Delisting Players After the ND

[kosifantutti]

The Saints should be fined and sanctioned for this.

It's pathetic on their behalf, disrespectful and an absolute disgrace.

I hope Winmar sues them, this is his livelihood at stake here, shame on St Kilda.

Not sure if serious. Fined and sanctioned for following AFL rules?
On what basis would he sue?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

A nail in the coffin to their disastrous 2009 trade week and draft.

Great to see Watters putting a broom through the place.

 

[Sunshine Saint]

The Saints should be fined and sanctioned for this.

It's pathetic on their behalf, disrespectful and an absolute disgrace.

I hope Winmar sues them, this is his livelihood at stake here, shame on St Kilda.

Take a deep breath and look at the facts:

- Winmar has been at Saints for three years

- he had been given very clear instructions on the fitness level expected, after a very ordinary season in VFL in which he was dropped to the development team

- he chose to take his position and the opportunity for granted and the club consequently dropped him from the list

- he will be paid out in full for the entire 2013 season

- he now has the opportunity to be drafted, albeit in a shallow draft pool, or can go to a state league, play to his potential and be picked up by another club in the 2013 draft

- Saints operated completely within the rules and went over and beyond to give Winmar the opportunity to improve his motivation and attitude

I have no sympathy for someone who has been given every opportunity and chooss to not make the most of that. Unfortunately he may become another unfulfilled talent.

 

[tigers_of_old_08]

He can still get Rookie listed or PSD so all is not lost for 2013. Plenty of great players have come from there, although he has to pull his finger out to get a spot. Don't think two weeks would have changed much had the saints done it earlier.

Yup, if he was supposedly good enough for a ND pick up, then a PSD or Rookie Draft pick up should be a shoo-in. Right? A better player will push a weaker player out improving the quality of the PSD or RD list of players available.
And if you believe that NM was dropped purely because he came last in a time trial then youre not looking at the big picture.
This may sound harsh but it's the reality of the situation.

 

[legend166]

I just don't understand why the PSD/Rookie draft is so far away. It should happen the day after the National Draft.

 

[Bollox]

Dont see a problem with it. Not uncommon.
Would rather our clubs retain the option than forfeit it just so they can be "nice" or "understanding"

In general their opportunities are well respected, if any guy is suddenly ousted for no reason or even slim reasons, the aflpa will have a look.

We dont even know if the bloke had been warned 7 times, or it came from the other players/leadership group.

3 yrs is enough for it to turn into whats right for the club...the only part i have issue with is the pathetic abused euphemism "decided its in his best interest as well as the clubs".....simply makes me think whoever said it is utterly gutless in whatver the decision was and hopes to smell sweet.

 

[The_Wookie]

Players should be able to maximise their employment opportunity. sacking them the day after the main draft limits that siginificantly. Delistings should be done by list lodgement pre-draft/

 

[Ricmel]

Dont see a problem with it. Not uncommon.
.

Yeah, I think clubs like to look at the national draft results and have the chance to further refine their list.

I do agree that the way the drafts are set up it can be disadvantageous to some players but it is teh AFL that is responsible for fixing that (and they should).

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I just don't understand why the PSD/Rookie draft is so far away. It should happen the day after the National Draft.

If clubs come up empty handed in the ND with types of players they might be targeting, they need another week or two to shop around for other options.

 

[Testekill]

Let's look at it this way.

* Places last in a time trial
* Has a terrible 2012 in the VFL
* Dropped to the VFL Reserves
* Doesn't sound like he's been putting in the hard yards off field so far this preseason.
* Let's be honest, never looked like he was going to make it

 

[Numbered Days]

Yup, if he was supposedly good enough for a ND pick up, then a PSD or Rookie Draft pick up should be a shoo-in. Right? A better player will push a weaker player out improving the quality of the PSD or RD list of players available.
And if you believe that NM was dropped purely because he came last in a time trial then youre not looking at the big picture.
This may sound harsh but it's the reality of the situation.

But what if it was one of the other 10 clubs that would have taken him? Clubs don't just all have a numbered list of players and get the next one on the list - he may have fit a need for a club but they have now taken someone else.

Overall I don't think it's that big a issue but doesn't seem ideal. Would like to see it a bit "fairer" and players should have the maximum opportunity to find a new club. St Kilda haven't really done anything wrong though.

 

[the distributer]

Then sack him before the ND and let him have a chance.

That is the premise of the thread, not that Winmar did the wrong thing.

Why do clubs have the ability to say when and where players are sacked without the consequences.

Personally I think the Saints should have one less player i.e. Winmar on their list. As shoudl any other club that does a similar thing.

There's still the rookie draft to come, if anyone had even slightest intentions of taking him in the ND then surely they'll find a rookie spot for him at least.

 

[Dalphonso]

One just wonders if recruiters sometimes become bedazzled by famous names hoping they will be as good as their famous Cousins ,Uncles or Fathers due to the pedigree?
I know I may be shot down in flames with this thought in Todays footy but just maybe?
I am sure if Brett Ebert was no relation to his famous Father and was called Brett Jones there would have been far less attention,hype and far less pressure on the player.There were also 2 Robrans that weren't a patch on their Fathers ability.
There have been 1 or 2 blokes from the Top End that haven't lived up to expectations that were related to Michael Long.

