Jump to content

chookrat

Members
  • Posts

    2,195
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

6,391 profile views

chookrat's Achievements

Redleg

Redleg (4/10)

3k

Reputation

  1. Lord Nev, this scenario works well for us if we can get at least 3 - 4 years of quality service from Grundy (should do given he's 28 and has been quite durable over his career) and can turn pick 8 into a quality key position forward / defender that can have an impact in their 2nd or 3rd season. I include defender as this could free up Petty to play forward.
  2. Sheedy is a loose unit. The Board doesn't vote for which coach it wants but rather votes to endorse the recommendation provided by the expert panel it appointed to identify the most suitable candidate. Sheedy didn't vote for Hird, regardless of whether he voted with or against the rest of the Board.
  3. Why would 32 go back Freo's way? Jackson is worth at least this and next year's first round pick. The only way Jackson gets to Freo or West Coast is if we agree to a trade. The alternative is he walks into the draft or agrees to a 1-2 year contract extension which provides time for Freo and West Coast to put together the required trade currency. If Jackson felt that Freo were playing games then he'd probably tell them to get their house in order and come back in a year or two when they're serious about trading him in.
  4. Tiers my concern with such an approach is that while such an approach may seemingly provide a more 'independent panel' it may introduce different bias such as viewing the actions from the perspective of random people and not the demands of a high performance sporting environment tested against the league's duty of care to player wellbeing. I'd rather have a panel of experienced operators with the mix of perspectives relevant to the investigation. In my view the AFLPA call for a former coach or footy boss to be part of the panel is necessary to provide a balanced context context between the cultural sensitivities, player well being, and the demands of a high performance program. The panel should also include a senior indigenous figure and a senior figure with a focus on player welfare. I believe that assembling a panel of random people will result in bias because none of them will understand the cultural, player wellbeing and high performance context of what took place.
  5. My mail is McStay goes and DeGoey stays.
  6. Surprised he didn't suggest we'd chuck in Trac as a sweetener
  7. Yep and this is an intelligent way for us to approach trades. Being regarded as fair and able to make deals done that bring in the players we need also make us an attractive destination for players as they know if we're interested in bringing them in then we will get the deal done. We don't end up in the messy situation where clubs dig their heels in and deals either don't get done or one side concedes at the last minute.
  8. Melbourne, closely followed by Flagmantle
  9. As a club member and supporter I've been pretty critical of Bartlett in all of this but I also do have concerns for his mental health and wellbeing. His actions do not seem at all rational and I couldn't imagine launching legal action against anyone at that stage of my life. Given his legal background he must know that this will consume him for years, impact his family and loved ones, will likely cost alot of money that he will never recover, and that any 'win' in court won't return any loss or damages he has incurred.
  10. I reckon the media and public have gotten into a frenzy over specific details by one side without any broader context. I'm bewildered how Hawthorn conducted such a review and reported its findings to the AFL without interviewing Clarkson and Fagan as part of the process. I accept the allegations are serious and should be properly considered but that they have made their way into the public domain before Clarkson and Fagan have had a chance to respond to the allegations. What happens to their reputations if it turns out the players made things up?
  11. This nails it Wells. In my view Bartlett was well respected by the Melbourne faithful after he had stepped down and even when the information came out that he was pushed out by the board, didn't harm his reputation. If at this stage he simply put out a statement that he'd overseen the rebuild of the club from a bottom 2 side to the point that it won the premiership in the year that he departed, and that he'd achieved what he'd set out to and that the club was in good hands under Roffey's leadership that would have been the end of it. Instead he demands that the board release a statement that he wasn't pushed and then publicly airs his grievances re the club compromising on its values as the reason why he left on his on accord. He uses the argument of safety and well-being to defend his pursuit which is a low bow to draw. He should sue himself for defamation as he is the one who has done all of the damage to himself. My take is he is utterly selfish for pursuing this publicly and through the courts and as members we should be furious at the distraction it has created for our 2022 campaign. Being the president of an AFL club is a privileged position and one that requires putting the club first which despite his earlier good work he has utterly failed in.
  12. Agree on this. I'm comfortable with the $700k salary as Grundy is an elite ruckman but you don't use 1st round draft picks on a 29 year old in the latter part of their career.
  13. I'd bring in Ian Ziering. You don't survive 7 Sharknados without knowing a thing or two about leading young men.
  14. I can't see us letting Jackson go for less than a top 3 or two mid first round picks. If Freo don't have the picks and aren't prepared to trade players we can always offer Jackson a 1 - 2 year deal and commit to work out a fair trade the following year.
×
×
  • Create New...