- Aug 17, 2006
- 23,357
- 21,682
- AFL Club
- Geelong
They all left primarily for money. Personal reasons come second.
The club wasn't going to be able to keep them no matter what they did.
Once again even if Bundy was contracted, he would have left just as Beams is leaving Collingwood.
The Suns showed little interest in signing Bundy. We would have got very little extra for him if he was contracted given his "personal reasons" and injuries.
Geelong has a stated policy to help players get to their destination too.
People can play devil's advocate all they like, it won't change a thing to how contracts.negotiations are being played out these days.
That is all completely irrelevant to what was being discussed. Which was the suggestion that the reason Christensen was left out of contract was to give the club flexibility in pursuing other targets and that an agreement had been reached with him in principle, which would be signed after Frawley or any other free agency pick ups had been secured. Which, of course, makes no sense. Because if you're agreeing in principle to a contract before going out and signing another player, why not just present the contract? The answer is, of course, because the contract might need to be changed down the track, depending on how much is needed to secure the new player.
The specific discussion that was going on wasn't about Christensen's motivations for leaving, it was about the club's motivations for not signing him during the season, or signing him on for longer than one year at the end of last season.