View Full Version : Pfeiffer to be picked up by Richmond in the draft
relapse
29 Oct 2007, 08:52
Is going over there to do pre-season training. He has been told that he is a good chance to be picked up by them, obviously dependant on his performance and attitude during pre-season.
Will be interesting to see how he goes as this was a very interesting decision by the club to delist him considering he was a first round pick, hopefully it doesnt turn around to bite us on the ass.
Campbell's Chunky
29 Oct 2007, 09:42
He's a very close mate of Cleve Hughes'.
Jars458
29 Oct 2007, 10:24
Is going over there to do pre-season training. He has been told that he is a good chance to be picked up by them, obviously dependant on his performance and attitude during pre-season.
Will be interesting to see how he goes as this was a very interesting decision by the club to delist him considering he was a first round pick, hopefully it doesnt turn around to bite us on the ass.
Cant' see that it can bite us on the ass no matter what happens. It seems to be accepted that his problems are related to attitude and not football abiliity. If a new environment means he changes his attitude, then the AFC can't be balmed fo that. Good luck to the lad, we have to move on.
KUNG FU
29 Oct 2007, 11:58
Cant' see that it can bite us on the ass no matter what happens. It seems to be accepted that his problems are related to attitude and not football abiliity. If a new environment means he changes his attitude, then the AFC can't be balmed fo that. Good luck to the lad, we have to move on.
I think it would be a comment on how poorly we manage players if RICHMOND can get him on the right path but we couldn't.
IddyBiddy
29 Oct 2007, 12:09
I think it would be a comment on how poorly we manage players if RICHMOND can get him on the right path but we couldn't.
Who is to say that by delisting him Adelaide has set him on the right path in a way that would be impossible had he stayed on the list? Honestly, players need to take some responsibility for positions they find themselves in.
Freddy Bassett
29 Oct 2007, 12:39
IMO Pfeiffer will be a very good AFL player. It probably is the kick in the arse he needs to switch on. How many chances does a kid deserve though? Espescially when all our other kids are outstanding, intelligent kids. As good as he might one day be, he may of been a negative influence. Cant help too think this decision will bite us. Oh well, I hope he does well
tigertiger
29 Oct 2007, 13:02
I dont know anything about him he has never played a AFL game, whats his strengths.
Campbell's Chunky
29 Oct 2007, 13:30
I dont know anything about him he has never played a AFL game, whats his strengths.
Drinking, Gambling.
Nah seriously, it's a joke we delisted him.
What is he, 19? Has there ever been a 19 yr old known to go out and get smashed?
He probably needed a kick up the ass but man he has more talent in his pubic hair than 4 ruckmen sized Michael Doughtys.
Jars458
29 Oct 2007, 13:57
I think it would be a comment on how poorly we manage players if RICHMOND can get him on the right path but we couldn't.
Its all in his own control. The Club can only provide so much support and I am confident it has done that. If Pfeiffer now pulls his finger out then good luck to hiom but I still say that has no bearing on whether the Club's decision was correct or not. The AFC sets certain standards and he has refused to live up to them.
KUNG FU
29 Oct 2007, 15:03
Its all in his own control. The Club can only provide so much support and I am confident it has done that. If Pfeiffer now pulls his finger out then good luck to hiom but I still say that has no bearing on whether the Club's decision was correct or not. The AFC sets certain standards and he has refused to live up to them.
I disagree. Certainly the player needs to take the majority of the responsibility, but to suggest that the club has no influence on their playing group's off field behaviour is negligent and naive.
crowman_23
29 Oct 2007, 15:10
I'm still personally disappointed we delisted him and was hoping that we would redraft him and hope he got the message. I think he will turn in to a very good player for Richmond and will be another one we look back on with disappointment.
Stiffy_18
29 Oct 2007, 15:16
I disagree. Certainly the player needs to take the majority of the responsibility, but to suggest that the club has no influence on their playing group's off field behaviour is negligent and naive.
It has some degree of influence but not that much. Players will go off and do what they want to do and live their lives how they best see fit. The club would do everything in their power to point them in the right direction but they cannot make them do things that they don't want to.
You can take the horse to the water but you can't make it drink ;)
Southerntakeover
29 Oct 2007, 15:32
It has some degree of influence but not that much. Players will go off and do what they want to do and live their lives how they best see fit. The club would do everything in their power to point them in the right direction but they cannot make them do things that they don't want to.
You can take the horse to the water but you can't make it drink ;)
Unfortunately, the problem here seemed to be getting the damn horse to get its head out of the drink before it drowns.
Stiffy_18
29 Oct 2007, 15:33
Unfortunately, the problem here seemed to be getting the damn horse to get its head out of the drink before it drowns.
I'll pay that :D :thumbsu:
KUNG FU
29 Oct 2007, 15:46
It has some degree of influence but not that much. Players will go off and do what they want to do and live their lives how they best see fit. The club would do everything in their power to point them in the right direction but they cannot make them do things that they don't want to.
