 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Woods Of Ypres
Joined: 27 May 2003
Location: Yugoslavia
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| would make more sense if both were good, established players, but one is a fringe midfielder, the other still developing KPP. wasting two spots on the list next year for these two?? stupid. |
|
|
|
 |
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Woods Of Ypres wrote: | | would make more sense if both were good, established players, but one is a fringe midfielder, the other still developing KPP. wasting two spots on the list next year for these two?? stupid. |
Keefe is a very promising defender, 200cm and good skills, exactly the type we're lacking.
_________________
Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
|
Woods Of Ypres
Joined: 27 May 2003
Location: Yugoslavia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Defender wrote: | | Woods Of Ypres wrote: | | would make more sense if both were good, established players, but one is a fringe midfielder, the other still developing KPP. wasting two spots on the list next year for these two?? stupid. |
Keefe is a very promising defender, 200cm and good skills, exactly the type we're lacking. |
Keefe is the only one worth keeping imo.
If we keep Thomas it will be a goodwill gesture, and a wasteful one. |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
why is it a mistake?
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'd be happy with putting them on the rookie list this year.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | On the contrary, I think that's fantastic news. Perhaps the "side by side" motto is something the club takes seriously after all. |
If they put the effort in, the study by Keeffe for example, I agree. But nit if they just cruise it. Until draft time, I'd want to see them give back, and I mean A LOT back.
This hurts the team, it has already, and will continue to do something. They need to realise an AFL career, with all the trappings, the fame, the fortune, the girls hanging off them. The doing something that's fun for a living, and getting well paid for it, is a privilege and not a right.
They owe the club, not the other way around.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
themonk
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | On the contrary, I think that's fantastic news. Perhaps the "side by side" motto is something the club takes seriously after all. |
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | On the contrary, I think that's fantastic news. Perhaps the "side by side" motto is something the club takes seriously after all. |
Why is it "fantastic news"? First, Pert's initial statement confirmed they were going to do this. Secondly, he acknowledged it would be a burden for the Club. Thirdly, it's good for them but nobody much else - the spin in this story is directly contrary to Pert's public remarks and it doesn't make much sense to me (the Club may have a vague wish to keep Keeffe, just, but I doubt it has any serious interest in Thomas at all). Fourthly, I want to see my football team win premierships and I am yet to be persuaded that this will help - it may make the players feel warmer and fuzzier about their environment but I don't expect that "warm and fuzzy" will translate into competitive.
In summary, this is probably something the Club feels it "has to do" and I am OK (and no more) with them doing it but I am certainly not excited by the prospect and I would be very pleased if the Bridiots drafted both of them from under our noses, instead.
These two appear to have behaved like clowns and to have placed the Club in a quite invidious position. There are all sorts of problems with the "doping" rules but, for the time being (and possibly forever), they are what they are and it is entirely beyond comprehension why these players couldn't have applied just a little more foresight. The excuses about them being "young" do not wash with me. They have both been around the football scene for much more than long-enough to appreciate the dumb risk they were taking and I find it troubling and disappointing that they don't appear to have given more weight to the impact such stupidity could have on their team-mates, the football department, the footballing aspirations of the Club and the hopes of the supporter base.
I could not care less about the AFL "brand" or the Collingwood "brand" but I sure as hell care about how the team goes on the field and it is quite inconceivable that this could improve Collingwood's performance in 2016 at all. We may be able to carry them - but that's about it. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I am not interested in the ethics or morality of drug taking, I am only interested in winning a flag. It has been a bad year for off the track issues such as Goodes, drugs etc....
Anyway, I would not be surprised if Brisbane or Gold Coast use a late pick to get Keefe and Thomas. Why wouldn't they - 2 ready made players that only have to sit out one year.
I would be surprised if they came to us through the rookie draft.
I suppose it depends on the money and whether the northern clubs would want to roll the dice.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I take Eddie and Bucks at their word on this one. They see Thomas and Keeffe as two quality young men and feel that the illicit drug taking was out of character. As Bucks said, he was very surprised to hear that these two particular players were the ones to test positive.
If we think these are the only two players on our list to have taken illicit drugs we are kidding ourselves. I think the club sees these two as very unlucky and know of other players who could easily have been in this position.
In that case, and given that they will at the very least be handy members of our list in 2017, I definitely support the decision to sign them up this year. Running two rookie spots less is a fairly minor burden.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree 
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I am all for keeping them, we have developed these lads and then what get rid of them so another club gets them when they peak ? sc$ew that! As many have said there are not too many 200cm running defenders in the league!
