List Mgmt. Ty Vickery - Tigers decided not to match the deal. Richmond receives Pick 26

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Dunno how this restricted/ unrestricted works. Since the hawks always pay unders can we match there low offer thus forcing them to up the ante or trade? We should make plays for hartung, ltherland, Langford or Blake Hardwick? Everyone's trying to raid gws we should be original and plunder the best who have plenty of frustrated disgruntled fringe players who aren't getting opportunities or decent money. I'm sure hartung is equally as frustrated as Lennon missing out on finals. Membrey cracked it when goodes went another year and what a pickup.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dunno how this restricted/ unrestricted works. Since the hawks always pay unders can we match there low offer thus forcing them to up the ante or trade? We should make plays for hartung, ltherland, Langford or Blake Hardwick? Everyone's trying to raid gws we should be original and plunder the best who have plenty of frustrated disgruntled fringe players who aren't getting opportunities or decent money. I'm sure hartung is equally as frustrated as Lennon missing out on finals. Membrey cracked it when goodes went another year and what a pickup.
If a club matches a RFA offer then they are with it, if the player agrees to stay. If the player doesn't agree, then he can then engage clubs with a trade. Clubs cant match an offer, then ask for a trade, but they can threaten to match it thus getting a better offer. This is what happened with danger and the cats. This is what I think is the regs for free agents.
 
Got this article of Beveridge on Talking Footy.At the 2:30 mark the dropping and handling of Jake Stringer surfaces.
I got this wrong as i believed they were just resting him for the finals,but Beveridge clearly states two major factors.
1 They didn't want to compromise the integrity of the match committee
2 Every play is treated equally

If our club had of handled TV early in his career with the same beliefs and standards the consequences may have been different

This interview shows the difference between a coach and a caretaker.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/video/2016-09-13/beveridge-talks-finals-on-talking-footy
 
Got this article of Beveridge on Talking Footy.At the 2:30 mark the dropping and handling of Jake Stringer surfaces.
I got this wrong as i believed they were just resting him for the finals,but Beveridge clearly states two major factors.
1 They didn't want to compromise the integrity of the match committee
2 Every play is treated equally

If our club had of handled TV early in his career with the same beliefs and standards the consequences may have been different

This interview shows the difference between a coach and a caretaker.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/video/2016-09-13/beveridge-talks-finals-on-talking-footy

Hawthorn didn't drop Luke Hodge when he was done for drink-driving. So maybe they have different rules for different players. Works ok for them. Their coach is going alright I think.

However on the Ty stuff. I can't believe he wasn't dropped. However I come from a built in mindset of differentiation. Horses for courses. Not sure it should apply to football clubs with selection but some players clearly respond to the carrot, others to the stick.
 
Hawthorn didn't drop Luke Hodge when he was done for drink-driving. So maybe they have different rules for different players. Works ok for them. Their coach is going alright I think.

However on the Ty stuff. I can't believe he wasn't dropped. However I come from a built in mindset of differentiation. Horses for courses. Not sure it should apply to football clubs with selection but some players clearly respond to the carrot, others to the stick.
Hodge wasn't based on performance . He did do some community work on alcohol as a token punishment. I think comparing our standards to Hawthorns is a bit of a giggle PC. Clarko and the team have no issues with dropping under performers.
Our standards are poor under DH and blokes just rock up knowing they will get a game even if they take the day off. TV is just one example of many. Our list is not competitive within which makes it impossible to be competitive on the field.
Seven years going onto eight............. Sigh
 
Last edited:
Hawthorn didn't drop Luke Hodge when he was done for drink-driving. So maybe they have different rules for different players. Works ok for them. Their coach is going alright I think.

However on the Ty stuff. I can't believe he wasn't dropped. However I come from a built in mindset of differentiation. Horses for courses. Not sure it should apply to football clubs with selection but some players clearly respond to the carrot, others to the stick.

Hodge is a good bloke though

You don't fine/suspend good blokes
 
Hodge is a good bloke though

You don't fine/suspend good blokes
Great response and I'm glad you raised it , but TV is a good bloke at PRO. What does Hodge off field behaviour have to do with his leadership courage and ability on the field? If TV could perform as much as Hodge's big toe we would have half a player.
 
Great response and I'm glad you raised it , but TV is a good bloke at PRO. What does Hodge off field behaviour have to do with his leadership courage and ability on the field? If TV could perform as much as Hodge's big toe we would have half a player.

Agreed but what does that have to do with him being dropped?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top