You can take the horse to the water but you can't make it drink ;)
All fair points. I still can't help but think the club has not handled the off-field stuff well recently. Pfeiffer went into the 'too-hard basket' way too early. In comparison, Goodwin's controversy earlier in the year went largely unpunished and he captained the side for most of the year. Also Vince is still on the list and Huddo was offered a sizeable contract again. It just seems inconsistent. It is fair to presume that Pfeiffer's issues were worse than what appeared in the media but nonetheless, I feel he has been a scape goat. And the AFC seems to be doing this all to spite their face.
There's a big difference between a 18 yo and a 20 yo in terms of maturity IMO.
earlsta
29 Oct 2007, 15:53
Simple as this really, Pfeiffer turned 20 only a few weeks ago, give him a chance FFS, we all used to **** around at the age of 18,19.
Pfeiffer hasn't done anything wrong at the age of 20!!
Looks like we aint gonna draft him if he's down at Richmond training ;/
Coopers
29 Oct 2007, 15:54
I thought it was fairly likely the crows will pick him up again.
hayden sumner
29 Oct 2007, 15:56
Good luck to him :thumbsu:
Stiffy_18
29 Oct 2007, 15:58
Simple as this really, Pfeiffer turned 20 only a few weeks ago, give him a chance FFS, we all used to **** around at the age of 18,19.
Pfeiffer hasn't done anything wrong at the age of 20!!
Looks like we aint gonna draft him if he's down at Richmond training ;/
And you know this for a fact?!
Most of Pfieffer's problem have not been made public and its easy to criticize from outside looking in without knowing all the information.
The fact that he has been delisted 2 years after getting drafted without playing a single AFL game by a team in desperate need of players like Pfeiffer speaks volumes.
The club tried to work it out, it didn't work, we cut our losses and move on. He could go on and become a good AFL footballer somewhere else but it was the risk we aren't willing to take based on the information we have.
How many excuses will people make for Pfeiffer. He is not the only 20 year old on our list. There are plenty but the trouble doesn't follow them around like it does with Pfeiffer. Is it the age or is it something else ;)
earlsta
29 Oct 2007, 16:00
Good luck to him :thumbsu:
Yep all the best to Darren, he put his hand up and performed on gamedays, nothing more could have been asked off him.:thumbsu:
IddyBiddy
29 Oct 2007, 16:10
Yep all the best to Darren, he put his hand up and performed on gamedays, nothing more could have been asked off him.:thumbsu:
hmmm i can think of one or two things...:confused:
Yep all the best to Darren, he put his hand up and performed on gamedays, nothing more could have been asked off him.:thumbsu:
In hindsight, it now appears clear that his non-selection late in the year was NOT due to performance (or lack thereof) in the SANFL, but due to his off-field behaviour. At the time we were all wondering why Jericho was being selected ahead of him on the Emergency list, despite Pfeiffer being the better SANFL performer. Now we know the answer to this question.
Southerntakeover
29 Oct 2007, 16:22
Simple as this really, Pfeiffer turned 20 only a few weeks ago, give him a chance FFS, we all used to **** around at the age of 18,19.
Pfeiffer hasn't done anything wrong at the age of 20!!
Looks like we aint gonna draft him if he's down at Richmond training ;/
I dont buy the 'boys will be boys' attitude alot of people around here seem to take.
Hes 20, not 12. Thats old enough to be able to make responsible decisions about what is and isnt appropriate. Young AFL players are paid ALOT of money, the least they can do in return is ensure that they have the best chance possible of performing at their peak during the season. Its their job.
ICanDressMyself
29 Oct 2007, 16:30
All the best to Pfeiffer but needs to change his attitude if he's ever going to become something.
macca23
29 Oct 2007, 17:05
I don't wish Pfeiffer any harm, but I don't wish him well either. He doesn't deserve it.
He is nothing more than another one of these talented irritants who want to be one of the lads rather than an elite footballer.
He has cost us yet another 1st round pick down the drain with no return - so thanks for nothing Pfeiffer. :thumbsd:
All fair points. I still can't help but think the club has not handled the off-field stuff well recently. Pfeiffer went into the 'too-hard basket' way too early. In comparison, Goodwin's controversy earlier in the year went largely unpunished and he captained the side for most of the year. Also Vince is still on the list and Huddo was offered a sizeable contract again. It just seems inconsistent. It is fair to presume that Pfeiffer's issues were worse than what appeared in the media but nonetheless, I feel he has been a scape goat. And the AFC seems to be doing this all to spite their face.
There's a big difference between a 18 yo and a 20 yo in terms of maturity IMO.
And there is a bigger difference between that 18 yr old and the 30 yr old
Seriously you must forget players get brownie points banked. A young 18 yr old has none and needs to walk a straight line, whereas a 30 yr old has many points banked up ( Torney excluded :o:( )
When assessing players you make a decision, if it backfires you shrug your shoulders and walk away. I dont think Richmond will make Pfeiffer a better player than the AFC could have
Jars458
29 Oct 2007, 17:22
I disagree. Certainly the player needs to take the majority of the responsibility, but to suggest that the club has no influence on their playing group's off field behaviour is negligent and naive.
You can't highlight the one statement in the paragraph withouth considereing the remained of the para which gives it context.
As I said "the club can only offer so much support". Once that support is given it is then up to the player. The AFC puts shit loads of effort into player welfare and still he couldn't do the right thing. Not the Club's fault.
If the Club had just drafted him and left it to him then I agree with you but that is not the case.
