List Mgmt. Mitch Clark Delisted 24/10/16

[ChookNorris]

Good thing Aaron Davey told me Wylie Buzza was his pick for the best key Forward in last years draft.

 

[cynical]

Clark fixing our CHF problem is like buying lotto tickets to fix money problems

 

[Partridge]

Clark fixing our CHF problem is like buying lotto tickets to fix money problems

About the same odds too.

 

[David the Cat]

About the same odds too.

True enough.....but people keep buying them.

 

[Bobby_]

Clark fixing our CHF problem is like buying lotto tickets to fix money problems

even funnier was listening to those same posters say Clark will be out of rehab in no time at all and deliver like they intended he would. Absolute joke was this signing in the first place. Chris Scott will run Harry Taylor into the ground with plan B now.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

At the end of 2015, I remember Scott saying that him missing much of the season didn't matter because Clark was a long-term prospect. 1 year and 1 AFL game later, and he's gone. Some long-term prospect that turned out to be.

 

[Bobby_]

At the end of 2015, I remember Scott saying that him missing much of the season didn't matter because Clark was a long-term prospect. 1 year and 1 AFL game later, and he's gone. Some long-term prospect that turned out to be.

He said the very same thing about Mitch Brown when he was asked about him during an interview in one of those NAB practice games. One year later and Brown was delisted.

 

[leorex]

Clark fixing our CHF problem is like buying lotto tickets to fix money problems

that is what I do

 

[leorex]

peoples say recruiting Clark was wrong

why? Because he got delisted?
delisting him was wrong in my opinion

Clark is talented, surely there must be room for him somewhere on the park
injuries and everything

 

[Cursed Cat]

peoples say recruiting Clark was wrong

why? Because he got delisted?
delisting him was wrong in my opinion

Clark is talented, surely there must be room for him somewhere on the park
injuries and everything

For me, the issue was always that he had played so little footy and the game moves quickly.
I was never sure a functional forward line could accommodate both Clark and Hawkins, either.
Our list is thin for key forwards now that all of Clark, Vardy and Kersten have gone, no doubt; somewhat mitigated by the recruitment of Black.
But I never really thought Clark was the answer personally.

 

[Wojcinski]

He said the very same thing about Mitch Brown when he was asked about him during an interview in one of those NAB practice games. One year later and Brown was delisted.

It's a tough spot for a senior coach to be in though, unless you expect them to start saying things like "Clark will be given 12 more months otherwise he'll be delisted" during tv interviews? That might be the way it goes internally but everyone knows every AFL club official and player that speaks to the media is pacified and given canned responses.

 

[Partridge]

He said the very same thing about Mitch Brown when he was asked about him during an interview in one of those NAB practice games. One year later and Brown was delisted.

Ah yes, the dreaded 'he's in our best 22' curse.

 

[Partridge]

At the end of 2015, I remember Scott saying that him missing much of the season didn't matter because Clark was a long-term prospect. 1 year and 1 AFL game later, and he's gone. Some long-term prospect that turned out to be.

I can't recall that, but I did find this:

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/05/05/clark-stanley-may-return-cats-afl

"We want Mitch to be a long-term player for us, not one who just comes in and papers over cracks in the short term," Scott said on Tuesday.

"Hopefully that decision-making means he's a better chance to play well this week and if he doesn't quite come up this week then he plays well the next week.

"We were really clear with Mitch when he came in that our priority was for him to come and be a long-term player for us.

 

[Lewy]

You have no way of knowing that. Besides, they're ahead of him as ruckmen, not as a key forward.

The way the side was structured this year, you can not seperate the two positions. Apart from 2 games where Henderson played forward, we played with one key forward and 2 ruckman/forwards. All 4 of Clark, Vardy, Smith & Stanley fall into that category. In terms of selection, Smith & Stanley were ahead of both Vardy & Clark. Vardy & Clark have now left the club. I think that speaks for itself.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

What if West had been played? What if Geelong had drafted Grundy?


