Player Watch Welcome to Port Adelaide Joe Richards

[Chewy316]

These things have a way of getting out though Chewy... Maybe not today or tomorrow but they come out.

I pot the club often because it deserves it often but also think I can see other sides of issues.

Surely we wouldn't be that dickish would we?.

Sounds like you are saying we are.

It's not about being "dickish" as you put it - but the Club would never go to the family in the first place if their intention wasn't to use that number going forward.

So when you reverse engineer things from that perspective, it's easy to see how it would have played out. I have no doubt the Club would not have used the number if the family objected strongly, but I also don't think the situation would have played out in such a way that a proper discussion was had.

Again, if there was no intention on the Club's behalf to use said number, there would be no reason to initiate that conversation with the family in the first place.

 

[RossFC]

 

[Lagooner]

It's not about being "dickish" as you put it - but the Club would never go to the family in the first place if their intention wasn't to use that number going forward.

So when you reverse engineer things from that perspective, it's easy to see how it would have played out. I have no doubt the Club would not have used the number if the family objected strongly, but I also don't think the situation would have played out in such a way that a proper discussion was had.

Again, if there was no intention on the Club's behalf to use said number, there would be no reason to initiate that conversation with the family in the first place.

Yes asking for something you want is generally the first step in getting it. Groundbreaking stuff. I just don’t know why you have it in your head that the Club had neither the time nor respect to ask the family properly.

I mean by your own admission the Club wouldn’t have used it if the family were strongly opposed to the idea. Sounds dangerously close to consultation!

 

[Lefti93]

That answer at the end was quality.

 

[Relativity]

Who the feck was asking the questions? Was that Rootchie?
"Was the change of lifestyle part of your decision to come over here?"
Really?
Fmd.

 

[Scodges]

I would have thought that number would go to an actual established player, that’s proven to be pretty good & or worthy.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Tibbs]

It's not about being "dickish" as you put it - but the Club would never go to the family in the first place if their intention wasn't to use that number going forward.

So when you reverse engineer things from that perspective, it's easy to see how it would have played out. I have no doubt the Club would not have used the number if the family objected strongly, but I also don't think the situation would have played out in such a way that a proper discussion was had.

Again, if there was no intention on the Club's behalf to use said number, there would be no reason to initiate that conversation with the family in the first place.

You are being a bit anal over this IMO. Of course they would say "We are interested in using the number again ... Thinking of giving it to a mature-age ex-Magpie player, but want to get the family's views and approval first."

And yes, 12 years on, the family no doubt agreed to it. Coerced, strong-armed? I doubt it - I imagine if they said "Not yet, too early for the family," we would have readily acquiesced.

I am not a fan of this current admin, but i disagree with your take on this!

 

[Chewy316]

You are being a bit anal over this IMO. Of course they would say "We are interested in using the number again ... Thinking of giving it to a mature-age ex-Magpie player, but want to get the family's views and approval first."

And yes, 12 years on, the family no doubt agreed to it. Coerced, strong-armed? I doubt it - I imagine if they said "Not yet, too early for the family," we would have readily acquiesced.

I am not a fan of this current admin, but i disagree with your take on this!

I don't think the club would have strong armed anyone, and anyone who has read my posts and drawn that conclusion have misinterpreted what I've said.

I do think there's an art of persuasion and the use of language would have been done in such a way to engineer their preferred outcome.

My personal opinion is that they should have left the number vacant as a simple sign of respect in conjunction with what the prison bar #35 has represented each week for the AFL team over the last decade. Just tears away a bit more at the club's fabric imo.

 

[Scholz Supremacy]

Really spooks me that the last player to wear that number was a bloke who came over from Collingwood after only a handful of games for them, and that’s exactly who we’ve given the number too again after what happened.

 

[TeeKray]

Really spooks me that the last player to wear that number was a bloke who came over from Collingwood after only a handful of games for them, and that’s exactly who we’ve given the number too again after what happened.

He's obviously not at all superstitious.

Re the club asking the family, I agree with Chewy that if the club takes that proposition to the family it would be hard to say no (and none of us would know whether they genuinely do support it or not).

Personally it would've made more sense to me to do it when the last of his teammates retired (Boak) and preferably that it was an idea that actually came from Boak or someone else who knew John rather than some w***er like Chris Davies or whoever it was who put forward the idea.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

That answer at the end was quality.

9 news showed that bit

 

[El_Scorcho]

He's obviously not at all superstitious.

Re the club asking the family, I agree with Chewy that if the club takes that proposition to the family it would be hard to say no (and none of us would know whether they genuinely do support it or not).

Personally it would've made more sense to me to do it when the last of his teammates retired (Boak) and preferably that it was an idea that actually came from Boak or someone else who knew John rather than some w***er like Chris Davies or whoever it was who put forward the idea.

I assumed we were waiting for his last teammate to retire.

I like the idea of bringing it back though. It's time. The 12 year tribute was just about perfect to me. I think asking the family is a reasonable and respectful thing to do.

 

[Scholz Supremacy]

He's obviously not at all superstitious.

Re the club asking the family, I agree with Chewy that if the club takes that proposition to the family it would be hard to say no (and none of us would know whether they genuinely do support it or not).

Personally it would've made more sense to me to do it when the last of his teammates retired (Boak) and preferably that it was an idea that actually came from Boak or someone else who knew John rather than some w***er like Chris Davies or whoever it was who put forward the idea.

Sorry to go down this path, but I'm being reminded of the group of players that played a small handful of games for Fremantle (Colin Sylvia, Shane Yarran, Harley Balic, Cam McCarthy)

 

[Willsy10]

Sorry to go down this path, but I'm being reminded of the group of players that played a small handful of games for Fremantle (Colin Sylvia, Shane Yarran, Harley Balic, Cam McCarthy)

It’s just a guernsey number.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[TazD]

It’s just a guernsey number.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

How'd you get that 10 in your name?

 

[Willsy10]

Was an old footy number, but I had several different footy numbers, never really understood the string attachment to numbers, let alone trying to correlate a number on a guernsey with life or death.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Hopam002]

Will be good to see the 35.

 

[RossFC]

 

[Ralph Lorenz]

I haven't bought a guernsey in a while but I'll get one this year to don the 35

 

[EskimoPAFC]

I think there is no better way to honour JMac than to bring the number back. Glad we are doing it and hope Joe1 appreciates the importance of it and does it proud.

 

[jac147]

I think there is no better way to honour JMac than to bring the number back. Glad we are doing it and hope Joe1 appreciates the importance of it and does it proud.

I’m sure he does. Yes it will be great to see #35 out there again and it was just the right time to get that number out of retirement and give it to a Collingwood recruit.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

I’m sure he does. Yes it will be great to see #35 out there again and it was just the right time to get that number out of retirement and give it to a Collingwood recruit.

Is the only thing that makes it the right time to un-retire #35 that Joe Richards was traded?

 

[Janey]

Is the only thing that makes it the right time to un-retire #35 that Joe Richards was traded?

I'm guessing that it could have been un-retired earlier, but they probably wanted there to be some significance to the timing, so going to an ex-Collingwood player gave it that.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Is the only thing that makes it the right time to un-retire #35 that Joe Richards was traded?

And 12 years being a commemoration of 2012.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

Unretiring a number is such a rare occurrence.

Doing it without significant reason cheapens the decision to retire it in the first place.

To do it because someone was traded from the same club as the player whose number was retired or after an arbitrary amount of time is strange.