Jars458
29 Oct 2007, 17:24
Yep all the best to Darren, he put his hand up and performed on gamedays, nothing more could have been asked off him.:thumbsu:
He never played a game. I have no doubt he has enough work ethic to play for Norwood but that is entriely a different matter. AFL and SANFL are eons apart in what is required.
drjimminez
29 Oct 2007, 17:38
How did he not get a game? was he a top pick? was his form in the sanfl good? Whats the story! does he love the punt and the pub? Seems like a strange 20 year old indeed...
rufus_afc
29 Oct 2007, 17:40
I don't wish Pfeiffer any harm, but I don't wish him well either. He doesn't deserve it.
He is nothing more than another one of these talented irritants who want to be one of the lads rather than an elite footballer.
He has cost us yet another 1st round pick down the drain with no return - so thanks for nothing Pfeiffer. :thumbsd:
I dont think you can blame Pfeiffer I think you can blame the club, every first round player lately we get seems to either be a dud or want to leave at the first opportunity. The club needs to shoulder the blame for this, they need a better mentoring system for youngsters and need to promote an enivornment that makes the players want to stay.
marco polo
29 Oct 2007, 18:07
Interesting to hear he's training down at Richmond, personally i think this is very good for our club if true.
From what i read here, Pfeiffer has talent but needs to settle down and focus on an AFL career. I sincerely hope he can do this if we decide to give him a go.
Where do you all think his best position is? I've never seen the lad play, so any info related to "on-field" performance would be much appreciated.
earlsta
29 Oct 2007, 18:17
Half-back flank / Wing ..
Courageous player, good penetrating kick, good enough to play AFL. Would walk straight into your first 22 I'd think. Would walk into our first 22 based on skill too. Craigy's just a little cautious you see. ;)
He'll be a very good AFL player, not just a good ordinary player. Good luck if you get him. Richmond taking him at #1 in the PSD shows how highly he is rated around the place, Essendon were looking at him too.
marco polo
29 Oct 2007, 18:23
Half-back flank / Wing ..
Courageous player, good penetrating kick, good enough to play AFL. Would walk straight into your first 22 I'd think. Would walk into our first 22 based on skill too. Craigy's just a little cautious you see. ;)
He'll be a very good AFL player, not just a good ordinary player. Good luck if you get him. Richmond taking him at #1 in the PSD shows how highly he is rated around the place, Essendon were looking at him too.
Cheers mate.
Hopefully he can turn it around and have a succesful career at whichever club he ends up at (preferably Richmond), as it definately sounds like he has the talent.
James_37
29 Oct 2007, 18:50
Suprised if he's getting that much interest that we didn't try to trade him, its not as if there's any go home factor or that he wanted to leave, so we couldn't be screwed around by those clubs with early PSD picks. Could have perhaps gotten a 2nd round pick or could have coupled him with the Hudson or Meesen trades for higher picks. We could be looking at picking up in the draft or something, the situations just a little strange and we certainly don't know everything.
RoosterLad
29 Oct 2007, 18:53
Pfeiffer will get spooned by Richmond next year, Drummond will be jealous.
Stiffy_18
29 Oct 2007, 19:27
Suprised if he's getting that much interest that we didn't try to trade him, its not as if there's any go home factor or that he wanted to leave, so we couldn't be screwed around by those clubs with early PSD picks. Could have perhaps gotten a 2nd round pick or could have coupled him with the Hudson or Meesen trades for higher picks. We could be looking at picking up in the draft or something, the situations just a little strange and we certainly don't know everything.
We did but why exactly would another club give us anything when they know that they can get him for free?!
Its not like other clubs are not aware of things like this.
We did but why exactly would another club give us anything when they know that they can get him for free?!
Its not like other clubs are not aware of things like this.
Or even better, we could've kept him.
King Elvis
29 Oct 2007, 19:35
And you know this for a fact?!
Most of Pfieffer's problem have not been made public and its easy to criticize from outside looking in without knowing all the information.
The fact that he has been delisted 2 years after getting drafted without playing a single AFL game by a team in desperate need of players like Pfeiffer speaks volumes.
The club tried to work it out, it didn't work, we cut our losses and move on. He could go on and become a good AFL footballer somewhere else but it was the risk we aren't willing to take based on the information we have.
How many excuses will people make for Pfeiffer. He is not the only 20 year old on our list. There are plenty but the trouble doesn't follow them around like it does with Pfeiffer. Is it the age or is it something else ;)
Raises an interesting question as to whether our Culture and Development are as strong as we like to claim it is then - if we can't take a kid like Pfeiffer and turn him into something.
Not every youngster is going to be a Van Berlo in attitude; are we going to take the soft option and delist every youngster who isn't perfect (except Jericho of course) ??
fightingdreamer88
29 Oct 2007, 20:52
Pfeiffer will get spooned by Richmond next year, Drummond will be jealous.
I lol'd
We did but why exactly would another club give us anything when they know that they can get him for free?!
Its not like other clubs are not aware of things like this.
Only one player and club can do this. The rest have no guarantees , if you're suggesting Richmond all along wanted Pfeiffer and didnt trade becuse they would '' get him for free''.. then I would find that hard to believe
out of order
29 Oct 2007, 22:30
this dude is like the sacrificial lamb to make the club better. Basically the likes of Sellar & whoever else now know its maximum effort or its the chop.