What if Kersten had been played? What if Walker had been kept? What if, instead of playing four key backs all year, one of those backs (Taylor/Henderson) was given substantial time as a forward all season to mold them into the role rather than desperately throwing one of them into the role in the last few rounds of the season and then in a cut-throat prelim after weeks missed due to injury?

Pretty strange post, that.

Firstly, I'm not sure why you brought up West and Kersten not being selected for their respective finals, or not giving one of the key backs enough time forward throughout this year - those were all decisions made independent of the McIntosh and Clark trades. Even the decision not to draft Grundy was only affected indirectly, if at all (we had the chance to draft Grundy but opted for Thurlow instead, and he was well and truly gone by the pick used for McIntosh. You could possibly argue that we would have been more likely to pick Grundy if not for trading in McIntosh, but I certainly haven't seen that confirmed anywhere).

In any case, you kind of made my point for me - every decision or non decision made by the club is a gamble; a series of 'what ifs'. We don't know whether any other course of action would have proven more successful, but it's my opinion that in 2013 a fit McIntosh would have been more beneficial to us than the selection of West (who could and should have been selected anyway - I said at the time that it was a terrible decision to leave him out) or a first year ruckman; and it's my opinion that this year a fit Clark (as I alluded to in my previous post, I'm not entirely sure what the go with Clark was in the second half of the year, but you know what I mean) would have been more beneficial to us than Walker, Kersten (again, could have been selected anyway) or playing one of our defenders out of position.

The point of my response to Geelong_Sicko was that I think both gambles were worth taking at the time, because I think they both gave Geelong the best chance of winning a premiership at the time. You may think differently - that's great, and as I said concerns over their durability have been vindicated. But we'll never know for sure whether any other options available to us at the time would have turned out better. Perhaps worse? What if? They're all gambles.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

What if West had been played? What if Geelong had drafted Grundy?


What if Kersten had been played? What if Walker had been kept? What if, instead of playing four key backs all year, one of those backs (Taylor/Henderson) was given substantial time as a forward all season to mold them into the role rather than desperately throwing one of them into the role in the last few rounds of the season and then in a cut-throat prelim after weeks missed due to injury?

Too right. Just about everything can be boiled down to a "What if..." and calculating risk versus reward in competitive sports. In life itself, really. If you win at it you're a genius. If you don't you're a fool. To highlight this isn't wrong, but to gamble in the first place isn't wrong either.

 

[SJ]

Ah yes, the dreaded 'he's in our best 22' curse.

What about the 'being accepted as a Geelong player' curse?

 

[Ricketz]

Ok, I agree with that. Whilst I think it's great that a destigmatisation of mental illness is occurring, it appears that peoples behaviours can be now totally justified or explained if they are diagnosed with depression. Having depression shouldn't absolve you of still acting like a decent human being. As we have seen recently with a few media personalities, being diagnosed with depression is almost now a convenient excuse or fallback for acting like a prick.

Actually, that is exactly what depression does to you - it affects your ability to override your emotional response with a rational response. That is one of the reasons people with depression withdraw themselves - they know they are sometimes not pleasant to be around, and hate themselves more for it. Of course depression explains these behaviours, but if you had ever talked to someone with depression, they would be unlikely to ever use it as a justification.

I imagine your comment was flippant, but it is the equivalent of suggesting that having a broken leg shouldn't absolve you of walking. Depression is a physical disorder of brain tissue resulting in abnormal functioning brain activity.

Here is a link you might want to read, if you want to be informed about the disease: https://www.beyondblue.org.au/the-facts/depression/signs-and-symptoms

 

[steady2]

I can't recall that, but I did find this:

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/05/05/clark-stanley-may-return-cats-afl
"We want Mitch to be a long-term player for us, not one who just comes in and papers over cracks in the short term," Scott said on Tuesday.
"Hopefully that decision-making means he's a better chance to play well this week and if he doesn't quite come up this week then he plays well the next week.
"We were really clear with Mitch when he came in that our priority was for him to come and be a long-term player for us.

