#2 Jordan De Goey

[Piesnchess]

St Kilda is death valley for any player hoping to be part of a Premiership team whereas our window is just opening now. One would think his manager would explain this too him, look at Geebung, happy as larry,with a bevy of older players who just won a Flag. Premierships are priceless, surely he knows this, and he wont get one at deadbeat Saints. Just behave like any Magpie player, dont be a ratbag, like all our players , just sign it and behave, be normal, thats all he has too do. End of story.

[Damien]

Just all part of the negotiation process.

[BazBoy]

Will the club adjust the behavioural part of the clause now

[The General]

Let him go. The season has just ended and he has already made a poor decision in the off-season. Choosing to go to Vegas for his end of season trip says it all.

Quickly St. Kilda, sign him up now so that any f*** up he does over there is on your books, not ours.

[scoobydoo]

Wants to get paid close to a million bucks while still reserving his right to disgrace himself and the club without sanction.

Let him go. He's not even that good.

Complete b.s
Not asking for $1 million & how do you know what Collingwood is asking of him.
So you’ll be happy with Wrighty the magician losing Grundy JDG & Henry this trade period? That won’t set Collingwood back at all.

[stui magpie]

Just all part of the negotiation process.

Agreed.

From the Age article,

De Goey told coach Craig McRae and football manager Graham Wright at his exit interview last week that he wanted to stay at the club but would not sign the new five-year contract offer with the existing behaviour clauses.

His manager Ryan Vague reaffirmed that position with Wright on Sunday and Monday. De Goey has agreed to some extra clauses in a new contract but believes the clauses Collingwood wants are too broad and arbitrary.

So that's not saying he won't accept behavioural clauses, sounds like he already has, but doesn't like some of the others.

So the negotiation starts with the wording of clauses.

Also in the article,

Collingwood could also theoretically exercise their right, under restricted free agency, to match St Kilda’s contract offer for De Goey and force the Saints to trade for him. However, doing so would most likely mean matching St Kilda’s contract terms without the sort of behavioural clauses that have been a stumbling block with Collingwood.

If Collingwood matched a contract offer without those terms, De Goey would be prepared to stay anyway.

Over to you Collingwood

[MJ23]

I wanted to keep Degoey and Grundy.
I accepted the fact Grundy is gone and we keep Degoey. I beleive the contract on offer has triggers in just the first 2 yrs that are easily met and even in those years would have him on significant dollars.
And still he wont sign.......

I say move him. Im sick of players holding the club to ransom when we have just seen a Club win a flag with players on less because they want success and want to be there.

Keep Grundy.
Trade for Macstay - anything above 2nd round is a win with FA compensation for Degoey.
Bring all the players in we are expecting.
Henry for a first.
The late first will go in trade for Mitchell - whp I think we need to help until the kids come on - hew will be a great clearance mentor.

Should leave us with a couple of picks under 20 and some great role players.

Then Id have someone buy drinks for Degoey every time I saw him out...........

[BazBoy]

[sherrife]

Wants to get paid close to a million bucks while still reserving his right to disgrace himself and the club without sanction.

Let him go. He's not even that good.

Complete b.s
Not asking for $1 million & how do you know what Collingwood is asking of him.
So you’ll be happy with Wrighty the magician losing Grundy JDG & Henry this trade period? That won’t set Collingwood back at all.

I presume they're asking him not to get arrested and charged with violent, anti-social crimes, refrain from aggressively groping women in public, and other such minimal standards. Adhering to basic social protocols shouldn't be much to expect of a man on close to 1 million bucks. (850k is quite close to a million, I would say).

But even if he would sign, we should let him walk. He's not much chop, and he's a total d*ck.

[stui magpie]

^@Sherrife

They don't need those clauses, all that is covered under the AFL rules.

If I was Jordy, given recent events, I'd be concerned that overly broad and non-specific clause would give the club the ability to terminate the contract for something minor if they decided to do a salary dump and get my salary off the books if I lost form or they got other options. I'd want to make sure if I got sacked it was for something serious, which the AFL rules already covers.

[Deja Vu]

The standard AFL contract contains behavioural clauses. There is zero need to have additional ones in there. What do St Kilda do at their club that they’d be prepared to take the risk? Clubs back their culture to turn around recidivists, why would we be any different?

Clubs have shown time and time again that they can’t be trusted when it comes to dishing out punishment for off field discretions. That’s the AFL’s job, just like they deal with on field discretions through the MRP and Tribunal.

If the off field incident is egregious the league will deal with it. Everything else is just jumping at shadows unnecessarily.

Remove the clauses and let’s just get on with it. If we let him walk we may as well reassess where we’re at as a team. We shipped Treloar so we could ease the cap pressure and retain our free agents in Moore and JDG. Losing him now is a massive fail (salary cap) followed by another fail (list management)

[23 YIPPEE!!!]

What will Collingwood get back in return for JDG

[September Zeros]

There’s a lot of hair triggers being pulled here and certainly the guns going off half cocked to match it. Can we hold back our aggression a little?

I think if there was a psychologist in the room there’d be a flood of mirrored frustration and control issues being diagnosed.

Can Jordy not maintain the right to have some of the finer points clarified in the behavioural clauses?

Sound like he accepts them by and large and just needs some clarification. It is after all his livelihood.

I like Jordy, I think he will stay

[lazzadesilva]

But even if he would sign, we should let him walk. He's not much chop, and he's a total d*ck.

Okay so you are happy to let a player who has problems conforming to the clubs demands and rules leave. I remember Phil Carman being a dick and being let go. We didn’t win a flag for years after that. We can’t do both. Either we let him go and bring another team closer to ultimate success or we manage the situation as best as we can and hope his behaviour is acceptable. The reality is that if we let him go, our premiership window will be much smaller and all the achievements this year will be wasted. I want to know how Bruz is doing trying to curb JDG’s dick behaviours and if Craig McRae is still talking to him about this stuff. If the club decides that enough is enough, so be it but we should accept that it will delay any dreams of a flag for a while.

[Mr Miyagi]

I understand Jordy’s pride. He did nothing wrong in Bali but with the new contract he would lose a lot of money. This clause shouldn’t be public either, now every flog will be trying to set him up (like the honey trap Ginnivan got caught in recently).

On the flip side, Geelong players today announced individual sacrifice in exchange for team success. Could argue they’re getting money elsewhere on the sly, but shows why Jordan could be traded.