:):)
James_37
29 Oct 2007, 23:40
We did but why exactly would another club give us anything when they know that they can get him for free?!
Its not like other clubs are not aware of things like this.
They didn't know this, unless we were very open about what we were doing with players. They couldn't say they would get him for nothing as they weren't to know that he was to be delisted, for all these other clubs knew, we would probably keep him. If richmond is willing to pick a delisted player up with their 1st pick in the PSD, it begs the question exactly what we were doing in trade week in relation to that player or why he was delisted, and it wasn't as if we didn't know he was going to go, as soon as trade week was over, we delisted our players.
Stiffy_18
29 Oct 2007, 23:57
They didn't know this, unless we were very open about what we were doing with players. They couldn't say they would get him for nothing as they weren't to know that he was to be delisted, for all these other clubs knew, we would probably keep him. If richmond is willing to pick a delisted player up with their 1st pick in the PSD, it begs the question exactly what we were doing in trade week in relation to that player or why he was delisted, and it wasn't as if we didn't know he was going to go, as soon as trade week was over, we delisted our players.
Are you that naive to think that other clubs wouldn't know this?!
Other clubs scout players on other lists just as heavily as they scout the underage competition. They have their informants at every club in the country. Do you think that Richmond, or Carlton or any other clubs don't have their guy in a Norwood FC or Port Adelaide Magpies or any other club?!
Besides that, Pfieffer would have known well in advance what his future would be. He would have been told at the end of season meetings what the club had in plan with him. It only takes Pfieffer to tell someone at Norwood or his agent and other clubs know whats going on.
I can't believe that there are still people out there that think there is such a thing as secrecy between AFL clubs. I am sure that all the other AFL clubs would have been well aware of who we would delist just as we were very aware of who other clubs would cut.
Why do you think Fremantle didn't trade for Kepler Bradley?! Because they could get him with the minimum of fuss without having to go through all the "who will blink first" with Essendon.
James_37
30 Oct 2007, 01:04
Besides that, Pfieffer would have known well in advance what his future would be. He would have been told at the end of season meetings what the club had in plan with him. It only takes Pfieffer to tell someone at Norwood or his agent and other clubs know whats going on.
I can't believe that there are still people out there that think there is such a thing as secrecy between AFL clubs. I am sure that all the other AFL clubs would have been well aware of who we would delist just as we were very aware of who other clubs would cut.
Why do you think Fremantle didn't trade for Kepler Bradley?! Because they could get him with the minimum of fuss without having to go through all the "who will blink first" with Essendon.
Can't be bothered continuing this stiffy, apparently i'm naive to think that clubs try to keep their dealings as secret as possible and maintain a competitive edge over their opponents, and by all appearances, you may be right, the Crows basically told Richmond, you want him, have him, we'll give away a 1st round draft pick for nothing.
out of order
30 Oct 2007, 01:50
i wouldnt say you're far wrong actually James, it would more be a case of if we offered this guy up after 2 yrs of doing nothing, as an opposition club you know you dont really have to make a move for him unless you really want him. Basically hes on his way out either way.
Why do you think Fremantle didn't trade for Kepler Bradley?! Because they could get him with the minimum of fuss without having to go through all the "who will blink first" with Essendon.
And if someone else picks him up? Have they blinked?
relapse
30 Oct 2007, 07:41
Are you that naive to think that other clubs wouldn't know this?!
Other clubs scout players on other lists just as heavily as they scout the underage competition. They have their informants at every club in the country. Do you think that Richmond, or Carlton or any other clubs don't have their guy in a Norwood FC or Port Adelaide Magpies or any other club?!
Besides that, Pfieffer would have known well in advance what his future would be. He would have been told at the end of season meetings what the club had in plan with him. It only takes Pfieffer to tell someone at Norwood or his agent and other clubs know whats going on.
I can't believe that there are still people out there that think there is such a thing as secrecy between AFL clubs. I am sure that all the other AFL clubs would have been well aware of who we would delist just as we were very aware of who other clubs would cut.
Why do you think Fremantle didn't trade for Kepler Bradley?! Because they could get him with the minimum of fuss without having to go through all the "who will blink first" with Essendon.
Us, the supporters were in shock over this decision. I really doubt that Richmond would have known it was coming and would have either known or foresaw what all of us couldnt. Thats the whole reason supposedly we wait until after trade week to make delistings because there is potential for them to be traded.
I would say that Pfeiffers name might have come up, but didnt get any interest at the trade table.
Kristof
30 Oct 2007, 07:58
Are you that naive to think that other clubs wouldn't know this?!
Other clubs scout players on other lists just as heavily as they scout the underage competition. They have their informants at every club in the country. Do you think that Richmond, or Carlton or any other clubs don't have their guy in a Norwood FC or Port Adelaide Magpies or any other club?!
Besides that, Pfieffer would have known well in advance what his future would be. He would have been told at the end of season meetings what the club had in plan with him. It only takes Pfieffer to tell someone at Norwood or his agent and other clubs know whats going on.
