News Jackson Hately requests trade to Adelaide

Remove this Banner Ad

Perhaps the bluff element may be that we threaten to use it? Sheeesh!
Yeah, but a bluff is pretending to have something that you don't have or won't use.

Example: GCS bluffing last years saying they could redraft Martin.

Carlton called their bluff - GCS did not draft him and he went to Carlton.

We don't have a bluff. We have a statement of fact. If he goes to PSD we will get him for free. 0% chance we will pass on him.

There is no bluff to call.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Perhaps the bluff element may be that we threaten to use it? Sheeesh!
It's only a bluff if we a.) don't have the pick or b.) aren't going to use it. What you described above is a 'threat'.

Unrelated, would you like to play poker with me sometime? We can start with matchsticks and work our way up to real money.....
 
It's only a bluff if we a.) don't have the pick or b.) aren't going to use it. What you described above is a 'threat'.

Unrelated, would you like to play poker with me sometime? We can start with matchsticks and work our way up to real money.....
Do they allow that type of thing during your recess break?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So you think the 'bluff' element is that we won't use the pick on Hately, and we would just pretend that we would?
No I think we will trade in good faith, like we usually do. You want the club to act like pariahs and make an a*sehole of themselves!
 
Do you mean this?
Other uncontracted players who have not been able to negotaite a deal?

By your own logic though how is that different to using it on Hately? If we use it on Saad, aren't we duty bound to negotiate with Essendon or risk becoming 'Pariah's' and 'A$$holes'? So then we use it on another player, but wait, no, we have to negotiate with their club now for the same reason. Let's just let the pick go to waste so we don't annoy anyone, much easier.

You're just going around in circles like everyone who thinks we'd be committing some heinous crime by actually using a pick that we earned fair and square by finishing last to pick an uncontracted player from another teams list, which is exactly what the PSD is, and always has been, for.

The only point you're making is that we should never use Pick 1 in the PSD because it will hurt our 'reputation' - and that is plainly ridiculous.
 
The only point you're making is that we should never use Pick 1 in the PSD because it will hurt our 'reputation' - and that is plainly ridiculous.
Wow! Much negotiating experience?
The point I am making is that we should negotiate in good faith and if all else fails then we have the threat of using the PSD #1. We know that and they know that. The negotiation would proceed on that basis and may result in a slightly better outcome due to the leverage.
Your plan is to slash and burn from the start. Gives us that player for almost nothing or we will secure the player through the PSD!
I don't think that will stand us in good stead in the longer run.
 
If Carlton's play on Martin was deemed acceptable by the industry, not sure why the Crows have to take the high road in regards to using the PSD as a threat.
Carlton may well do it again this year with Saad. Would have to assume that the rest of the teams will see it as a sign that its open slather to start bending teams over barrels in this situation.

Once is a outlier, twice is a trend!
 
Carlton may well do it again this year with Saad. Would have to assume that the rest of the teams will see it as a sign that its open slather to start bending teams over barrels in this situation.

Once is a outlier, twice is a trend!

Carlton may not have much choice given how ridiculous Essendon are with their trade demands.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top