Nothing wrong with what Scott said, clearly it did not work out though. Thanks for the link to actual quote.

 

[Catman]

. The spin doctor just needs to shut up all together and start molding the team into a tough one again instead of a uncontested show-pony-front-running has-been still gettng by on past exploits (the Thompson era).

Considering 14 of the 22 that played the Prelim Final didn't play under Thompson (I included Duncan and Cowan in this as they only spent a year under him), you'd say that Thompson's influence is rather minimal on the current team.

And I'm wondering how one of the top teams in the league for contested footy this year can be tagged as soft?

 

[steady2]

At the end of 2015, I remember Scott saying that him missing much of the season didn't matter because Clark was a long-term prospect. 1 year and 1 AFL game later, and he's gone. Some long-term prospect that turned out to be.

Problem with your memory by the sounds of it. What you heard and what you think you heard and what you would like to have heard.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Problem with your memory by the sounds of it. What you heard and what you think you heard and what you would like to have heard.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-08/cats-cautious-on-clarks-return-date

"But as we stated really clearly in the pre-season, we never had any intention to bring Mitch in and flog him for all he's worth in the short term.

"Irrespective of his calf injury, we were always going to be really careful with his playing program to make sure we have a long-term asset on our hands."

"Even if it is, we've got strong confidence that the long-term plan is he is an important player for us."

 

[steady2]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-08/cats-cautious-on-clarks-return-date

Thanks for the link, it clearly does not support your claim; "At the end of 2015..." Nope it was July, in the middle of 2015. At that time it was expected Clark would resume at some stage prior to the end of the season, he did not. He was unable to make a return from injuries until more than midway through the following season, that is a year missing injured. Given his history it is no wonder he has been delisted. Clearly it was a risk that did not pay, that is really unfortunate for the club. Removing those blinkers might help with your memory.

 

[Shai]

My biggest concern are our ruckmen. When they didn't fire a shot, our clearance work suffered and when that suffered our gameplan fell apart. You could tell within 2 minute every week if we were going to play well just by looking at our ruckmen.

I'm confident that Scott and MC can create an effective gameplan that suits our players. If you're playing close enough attention you can see how it changes between years and during the year. But no game-plan is without weakness or without risk.

On match day moves other than the first Sydney game we were able to arrest the other team momentum somewhat in all of our other losses.

Mental fragility is a thing until it isn't. It's like how we got through 07 preliminary final but lost in similar circumstance in 04 and 05

Funny thing about rucks, when I posted this roughly 2 years ago we had 9 potential rucks/fwds, only 2 of those are still standing (and, not a ruck obviously but gets a nod in that image, Cocky)

 

[DangerIsLove]

Would like to see this Best 22 now that we have had a host of departures

Backs: Thurlow - Lonergan - Henderson
Half Backs: Duncan - Taylor - Thuoy
Centre: Menengola - J.Selwood - S.Selwood
Half Forwards: Motlop - Stanley - Cockatoo
Forwards: Battle - Hawkins - Menzel
Rucks: Smith - Dangerfield - Guthrie
Interchange: Blicavs - McCarthy - Kolodjashnijj - Powell-Pepper or Scharenberg

Emergencies: Lang - Bews - Mackie
Others: Cowan - Horlin Smith - Black - Ruggles - Parsons - Ryan

Important Draft Picks:

Pick #24 - Josh Battle
Pick #38 - Sam Powell-Pepper or Jonty Scharenberg
Pick #42 - Luke Ryan

Josh Battle is a player that can play as a third tall forward. Is a good kick for goal and will settle nicely. Powell-Pepper is a power midfielder, however he may be drafted higher meaning that we should go for Jonty Scharenberg. Ryan is a VFL coburg player and is ready made for AFL.

A good team.