I can't believe that there are still people out there that think there is such a thing as secrecy between AFL clubs. I am sure that all the other AFL clubs would have been well aware of who we would delist just as we were very aware of who other clubs would cut.
Why do you think Fremantle didn't trade for Kepler Bradley?! Because they could get him with the minimum of fuss without having to go through all the "who will blink first" with Essendon.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. These are multimillion dollar corporations. There is no way the intricate details of their operations would be known by their competitors. There might be whispers getting back, but I'm sure there are surprises that happen constantly. Pfeiffer would NOT have known more than a day out from his delisting what was going on, for the exact reason that you've said.
Markthirtytwo
30 Oct 2007, 08:43
Whoa, whoa, whoa. These are multimillion dollar corporations. There is no way the intricate details of their operations would be known by their competitors. There might be whispers getting back, but I'm sure there are surprises that happen constantly. Pfeiffer would NOT have known more than a day out from his delisting what was going on, for the exact reason that you've said.
They might well be, but football clubs leak like a dutch dyke.
That's how many journalists get many of their stories, epecially the ones they can't print without giving the game up.
Heard a few talk in hypothetical but you know that all they need is something to confirm it and away they go.
Markthirtytwo
30 Oct 2007, 08:47
Simple as this really, Pfeiffer turned 20 only a few weeks ago, give him a chance FFS, we all used to **** around at the age of 18,19.
Pfeiffer hasn't done anything wrong at the age of 20!!
Looks like we aint gonna draft him if he's down at Richmond training ;/
Qiuite true but we didn't have the chance to become an elite footballer, and my guess is he might have had his contract changed after year 1 to reflect his decision making off the field and hasn't lived up to it.
Only one player and club can do this. The rest have no guarantees , if you're suggesting Richmond all along wanted Pfeiffer and didnt trade becuse they would '' get him for free''.. then I would find that hard to believe
Incorrect.
Having been delisted, Pfeiffer can go into the ND and be selected there (much like David Rodan last year). If Richmond wait to pick him up in the PSD then they may be very disappointed, as he will probably be long gone.
There is no doubt that Pfeiffer IS talented enough to make it in the AFL, he just needs to get his attitude right. In what is supposedly a very weak draft, with teams currently having 77 draft selections between them, there is every chance that a lot of recycled players will be picked up. Pfeiffer is one of the more attractive options amongst those who have been delisted (along with Kepler Bradley). Odds are pretty good that he will be re-drafted in the ND, in which case every team has an equal chance of claiming him based upon how highly they rate him and what draft pick they are prepared to use in obtaining him.
Stiffy_18
30 Oct 2007, 11:28
They might well be, but football clubs leak like a dutch dyke.
That's how many journalists get many of their stories, epecially the ones they can't print without giving the game up.
Heard a few talk in hypothetical but you know that all they need is something to confirm it and away they go.
Thats my whole point. People think that clubs are air tight on this when they are not. I know we have also done the same thing to other clubs in the years gone by. We didn't trade with St. Kilda for Belgey because we knew we would get him for nothing. Same with Chris Ladhams.
And Kristof, are you seriously believing that Pfeiffer wouldn't have known about whats awaiting him before the trade week?! Dude, get with the program. Players are told after the season is finished, in their end of season meetings with the coach, where the club sees them and that includes cases like Pfeiffer where he was told, we will try to trade you so you can continue your career elsewhere, if we can't good luck and hope someone picks you up in the draft.
Torney was told before the trade week what his faith was. As was Bode and the rest of the players that were delisted.
I cannot believe that there are still people here to think otherwise.
As for Pfeiffer, the alarm bells were well and truly ringing throughout the AFL industry when he was send back to Norwood in his first year on the AFL list because he "couldn't cope with the demands of AFL football". So you think that Norwood officials are not told by the AFC why they are sending Pfeiffer back to them for a month at least?! Please!!!!
And do you also believe that other AFL clubs wouldn't be aware of what his issues are?! They have their people at every club in the country and they get their infomation one way or the other.
On, one hand you are telling me that clubs are multi-million dollar business, which is true but then you go on to underestimate the power that those dollars hold within the industry. If you think other AFL clubs are in the dark about our players then you are truly mistaken. Other AFL clubs would know a lot more about our own players than us supporters would. Just like our club knows much more about the players from other clubs than their supporters would. I can't believe how much people underetimate the intelligence out there thats at disposal of every half decently run club in the AFL.
KUNG FU
30 Oct 2007, 12:25
And there is a bigger difference between that 18 yr old and the 30 yr old
Seriously you must forget players get brownie points banked. A young 18 yr old has none and needs to walk a straight line, whereas a 30 yr old has many points banked up ( Torney excluded :o:( )
When assessing players you make a decision, if it backfires you shrug your shoulders and walk away. I dont think Richmond will make Pfeiffer a better player than the AFC could have
But there is also an even greater difference between making a player the captain, the leader, heart and soul of your team and delisting them. I'm just saying that the decision to make Goodwin captain was bloody stupid and showed weakness. It set an absolutely pathetic standard for the off-field behaviour of the club and may have at least in part played a role in the downfall of Pfeiffer and probably didn't help with Huddo and Vince.