 

[ExTasDeeMan]

Kind of ok with it - why should there be a need to protect lazy and disinterested footballers? In the real world, you put in sub par performances and mail in a stinker, you get the ass. A bit draconian I know, but the worlds smallest violin plays for these guys.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

This time it might be justifiable - or at any rate, is a player no-one's much fussed about - but in principle it's wrong. Unless the club is responding to actions or behaviour that completely violate understood standards, they should all have to abide by the cut-off dates for list changes. You decide after the trades and before the ND which players from your list you'll move on and which you'll keep, and you live with the decisions - if you want to leave wriggle room, you can cut more players (and risk losing them to other clubs). This newly popular "we'll delist but promise to pick them back up as rookies" strategy doesn't sit well with me, either, although I guess at least the player does at least have the opportunity then to talk to other clubs if they want to.

 

[gilbert the best]

A nail in the coffin to their disastrous 2009 trade week and draft.

Great to see Watters putting a broom through the place.

Well said

 

[Purple Suit]

It's a two way street. McPhee says hi

 

[Rummy]

I dont get all the hate at StKilda, surely Winmar would be paid out for the entire 2013 season, in which case if he can work/play somewhere else during 2013, if he wanted to he could be doubling his salary for the year or just kick back for the rest of the year sitting on his arse or enjoying a long holiday and still earn a nice income. Sure it may restrict his chance to be drafted into some AFL clubs 'this' year, however theres still the rookie draft, which it sounds like he'll be lucky to get even picked up in that, let alone the National draft. I dont see how this is any different to any other players who get sacked throughout the year for a raft of different discipline issues and have no hope of being picked up by another club for another 10-11 months, as opposed to Winmar who may only have to wait a matter of weeks, and then still keep his payout from StKilda despite not having to play for them.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

There's still the rookie draft to come, if anyone had even slightest intentions of taking him in the ND then surely they'll find a rookie spot for him at least.

But a Rookie spot does not provide the same opportunities as a primary list spot does. Not the same thing.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

I dont get all the hate at StKilda, surely Winmar would be paid out for the entire 2013 season, in which case if he can work/play somewhere else during 2013, if he wanted to he could be doubling his salary for the year or just kick back for the rest of the year sitting on his arse or enjoying a long holiday and still earn a nice income. Sure it may restrict his chance to be drafted into some AFL clubs 'this' year, however theres still the rookie draft, which it sounds like he'll be lucky to get even picked up in that, let alone the National draft. I dont see how this is any different to any other players who get sacked throughout the year for a raft of different discipline issues and have no hope of being picked up by another club for another 10-11 months, as opposed to Winmar who may only have to wait a matter of weeks, and then still keep his payout from StKilda despite not having to play for them.

So by your logic - you would be happy to get a payout form your job. Do a mickey mouse job for a year and then expect to waltz back into a job at the same level you were a year ago, despite you not having improved your skills against your competitors.

I personally think that would suck. It reduces your chances of long term secure employment.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

You still need to be able to cut players after the national draft. What if you arent happy with the players you got in the draft and you decide you want a pick in the pre season draft after all to finalise your list. There needs to be scope for this.

Why? If you can't sort your list out by the ND, then I suggest the club sack their football department for being incompetent.

 

[bunsen burner]

F***ing St Kilda. F***ing disgraceful.

I've been lenient of St Kilda up until now but they are a bunch of grubs. Grubby club. Grubby culture. No wonder they have an arsenal of wooden spoons.

Attention Scott Watters: Adam Cockie can't play.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Dont see a problem with it. Not uncommon.
Would rather our clubs retain the option than forfeit it just so they can be "nice" or "understanding"

In general their opportunities are well respected, if any guy is suddenly ousted for no reason or even slim reasons, the aflpa will have a look.

We dont even know if the bloke had been warned 7 times, or it came from the other players/leadership group.

3 yrs is enough for it to turn into whats right for the club...the only part i have issue with is the pathetic abused euphemism "decided its in his best interest as well as the clubs".....simply makes me think whoever said it is utterly gutless in whatver the decision was and hopes to smell sweet.

I think the AFL needs to change the rules. If day 1 of training is when you are going to sack players, then day 1 of training (even if it is just 1 day and day 2 is a month later) should be before the ND so clubs can make the right assessment of their list and how players are tracking.

I am not even a fan of what we did to Steinberg, but at the same time, if we did it prior to the ND, then he has the chance to nominate and move if he doesn't like the Essendon offer.

In the end, the way you work against your elite peers in AFL is completley different to normal workplaces, thus, everyone shoudl be given the maximum chance to find a new home.

Winmar deserves what he gets, but it is all about when he deserves it. These types of scenarios will just push the FA argument more and more as the clubs hold too much power regarding a player having the opportunity to play at the elite level.

 

[tigers_of_old_08]

But what if it was one of the other 10 clubs that would have taken him? Clubs don't just all have a numbered list of players and get the next one on the list - he may have fit a need for a club but they have now taken someone else.

Overall I don't think it's that big a issue but doesn't seem ideal. Would like to see it a bit "fairer" and players should have the maximum opportunity to find a new club. St Kilda haven't really done anything wrong though.

Draft for talent, trade for need.

Look I hear you, I'm just playing the devils advocate here.

 

[Thommo 42]

Let's look at it this way.

* Places last in a time trial
* Has a terrible 2012 in the VFL
* Dropped to the VFL Reserves
* Doesn't sound like he's been putting in the hard yards off field so far this preseason.
* Let's be honest, never looked like he was going to make it

Totally agree, but they really should sack him prior to the draft.

Not St. Kilda's fault though, they obviously gave him more chances than he deserved and left it as late as possible for him to turn it around.