Dustin Martin....hmmm, would we allow tats at AFC?

[Mattrox]

So you agree we have problems that need to be fixed?

We had early fitness issues that only seemed to dissipate after the bye round. We had game plan issues. We have been grooming a greenhorn to take over the Tippett role, then we lose Walker and our neophyte forward is all of a sudden #1.

We also had small forward issues. If we get Betts, he marks, crumbs, chases and tackles. That's Porps, Callinan and Pets in one player.

The issues above are far more pressing. If we had our house in order the conversation might be different.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Ask Reilly and Van Berlo to take pay cuts

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Elite Crow]

Couldn't agree more.

Curious, when did VB sign his 3 year contract renewal? Does that cover 14-16?

 

[Wood_Duck]

Curious, when did VB sign his 3 year contract renewal? Does that cover 14-16?

Yep end of 16.

 

[Elite Crow]

Yep end of 16.

Unbelievable. Why another 3 years when you're a qtr way through this year, it's not as if he would have been in demand.

 

[Tex200]

Yep end of 16.

Goody gumdrops

 

[Bicks]

OK, rather than starting a new thread let's have your opinion on where Dustin Martin will be playing in 2014..
IMO a big serving of humble pie will be needed for Dustin to chow down on because he will be at...

RICHMOND

 

[FR0GGY]

So any chance if we get dusty and Eddie, we could get sponsorship from Tatts Bet?

 

[Allefgib]

Thanks mate - have calmed down considerably due to your condescending first line.

There is no doubt that Martin's wage might be diminished due to his immaturity. Its every clubs right to pay him less because they will take a bigger risk than recruiting a player like Sloane. I am not disputing that nor would I have no problem with us turning down Martin if there were too many big red flag and the risk was too big. This isn't the issue I am referring to.

What I called Bicks out on was the fact that he called players like Tippett / Martin as money hungry mercenary's with no loyalty. He then supports us bringing in Eddie Betts. This is pure hypocrisy.

Apologies for language, you've just been very worked up and ppl seem to be miscommunicating.

I've seen a few different views. Most seem to be about the risk of martin not his rights or potential reward.

 

[Allefgib]

So any chance if we get dusty and Eddie, we could get sponsorship from Tatts Bet?

Ha. Nice

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

OK, rather than starting a new thread let's have your opinion on where Dustin Martin will be playing in 2014..
IMO a big serving of humble pie will be needed for Dustin to chow down on because he will be at...

RICHMOND

Luis Suarez Board

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

And living with club president Garry March, Cotchin and Choco babysitting at the club etc, this kid ain't high maintenance, he's a full time job for a team of minders.

No wonder he wants to get away

 

[Sanders]

I think part of the thing here is that I am not sure that our leadership group would want Martin. What if Noble goes yes and the leadership group says hell no?!

Well if the inmates are running the asylum then something is wrong with our chain of command structure

Consult who you want, but the guys in charge make the decision

 

[Sanders]

We had early fitness issues that only seemed to dissipate after the bye round. We had game plan issues. We have been grooming a greenhorn to take over the Tippett role, then we lose Walker and our neophyte forward is all of a sudden #1.

We also had small forward issues. If we get Betts, he marks, crumbs, chases and tackles. That's Porps, Callinan and Pets in one player.

The issues above are far more pressing. If we had our house in order the conversation might be different.

OK so our problems are exclusively within our grasp, and none relate to the quality of our competition?

We don't get to decide in a competitive environment when it suits us to address our issues.

 

[Footypie32]

Not sure if this has been asked yet (apologies if it has), but if people are so concerned about the effect Martin would have on the Club, I wonder if those same people would except Goodwin back in some capacity?

 

[Mattrox]

OK so our problems are exclusively within our grasp, and none relate to the quality of our competition?

We don't get to decide in a competitive environment when it suits us to address our issues.

You are as short sighted as they get. Of course you address issues right bloody now. But why bring in new issues which will need extra resources when we need to use those resources in other areas right now.

Bringing in problems doesn't fix the existing ones.

You can only control how you prepare. We are not in control of what others do. But fix our problems and move forward and we win more games. We go from 'competitive' to consistent then consistent to good.

But all that doesn't matter because your posting history shows that when we do something good you make up some bull s**t excuse how "it doesn't really count because....." and when something goes against us we are s**t house and its Trigg's fault.

Funny s**t is what you type here is almost word for word what Nelso RonSon and dav3 use on Bay 13 as trolls. I find that hilarious because coming from a Tealster it sounds like a troll coming from a supposed Crow fan it just sounds bitter.

 

[crowsup]

I don't know... A couple of years ago most of the guys here complained that our club was too squeeze clean. You wanted some players that would play with aggro. Not pretty boys. You wanted a board that would defy the AFL. Get in their faces and try something that would put one over the AFL.
Someone tries to do that but gets caught. Now you want to lynch them. Is it because he/they got caught that you want them lynched, or is it because they actually tried to put one over them?
Now there may be a chance to get a "bad boy'' but you want to keep the team full of squeeze clean players.
Unfortunately, most times, you cannot have one without the other.