Also, the Torney example illustrates the miscalculation on Pfeiffer IMO. Pfeiffer had a lot of football left in him and, to an extent, had a real Torney streak about his game. He's a hard running & hard hitting footballer with 12 years of service to give and we wouldn't invest even one more year in him so he can turn his attitude around, but we give Jericho a million golden tickets.
You can't highlight the one statement in the paragraph withouth considereing the remained of the para which gives it context.
As I said "the club can only offer so much support". Once that support is given it is then up to the player. The AFC puts shit loads of effort into player welfare and still he couldn't do the right thing. Not the Club's fault.
If the Club had just drafted him and left it to him then I agree with you but that is not the case.
When that sentence encapsulates your position and it is the opening sentence, I think its reasonable to highlight it. Its not as if I didn't consider the rest. They were all fair points, but it is you, not I, that am only considering one part of the argument. I acknowledged that the player has the major role in their own behaviour, but you made a blanket statement that the club had no role in the issue.
Kane McGoodwin
30 Oct 2007, 13:35
Us, the supporters were in shock over this decision. I really doubt that Richmond would have known it was coming and would have either known or foresaw what all of us couldnt. Thats the whole reason supposedly we wait until after trade week to make delistings because there is potential for them to be traded.
I would say that Pfeiffers name might have come up, but didnt get any interest at the trade table.
Many supporters disagreed with the decision, but it is not like it was a complete shock, as it was always on the cards that Pfeiffer may be delisted.
drjimminez
30 Oct 2007, 18:54
Can't a player opt for the national draft or the PSD, they can not enter the ND but enter the PSD.. And if they get drafted in the ND they can't name their price they are paid as per the bracket in which they were selected...
Crow-mo
30 Oct 2007, 23:25
Can't be bothered continuing this stiffy, apparently i'm naive to think that clubs try to keep their dealings as secret as possible and maintain a competitive edge over their opponents, and by all appearances, you may be right, the Crows basically told Richmond, you want him, have him, we'll give away a 1st round draft pick for nothing.
you missed the point.
you're right that they TRY to keep things secret, but you've not addressed or acknowledged the fundamental question of whether that is a practical or possible outcome.
Crow-mo
30 Oct 2007, 23:26
Whoa, whoa, whoa. These are multimillion dollar corporations. There is no way the intricate details of their operations would be known by their competitors.
dude, seriously.
Stiffy_18
30 Oct 2007, 23:26
you missed the point.
you're right that they TRY to keep things secret, but you've not addressed or acknowledged the fundamental question of whether that is a practical or possible outcome.
Exactly right!
What some have suggested is nice in theory but impractical in real world.
Kristof
31 Oct 2007, 05:09
Exactly right!
What some have suggested is nice in theory but impractical in real world.
Hold on.
Torney found our a few hours before that he was being delisted. He has stated how surprised he was and that it was unexpected. You can still download the mp3 of the interview at 5AA (or from iTunes, which is where I got it).
But that is neither here nor there. Every club hears a whole range of whispers about what is going on at other clubs. No one would dispute that.
And about 40% of what they hear turns out to be accurate. Now, if you knew WHICH 40%, maybe you would feel like you had some kind of inside knowledge. But mostly you hear SPECULATION. Football clubs are full of bullsh!tters - or, even worse, full of people who have something to gain by other clubs being misinformed. Such as player managers. Or people who have something to gain by talking about misinformation like it is fact. Such as journalists.
No-one would suggest that footy clubs are like the CIA at guarding their secrets. But it is ridiculous to say that clubs know the intricate details with what is happening internally at their opposition. They might have whispers, but they know there is a lot of bullsh!t that leaks.
fightingdreamer88
31 Oct 2007, 05:19
Pfeiffer going to Richmond? Cya later.
Crow-mo
31 Oct 2007, 19:44
Hold on.
Torney found our a few hours before that he was being delisted. He has stated how surprised he was and that it was unexpected. You can still download the mp3 of the interview at 5AA (or from iTunes, which is where I got it).
But that is neither here nor there. Every club hears a whole range of whispers about what is going on at other clubs. No one would dispute that.
And about 40% of what they hear turns out to be accurate. Now, if you knew WHICH 40%, maybe you would feel like you had some kind of inside knowledge. But mostly you hear SPECULATION. Football clubs are full of bullsh!tters - or, even worse, full of people who have something to gain by other clubs being misinformed. Such as player managers. Or people who have something to gain by talking about misinformation like it is fact. Such as journalists.
No-one would suggest that footy clubs are like the CIA at guarding their secrets. But it is ridiculous to say that clubs know the intricate details with what is happening internally at their opposition. They might have whispers, but they know there is a lot of bullsh!t that leaks.
and as we both know, Matty Bode knew it was coming long before.
I suggest that Torney didn't know, because maybe it was a fairly recent decision. wrong decisions like that, you'd hope came out of the blue :D
Capitalist
31 Oct 2007, 20:46
i've decided that with Richmond being interested - we must have made the right choice :thumbsu:
Southerntakeover
31 Oct 2007, 20:48
and as we both know, Matty Bode knew it was coming long before.
I suggest that Torney didn't know, because maybe it was a fairly recent decision. wrong decisions like that, you'd hope came out of the blue :D
Did bode know officially for a long time, or did he 'know' as in it was ****ing obvious to everyone style of 'know'?
