Page 186 of 271
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:07 pm
by Deja Vu
magpieazza wrote:ClokingDevice wrote:magpieazza wrote:
If he goes he goes, just let it be, as long as we get compensated properly ( two first round picks at least ) and if for some stupendous reason we don't get two first rounders , we can't blame Travis for that anyway.
Oh we aren't getting 2 compensation picks, the AFL has already come out and said that, it will be one late 1st round draft pick
What was the Judd trade, correct me if I'm wrong. Kennedy, a first rounder and some other pick. I could live with that, if that was the trade.
He is a free agent. He does not need to be traded to leave. The team he goes to gives us jack squat. Compensation will come from the AFL in the form of a late first round pick or pick directly after our first pick, but only if we have not replaced Travis with a free agent of similar standing/value.
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:53 pm
by ClokingDevice
magpieazza wrote:ClokingDevice wrote:magpieazza wrote:
If he goes he goes, just let it be, as long as we get compensated properly ( two first round picks at least ) and if for some stupendous reason we don't get two first rounders , we can't blame Travis for that anyway.
Oh we aren't getting 2 compensation picks, the AFL has already come out and said that, it will be one late 1st round draft pick
What was the Judd trade, correct me if I'm wrong. Kennedy, a first rounder and some other pick. I could live with that, if that was the trade.
Kennedy, pick 3 and pick 20
But the AFL has come out and said it will be far less than even the Ablett compensation and that it will only be one pick.. so it will be 1 late first rounder.. that's it
And if they hadn't changed the f*cking veterans rule we could have back ended the last few years of his contract and got it done comfortably
Once again the footy gods have bent us over
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:00 pm
by Pies4shaw
The AFL has also indicated that it will be "net" compensation, so if, eg, one loses a big player and lands a big player, the compensation (if any) will be based upon the difference in quality between the player lost and the player gained. At least so far as I can tell, they haven't (yet) suggested that it works in reverse if you get a better player than you lose (or get a player and don't lose any).
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:09 pm
by magpieazza
Deja Vu wrote:magpieazza wrote:ClokingDevice wrote:
Oh we aren't getting 2 compensation picks, the AFL has already come out and said that, it will be one late 1st round draft pick
What was the Judd trade, correct me if I'm wrong. Kennedy, a first rounder and some other pick. I could live with that, if that was the trade.
He is a free agent. He does not need to be traded to leave. The team he goes to gives us jack squat. Compensation will come from the AFL in the form of a late first round pick or pick directly after our first pick, but only if we have not replaced Travis with a free agent of similar standing/value.
Ok thanks for clearing that up. We have to hope we get someone of equal standing and Travis stands next to or above a Petrie or a Riewoldt or a Kennedy or a 25 year old Pavlich. Cloke is a serious talent and if the AFL doesn't compensate adequately it will cause a storm, (in my teacup anyway).
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:22 pm
by Brenny
DaVe86 wrote:Yeah I think there are a number of factors surrounding Cloke's form.
1. He does not have Dawes and Leigh Brown as a buffer anymore. Dawes has been poor and often required in the ruck. Cloke's only help at times has been Goldsack and he is far from an aggressor.
2. Delivery has been poor. Our footskills have been atrocious over the last month.
3. Ball movement has been slow. Sides are getting back quicker and crowding his space. Cloke has still been decent when he has been able to compete one on one.
I know Thompson beat him a few times last week...but in all those situations the kick favoured the defender.
Regardless, he has still been out of form. His contract negotiations aren't helping. It probably wasn't a factor at the start...but now with all the media speculation it is surely having an impact just because of the perception. I think he is feeling the pressure and every week he doesn't perform it is building. He will be a better player once this is behind him.
I actually think if he leaves for big money he will continue to struggle because the attention on him will be even bigger. He will need to justify his wage.
At least if he stays at Collingwood for a lower salary, he will be considered a loyal player and the pressure will be off.
Look at 2010.
He kicked 38 goals in his 'yips' year.
Dawes kicked 30
Didak kicked 41
Heaps of players kicked others
Cloke had support then. 2011 he had a few players, as you mentioned, but this year he has had nobody.
As you said he is out of form, agreed, and I do agree with the other points too.
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:38 pm
by TimetoFly
Gawn to the scum.... All Done and dusted now from what I have heard today
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:44 pm
by Adz
TimetoFly wrote:Gawn to the scum.... All Done and dusted now from what I have heard today
From whom?
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:46 pm
by Deja Vu
Well it can't be done and dusted as that would be in breach of AFL regulations wouldn't it?
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:54 pm
by Pa Marmo
Adz wrote:TimetoFly wrote:Gawn to the scum.... All Done and dusted now from what I have heard today
From whom?
Yeah, c'mon time to fly, it's time to put up or shut up.
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:56 pm
by eddiesmith
So funny, I guess the hope is you post the same rumour so many times people start to believe it as fact when it is all bullshit
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:15 pm
by Deja Vu
Deja Vu wrote:Well it can't be done and dusted as that would be in breach of AFL regulations wouldn't it?
I just realised the fine for breaching this rule is 100K.
Is there anyone out there that would be upset at the Pies for paying a 100K fine if it meant signing Buddy Franklin in May next year to a multi-year, multi-million dollar deal.
Talk about a slap on the wrist.
Surely contravening this regulation should result in the offending club being banned from signing the player?
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:19 pm
by Piesnchess
ONLY Travis knows if Travis is staying, and Demir naturally. !
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:28 pm
by ClokingDevice
Piesnchess wrote:ONLY Travis knows if Travis is staying, and Demir naturally. !
The club and players are acting as if they know
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:44 pm
by Nick - Pie Man
Deja Vu wrote:Surely contravening this regulation should result in the offending club being banned from signing the player?
Yeah, at least that. Take away a couple of draft picks too for good measure.
$100k wouldn't hurt a club like ours. It rains money at the Lexus Centre
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:46 pm
by Nash Rising
ClokingDevice wrote:Piesnchess wrote:ONLY Travis knows if Travis is staying, and Demir naturally. !
The club and players are acting as if they know
But I bet you don't have any real (as opposed to imagined) examples