 

[Sanders]

You are as short sighted as they get. Of course you address issues right bloody now. But why bring in new issues which will need extra resources when we need to use those resources in other areas right now.

Bringing in problems doesn't fix the existing ones.

Maybe I am short sighted, because I don't see the vision in your grand plan. Maybe its me, but you appear to think that something that makes better onfield is a bad thing.

You can faff around on the edges, but as the other bloke explained, our onfield performances need to be better.

Bringing in better players is, in my opinion, a better solution than your vision of tinkering around the edges.

You can only control how you prepare. We are not in control of what others do. But fix our problems and move forward and we win more games. We go from 'competitive' to consistent then consistent to good.

Is your goal only to win more games? Not the most games?

I'm not energised by your low ambition, I'm not inspired by your great plan that goes from competitive to consistent to good.

Maybe a better way would be to try to make our list better?

But all that doesn't matter because your posting history shows that when we do something good you make up some bull s**t excuse how "it doesn't really count because....." and when something goes against us we are s**t house and its Trigg's fault.

Funny s**t is what you type here is almost word for word what Nelso RonSon and dav3 use on Bay 13 as trolls. I find that hilarious because coming from a Tealster it sounds like a troll coming from a supposed Crow fan it just sounds bitter.

Whilst you might not have much credibility to lose, such asinine gibberish does you no favours.

 

[Tex200]

You are as short sighted as they get. Of course you address issues right bloody now. But why bring in new issues which will need extra resources when we need to use those resources in other areas right now.

Bringing in problems doesn't fix the existing ones.

You can only control how you prepare. We are not in control of what others do. But fix our problems and move forward and we win more games. We go from 'competitive' to consistent then consistent to good.

But all that doesn't matter because your posting history shows that when we do something good you make up some bull s**t excuse how "it doesn't really count because....." and when something goes against us we are s**t house and its Trigg's fault.

Funny s**t is what you type here is almost word for word what Nelso RonSon and dav3 use on Bay 13 as trolls. I find that hilarious because coming from a Tealster it sounds like a troll coming from a supposed Crow fan it just sounds bitter.

Did you ever think some people are just tired of being unsuccessful

 

[Carmo]

A young list does not mean a good list. Melbourne have had one of the youngest lists for the past 5 years.

http://afl.allthestats.com/?itm=111331

In 2013 we had the 11th youngest list (out of 18) so about middle of the road.

We regularly had the fourth youngest 22.

First question, how did they go compared to other teams of similar age?

Second question, will you only use win losses as your assessment tool in the first question or your own evaluation of the performances in the games as well?

I dont mind if you use top 4 but I think you should use game performances as well as win loss. So far I'd say we are the best performed team against fremantle since we played them. Quite possibly they'll win the flag and we will have been the team that got closest to them in the latter part of the season.

Third question, what do you think would have happened to our results in 2013 if we didnt lose our best (and one of the best in the league) forwards and then later in the season our second best forward?

Fourth and final question, what do you think would have happened to our results if we had got off to a good start and had been optimally conditioned by the end of the preseason?

 

[Tex200]

The thing is a player of Martins calibre does not often come on to the market. As it happens he has now been left holding his d...k with seemingly no options. now is the time to show some nuts and swoop in to claim him.

 

[cmndstab]

Unbelievable. Why another 3 years when you're a qtr way through this year, it's not as if he would have been in demand.

It could be that we figured it was a good time to sign him to a front-ended deal.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

The thing is a player of Martins calibre does not often come on to the market. As it happens he has now been left holding his d...k with seemingly no options. now is the time to show some nuts and swoop in to claim him.

Yes he has talent, but he is yet to show that he is a $700k a year player. Listening to Cam Mooney on AA today sounds like there are more issues that haven't made the public arena.
Having said all that the thing I don't like about Martin is who he associates with, sorry but anyone that hangs out or in any way associates with a leader of a bikie gang is asking for trouble.......Ben Cousins mark 2.

 

[Sanders]

The thing is a player of Martins calibre does not often come on to the market. As it happens he has now been left holding his d...k with seemingly no options. now is the time to show some nuts and swoop in to claim him.

Absolutely

I wasn't generally in favour of us getting him when he said he wanted to test the market.

But now he has his back to the wall, there might be an opportunity to leverage his miscalculations to our advantage

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The thing is a player of Martins calibre does not often come on to the market. As it happens he has now been left holding his d...k with seemingly no options. now is the time to show some nuts and swoop in to claim him.

Spot on.

He's probably not feeling much love at the moment while other clubs are trying to teach him a lesson.

We're due for some luck with a Richmond recruit too.