Did bode know officially for a long time, or did he 'know' as in it was ****ing obvious to everyone style of 'know'?
Your version, he felt it was coming but wasn't confirmed till he got the call after trade week.
Campbell's Chunky
27 Nov 2007, 13:22
Interesting to note he has been booted from their training invitees.
He now is not training with anyone.
Capitalist
27 Nov 2007, 14:00
Interesting to note he has been booted from their training invitees.
He now is not training with anyone.
seems our big mistakes in this guy and Obst haven't come to bite us as yet...
Mr_Smooth
27 Nov 2007, 14:07
Interesting to note he has been booted from their training invitees.
He now is not training with anyone.
he'd be training for beerfest by now wouldn't he??? ;)
RoosterLad
27 Nov 2007, 15:10
I thought Pfeiffer was better than Bradman? Why didn't he get picked #1?
It was a tough decision for Hughes to take Kreuzer over Pfeiffer, is the mail I got.
The mail was taken out of Darren's letterbox mind you.
Drummond
27 Nov 2007, 15:44
It was a tough decision for Hughes to take Kreuzer over Pfeiffer, is the mail I got.
The mail was taken out of Darren's letterbox mind you.
Which I posted to him.
nevermind ...
That makes no sense. Richmond's PSD pick is before Carltanks ...
macca23
27 Nov 2007, 15:57
Which I posted to him.
If nobody picks Pfeiffer up Drummond, are you prepared to admit that your rant against the AFC for getting rid of him was unjustified, and that there are issues other than footy that led to Pfeiffer's demise??
johnnypanther
27 Nov 2007, 16:03
does anyone know why he is no longer training with Richmond?
Limbach_19
27 Nov 2007, 16:08
I am fairly sure he will be picked up by Richmond. His mate Cleve Hughes sounded fairly confident of that, and said he would be sent home between when he told me and the rookie draft to pack up his things for the move. So unless he has done something incredibly wrong between now and then i can only imagine he has gone back to Adelaide to get all his shit together.
Drummond
27 Nov 2007, 16:10
If nobody picks Pfeiffer up Drummond, are you prepared to admit that your rant against the AFC for getting rid of him was unjustified, and that there are issues other than footy that led to Pfeiffer's demise??
Yes I promise I will. :)
PS. I know there are issues other than footy because if not he would still be on the list. Just didn't think they were enough to delist a guy just turned 20. If he's not picked up, they obviously were.
macca23
27 Nov 2007, 16:17
Yes I promise I will. :)
PS. I know there are issues other than footy because if not he would still be on the list. Just didn't think they were enough to delist a guy just turned 20. If he's not picked up, they obviously were.
Good stuff!! :thumbsu:
RoosterLad
27 Nov 2007, 17:09
Haha how funny would it be if Richmond did pick him up.
From Adelaide to Richmond - what a wonderful player he must be.
earlsta
27 Nov 2007, 22:10
I hope he's picked up..
Yeah sure he was an asshole off the pitch....didn't obey by the rules...but the guy is 20 years old.
He performed in the SANFL, where I believe.. it counts the most, at least he did that.
Deserves another crack imo.
BackyardWrasslin
27 Nov 2007, 22:20
If we get him he will be steal of the year. I'm just afraid someone else will get him :(
fightingdreamer88
27 Nov 2007, 23:14
I hope he's picked up..
Yeah sure he was an asshole off the pitch....didn't obey by the rules...but the guy is 20 years old.
He performed in the SANFL, where I believe.. it counts the most, at least he did that.
Deserves another crack imo.
Hoo boy is that arguable. Drummond would always talk up his SANFL performances but he never consistently performed like Vince, Douglas or Knights. Imo he underperformed and never stood out from the rest, which as an AFL listed player he should've.
Hoo boy is that arguable. Drummond would always talk up his SANFL performances but he never consistently performed like Vince, Douglas or Knights. Imo he underperformed and never stood out from the rest, which as an AFL listed player he should've.
The kid was perpetually injured (stress fractures in back, glandular fever, broken jaw), but he did perform when he made it out onto the track.
It seems obvious to me (in retrospect) that the only reason he never made his debut (late in 2007) was his off-field behaviour. It was fairly clear that his card was marked "never to play for the AFC" when he made the best player list several weeks running but couldn't even make the emergency players list for the Crows.
NikkiNoo
28 Nov 2007, 09:14
I am fairly sure he will be picked up by Richmond. His mate Cleve Hughes sounded fairly confident of that, and said he would be sent home between when he told me and the rookie draft to pack up his things for the move. So unless he has done something incredibly wrong between now and then i can only imagine he has gone back to Adelaide to get all his shit together.
See I'm a little confused about this - why would you send a player back to pack up stuff when there is 16 days still to go until the pre-season draft?
Why would a recruit, that you were thinking of picking up, be dropped for over 2 weeks of pre-season training.....
I organised moving overseas while I was still working full time. Actually I had to organise two moves, one overseas from Canberra and the other of non-essentials back to SA.
johnnypanther
28 Nov 2007, 09:53
See I'm a little confused about this - why would you send a player back to pack up stuff when there is 16 days still to go until the pre-season draft?
