Opinion Rockliff / Hanley.....keep or trade?

Who would you trade?

  • Rockliff

    Votes: 13 7.9%
  • Hanley

    Votes: 41 24.8%
  • Both

    Votes: 94 57.0%
  • Neither

    Votes: 17 10.3%

  • Total voters
    165

Remove this Banner Ad

He is staying so how about we support him. He has no doubt made mistakes and he is now well aware the club will not tolerate such mistakes. 100% i can believe he hasn't had the support many other captains take for granted as captain of their club. He obviously took the wrong approach with the younger players and as a result he won't be captain. But NO ONE on this forum can ever deny the guy doesn't put in when he runs on the field. He has always been one of our most consistent performers on the field. Let's hope Fagan and Noble can turn the fortunes of the club around and maybe Rocky will regain the respect back of many.

Nobody has ever said he doesn't do well on-field, I don't think.
 
Happy he is staying, he has great qualities and hasn't done anything that leaves him beyond redemption. Plus hopefully he learns a lot about himself over the next 12 months.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Oh yeah I forgot its a big secret that no one can ever know as to why we all decided to chase him out of town. On record, bar a tweet, he's done nothing, he can turn it around.
Why do you think the club were desperate to rid the town of him? Why do you think there were no takers? How does that possibly add up for you?
 
Why do you think the club were desperate to rid the town of him? Why do you think there were no takers? How does that possibly add up for you?

Lol - my argument is he is not beyond repair not that there are issues with Tom, clearly there are, I was open to trading him. James keeps on with his 'who and who isnt in the know' stuff and spruiking the deep dark secrets line, and altered a post of mine on his perputual quest, so in return, my response was about him not being beyond repair and.. that until confirmed or someone writes a book, we should not read into the 'smoke theres fire' rationale, when considering if he can turn it around. It was bad enough to put him up for trade, its not bad enough for us to support him now, what we going to boo him?
 
I thought it was 'on record' that the club was looking to trade him, not people on BigFooty.

Yeah am I disputing there's issues? My first post mentioned he will learn a lot, i am saying nothing has stuck bad enough that he cant turn it around, can you argue otherwise?
 
Yeah am I disputing there's issues? My first post mentioned he will learn a lot, i am saying nothing has stuck bad enough that he cant turn it around, can you argue otherwise?

I'm not really looking for an argument, but I would say that he hasn't had the chance to turn it around and that you don't know what the issues surrounding him are, so it's hard to say.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yeah am I disputing there's issues? My first post mentioned he will learn a lot, i am saying nothing has stuck bad enough that he cant turn it around, can you argue otherwise?

The club wasn't keen on giving him another chance.
 
Lol - my argument is he is not beyond repair not that there are issues with Tom, clearly there are, I was open to trading him. James keeps on with his 'who and who isnt in the know' stuff and spruiking the deep dark secrets line, and altered a post of mine on his perputual quest, so in return, my response was about him not being beyond repair and.. that until confirmed or someone writes a book, we should not read into the 'smoke theres fire' rationale, when considering if he can turn it around. It was bad enough to put him up for trade, its not bad enough for us to support him now, what we going to boo him?
But you actually said:

On record, bar a tweet, he's done nothing, he can turn it around.
Implying that because only one thing is really 'public', that any behaviour that isn't publically known can be turned around. I'm not even sure how to go about arguing with you on that point.

Your methods of argument involve selecting only the words or pieces of evidence that support your argument from post to post. To be honest I don't even know what your ulterior motive is in continuing to argue against any of the points raised except that maybe you had nailed your flag to a mast early on and now it would make you feel uncomfortable to admit that some others may have an idea of what's going on.
 
I'm not really looking for an argument, but I would say that he hasn't had the chance to turn it around and that you don't know what the issues surrounding him are, so it's hard to say.

My inital post was fairly gentle, you do want an argument, you sought out the post for some reason, not sure what you want me to say? - he may or may not turn it around, and I am not privvy to the secrets.. will that end this convo?
 
But you actually said:


Implying that because only one thing is really 'public', that any behaviour that isn't publically known can be turned around. I'm not even sure how to go about arguing with you on that point.

Your methods of argument involve selecting only the words or pieces of evidence that support your argument from post to post. To be honest I don't even know what your ulterior motive is in continuing to argue against any of the points raised except that maybe you had nailed your flag to a mast early on and now it would make you feel uncomfortable to admit that some others may have an idea of what's going on.

Narr that last line meant, on record, meaning.. his slate.. his cred.. his currency.. his profile.. is not beyond repair. Fev was beyond repair, he is not. I have noted so many times that I believe there to be issues surrounding Tom.

Funnily enough, in your inital post you did exactly what you just accused me of, selected one part of a discussion and came at me about some big picture stuff that I wasn't even focusing on.

I believe I raised and agreed with several points about Tom along the way, my issue has been some of the language, not even sure why we are arguing.. my inital post was pretty cordial.
 
My inital post was fairly gentle, you do want an argument, you sought out the post for some reason, not sure what you want me to say? - he may or may not turn it around, and I am not privvy to the secrets.. will that end this convo?

I was contributing to a discussion at a time I was on the board. If I reply to a post of yours from hours ago, then I have sought out your post. At that time, please terminate my account.
 
2017 could be a huge year from Rocky. Had a bit of a wake up call regarding his professionalism and might put in the hard yards now to impress the FagNob.

Hope he turns it around, wins his teammates support and pulls out another AA standard year.
 
I'm not disappointed. Having some authority at he club is a good feeling because Tom is clearly a very good player and it would have been a big loss on field for next year. If we go relatively injury free and finally getting Beams on the field we can see Rocky head to the forward line and dominate 1 on 1's. I get memories of him destroying Jack Grimes a few years ago and that's what I'm getting excited about. Captaincy I don't think so. Pretty sure it was discussed in that Melbourne meeting that he would not be continuing as skipper.

And some of the personal attacks on him on social media is disappointing, as much as some people don't like it he's still a lion.
 
I will feel better about the rocky stituation when he speaks publicly. Imo, i think he should have come out straight after the presser and posted his own message of good will towards the club. Neither party got what they wanted here, but the longer he waits to speak publicly, the more people (like myself) question his willingness to play nice. It wasnt just the club shopping him, he had been trying to get a substantial pay rise from anyone willing. So now he has to man up, as the club has done.
 
2017 could be a huge year from Rocky. Had a bit of a wake up call regarding his professionalism and might put in the hard yards now to impress the FagNob.

Hope he turns it around, wins his teammates support and pulls out another AA standard year.

not to impress fagnob but the entire footy industry enough to get the contract his playing skills are worth next off season.

I think given the near complete broom put through the organisation off field this summer there is some possibility the club would want him to remain after next season despite clearly wanting him out the door this season.

but regardless of that - rocky will want that $500-$800k contract next season and to get that he needs to pretty much be AA extended squad.

On the flip side if he does the same things as implied from previous seasons the club is probably at a point where with the strength of fagnob in charge they'd be happy to drop him to the NEAFL and let him suck it up at that level until the professionalism in all aspects of off field improves.
 
Back
Top