's bidding but who knows how much he was consulted during the process and briefed prior to the press release. A bit more info from Pert would help quieten negative reactions.

You are quite right! I just get tired of so many media knuckleheads writing stuff about the club or Trac, that doesn't make sense and many including dees supporters buy into it as fact. And, while it was a little mischevious 🤣 of me I wanted to highlight that Purple is one of the biggest dumb...t media knuckleheads going round !!!

Sometimes I wonder if he reads what he writes or if he ever heard the word 'logic'. If Trac was a chance to win or even place of course he would be there! Logically, that means he would have played the whole season so wouldn't need to rebuild his body for day one of the preseason. And, surely, there isn't only one camp ... if he was fit he could go to the BnF and head to a later camp in the off season as he has in other years. Like many others, Purple never lets facts get in the way of some juicy and derogatory 'click bait'

Good to see that, Tim. Thanks. My two cents worth. Two assumptions by him are presented as facts: the club made the call whereas it is clear it was a mutual decision with full involvement of medical/fitness teams inside and outside the club. Duty of care says they couldn't afford to put him at risk if his body wasn't ready for the camp. the club wants to protect players. Maybe Davis doesn't know Trac addressed players, was happily interacting with them at training and was with them for our last game. It doesn't make sense that they suddenly need to be 'protected' from him !!! imv there are more plausible reasons for the club agreeing/encouraging Trac to skip the BnF: The stated reason by the club and Trac to get him ready for day one of the preseason. As many DL's have said to protect Trac from fans inundating him with support or criticism. His mental health needs to be a consideration in exposing him to the public. The media would turn the bluey into a circus if Trac attended. By not attending the focus is on the worthy award winners and the very worthy past demons in whose honour the awards are named. Davis is usually a good commentator but that is not his finest hour.

I agree. While there are no guarantees I didn't see info that provides that likelihood. We are on the same page layzie.

I should point out a feasibility study cannot be a guarantee a project will happen. A feasibility study should have a detailed road-map to completion with several points of go/no-go decisions. The email would have had more substance if a high level version was published indicating among other things, that there was support (at least in principle) from AFL, Racing, governments, community to undertake their responsibilities within the road-map time frames. Having said that, I see no reason for anyone to resign as we simply won't know if he project goes ahead for a year or more.

I'm not surprised by Allen's take. The club's announcement was very carefully crafted. It said the feasibility study was 'stakeholder engagement' which I took to mean (unknown) local community groups. Therefore it didn't include other stuff usually in such a study (eg macro level business case, risks etc) that lead to a go/no go decision that has a very high assurance of going ahead. The 'tell' tucked away in mfc's email is: While the success of the feasibility study does not ensure the future of the project ... Without being too cynical the announcement looked like a dressed up progress report. That there was no press conf let alone fanfare from other key stakeholders: AFL, Racing, Local Gov't etc says achieving a limited feasibility study is no big deal. As to the timing: the club needs some feel good news out there ...

Lamb deserves some credit. imv it was T.Viney and Mahoney who led the trades charge so to speak. I clearly recall reports of Mahoney's negotiations with Adelaide/Freo/GCS re Lever, Hogan, May. And his negotiations with GCS for pick swaps to get Oliver. Of course there is no way of knowing who did what behind the scenes or who attended the negotiation meetings.

1) Yes. Pert's acknowledgement of Mahoney when he left: mahoney-to-depart-the-demons “He was one of the key drivers of our AFLW program at its inception, oversaw our AFL list management strategy and has played a pivotal role managing the Casey Fields facility redevelopment" Since then Lamb has been our spokesperson for trades, player contracts and referred to as List Manager. Note: I earlier referred to 2020 Mahoney's new role as GM List Mngt which isn't quite right. It was a new role of 'GM Football Facilities and Administration', with the new GM FD role eg coaching, game plan, development etc. going to Richardson. 2) Yes. As GM's organisationally Mahoney and Richardson were 'equals' and both reported to Pert. When Mahoney left it is unclear who Lamb reports to. I don't think he has 'GM' in his title. Unfortunately, the club stopped publishing the 'who's who in the zoo' type info around 2020 so my interpretation and recollections could be incorrect.

Yes, I read it as the opinion of most posters and not yours. tbh I could have written my response quoting any number of recent posts on this. It was not a reflection of your post(s). I selected yours as it was the most recent and the reference to KPI's. Always have lots of time for your opinions.

Some long bows in those conclusions. The last point says St Kilda have the wrong KPI's. Probably the reason they have traded in very expensive players who have not performed or forever injured: Burgoyne, Hannebury, Jones etc. Having such a wishy washy job description explains why their list is and has been a mess for years. No decent playing list means no decent on field performance and little finals action. For an alternative and more typical Job Description for a List Manager list-manager-gws-giants The GWS GIANTS List Manager is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of the playing list that will develop and sustain a top 4 AFL team and to deliver on the Club purpose of winning premierships. The roles primary responsibility is to draft and trade players, effectively negotiate player contracts and ensure compliance with AFL TPP and broader Club and AFL regulations. The role supports the Football Department strategic objectives which include playing entertaining football, playing in finals and winning premierships as outlined in the annual business plans and budget. The role is then summarised in these categories: List Management Compliance Adminsitration Promotion and Development (in representing the club) RE mfc. With our 2020 restructure two roles were created: GM LM (Mahoney) and GM FD (Richardson) both reporting to Pert. Lamb reported to Mahoney. When Mahoney left he was not replaced and the role was absorbed by Lamb. iirc this was a result of FD budget cuts during covid. I haven't seen anything since to say he reports to Richardson altho I expect there would be a 'dotted line' reporting. Prior to the 2020 restructure T Viney was the List Manager with Mahoney leading player trade negotiations. imv we miss their negotiating skills. My understanding is Lamb's role is closer to GWS than St Kilda. Also, Lamb focuses on trading and Taylor focuses on drafting (vis a vis the FD's game plan and LM Committee guidelines). The Lamb/Taylor trade/draft roles can be inferred from our spokesperson/interviewee for Trades and Draft respectively. I am not advocating Lamb going, simply putting some other facts into the discussion. Whether Lamb is getting poor input/strategy from the FD, not listening to the FD, doesn't have the skill set to sell the club to players for trades, adequately managing the TPP, I don't know. What I firmly believe is our trades of the last 3/4 years have left us with a lesser list. imv we need to invest in a T Viney type List Manager with Lamb reverting to his role and reporting to this person as he did prior to Mahoney leaving.

Cheers. The thanks go to @red and blue forever as he has taken over this thread. And agree it is tricky keeping up with all the changes at this time of year. Confession time: it was me that suggested to randbf the number was 32!!! I inadvertently excluded ANB.

Below is my response to that in the Contracts thread.

The 'new' Goodwin thread by some newbie trollll got the short shrift it deserved! Well done mods !!!

Good behaviour maybe? LOL !!! 🤷‍♀️🙄🤔