Why would a recruit, that you were thinking of picking up, be dropped for over 2 weeks of pre-season training.....
I organised moving overseas while I was still working full time. Actually I had to organise two moves, one overseas from Canberra and the other of non-essentials back to SA.
i agree and i'm confused too
unless Richmond have someone else in mind for their PSD pick and want to put other clubs off selecting Pfeiffer (in the PSD) by implying that he still has issues, and consequently then picking up Pfeiffer with their rookie list pick?
(but i gotta say that theory sounds a bit far fetched)
jackster83
29 Nov 2007, 09:55
I cracked up laughing when I heard that Pfeiffer had gone to Richmond to train with his old mate Cleve Hughes. The same Cleve Hughes who appealed to SABSSA that his pathetic TER be raised because he played football for Norwood. :D
If Darren couldn't get his attitude right while playing for us, what chance does he have at a dysfunctional club which includes his best friend, who if possible has a worse attitude than Darren?
hey shorty
29 Nov 2007, 10:11
I cracked up laughing when I heard that Pfeiffer had gone to Richmond to train with his old mate Cleve Hughes. The same Cleve Hughes who appealed to SABSSA that his pathetic TER be raised because he played football for Norwood. :D
If Darren couldn't get his attitude right while playing for us, what chance does he have at a dysfunctional club which includes his best friend, who if possible has a worse attitude than Darren?
That was hilarious when I heard about that, but to be fair his mummy and daddy pushed him into it. Not sure if Clevo has a worse attitude, he just has a soft approach.
As far as Darren goes, well it appears he will only be rookie listed at best so if he wants to get anywhere he's going to have to work 10 times harder than he did when he was here. Perhaps he'll be like he was before he was drafted, he worked his @ss off day in day out, never socialised much but was 100% committed to footy, he's gonna have to be all that and more, even at Richmond.
GlaCial
29 Nov 2007, 11:35
does anyone know why he is no longer training with Richmond?
I'd also like to know.
He's not on the latest (10:55 AM Thu 29 November, 2007) list for permission to train (http://www.afl.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/208/Default.aspx?newsId=53905).
Can't imagine he'd get pick up in the PSD if he's taken off this list...... That doesn't much much sense to me.
Is he still eligible to be Rookie listed?
hey shorty
29 Nov 2007, 11:54
Can't imagine he'd get pick up in the PSD if he's taken off this list...... That doesn't much much sense to me.
Is he still eligible to be Rookie listed?
Its a bit weird isnt it. Id suspect that he wont be on any main list next season but yes he is eligible and it looks likely to be put on Richmonds rookie list. He knows himself he is very lucky to be given another chance to train at another club and never actually expected to be on a main list anywhere next year.
crows dude
29 Nov 2007, 12:04
Hes actually currently at Norwood Training. So I guess that means Richmond have decided one way or the other. Eithier they are definately not picking him up. Or they are but have sent him back to Norwood until after the Draft.
GlaCial
29 Nov 2007, 14:14
Hes actually currently at Norwood Training. So I guess that means Richmond have decided one way or the other. Eithier they are definately not picking him up. Or they are but have sent him back to Norwood until after the Draft.
Well Richmond do things a little different, but not even they would send a player to do any part of a pre-season with SANFL club if he could do it with them....surely.
I might be wrong, but it sounds to me as though he will be playing for Norwood next season.
Orangewhip
7 Dec 2007, 15:43
Haha how funny would it be if Richmond did pick him up.
From Adelaide to Richmond - what a wonderful player he must be.
Richmond has a greater history and far more premierships than you newbies. I hope he goes there and tears your Crows a new one next time you meet.
Richmond has a greater history and far more premierships than you newbies. I hope he goes there and tears your Crows a new one next time you meet.
Yeah, Richmond and Carlton are actually going to try and win games ...
Oh, and the more you rabbit on about the past, the more it proclaims your embarassment about the present and the fact that you have nothing to say about the future.
Rise_up_Stiffy
7 Dec 2007, 15:46
Far more wooden spoons also. The old 'glory' days are a far contrast from the more recent 2 finals appearances in 30 odd years. Richmond are the biggest joke in the AFL (after Carlton of course)
MickyCrow
7 Dec 2007, 16:30
Richmond has a greater history and far more premierships than you newbies. I hope he goes there and tears your Crows a new one next time you meet.
Piss off troll, stick to your own board
wall_ryan
7 Dec 2007, 17:24
Richmond has a greater history and far more premierships than you newbies. I hope he goes there and tears your Crows a new one next time you meet.
Go tank some games you Goat lover.
If you consider the time we've been in the league and the dissadvantages we face with father son etc, we're a lot prouder than richmond, most of their supporters haven't been alive for one of their "many" premierships.
If you want to date back to 1890 which you seem to be, include our sanfl club affiliates in our grand final tally
Richmond has a greater history and far more premierships than you newbies. I hope he goes there and tears your Crows a new one next time you meet.
bzzzt. thanks for playing...
fightingdreamer88
8 Dec 2007, 21:53
Richmond has a greater history and far more premierships than you newbies. I hope he goes there and tears your Crows a new one next time you meet.
Hear that? That's the sound of you phailing.
Hear that? That's the sound of you phailing.
lol orangewhip got owned