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | David wrote: | | On the contrary, I think that's fantastic news. Perhaps the "side by side" motto is something the club takes seriously after all. |
Why is it "fantastic news"? First, Pert's initial statement confirmed they were going to do this. Secondly, he acknowledged it would be a burden for the Club. Thirdly, it's good for them but nobody much else - the spin in this story is directly contrary to Pert's public remarks and it doesn't make much sense to me (the Club may have a vague wish to keep Keeffe, just, but I doubt it has any serious interest in Thomas at all). Fourthly, I want to see my football team win premierships and I am yet to be persuaded that this will help - it may make the players feel warmer and fuzzier about their environment but I don't expect that "warm and fuzzy" will translate into competitive.
In summary, this is probably something the Club feels it "has to do" and I am OK (and no more) with them doing it but I am certainly not excited by the prospect and I would be very pleased if the Bridiots drafted both of them from under our noses, instead.
These two appear to have behaved like clowns and to have placed the Club in a quite invidious position. There are all sorts of problems with the "doping" rules but, for the time being (and possibly forever), they are what they are and it is entirely beyond comprehension why these players couldn't have applied just a little more foresight. The excuses about them being "young" do not wash with me. They have both been around the football scene for much more than long-enough to appreciate the dumb risk they were taking and I find it troubling and disappointing that they don't appear to have given more weight to the impact such stupidity could have on their team-mates, the football department, the footballing aspirations of the Club and the hopes of the supporter base.
I could not care less about the AFL "brand" or the Collingwood "brand" but I sure as hell care about how the team goes on the field and it is quite inconceivable that this could improve Collingwood's performance in 2016 at all. We may be able to carry them - but that's about it. |
Perfectly put
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 3rd degree wrote: | | I am all for keeping them, we have developed these lads and then what get rid of them so another club gets them when they peak ? sc$ew that! As many have said there are not too many 200cm running defenders in the league! |
Realistically I think Thomas's body is shot, worth retaining Keeffe if he does the right thing in the interim
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | 3rd degree wrote: | | I am all for keeping them, we have developed these lads and then what get rid of them so another club gets them when they peak ? sc$ew that! As many have said there are not too many 200cm running defenders in the league! |
Realistically I think Thomas's body is shot, worth retaining Keeffe if he does the right thing in the interim |
Is this due to driving Uber Cabs?
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | David wrote: | | On the contrary, I think that's fantastic news. Perhaps the "side by side" motto is something the club takes seriously after all. |
Why is it "fantastic news"? First, Pert's initial statement confirmed they were going to do this. Secondly, he acknowledged it would be a burden for the Club. Thirdly, it's good for them but nobody much else - the spin in this story is directly contrary to Pert's public remarks and it doesn't make much sense to me (the Club may have a vague wish to keep Keeffe, just, but I doubt it has any serious interest in Thomas at all). Fourthly, I want to see my football team win premierships and I am yet to be persuaded that this will help - it may make the players feel warmer and fuzzier about their environment but I don't expect that "warm and fuzzy" will translate into competitive.
In summary, this is probably something the Club feels it "has to do" and I am OK (and no more) with them doing it but I am certainly not excited by the prospect and I would be very pleased if the Bridiots drafted both of them from under our noses, instead.
These two appear to have behaved like clowns and to have placed the Club in a quite invidious position. There are all sorts of problems with the "doping" rules but, for the time being (and possibly forever), they are what they are and it is entirely beyond comprehension why these players couldn't have applied just a little more foresight. The excuses about them being "young" do not wash with me. They have both been around the football scene for much more than long-enough to appreciate the dumb risk they were taking and I find it troubling and disappointing that they don't appear to have given more weight to the impact such stupidity could have on their team-mates, the football department, the footballing aspirations of the Club and the hopes of the supporter base.
I could not care less about the AFL "brand" or the Collingwood "brand" but I sure as hell care about how the team goes on the field and it is quite inconceivable that this could improve Collingwood's performance in 2016 at all. We may be able to carry them - but that's about it. |
Pert's statement was a bit ambiguous - I wasn't sure whether he was referring to the 2015 or 2016 drafts, and the latter seemed more logical.
It's fantastic news precisely because it doesn't benefit the club in any obvious way. Except for one: it's a show of loyalty that will have a hugely positive impact on team morale and make all players (not just Keeffe and Thomas) more willing to give back to the club.
At the end of the day, two rookie list spots is not such a big sacrifice. The rookie list is there for second chances and long-shot projects (like the Irish and American experiments).
While you may justifiably find the concept of elite athletes taking party drugs inherently stupid, remember that the consequences here far outweighed anything they could have reasonably expected. Did you know that cocaine could contain traces of clembuterol before this story broke? I certainly didn't. The 'stupidity ' of their act doesn't even come close to matching the price that they have already paid.
Personally, I would have preferred that the club help them fight the charge. But given the political climate and WADA's big man on campus attitude, this was probably the best result they could have hoped for. As such, I commend the club for how they've responded to this.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
