Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Everyone needs to accept we don't really know anything except that Trav isn't playing well, ATM. And he's not alone there. We will only know if he's staying or going at the end of the year. Anyone can claim anything they like but I won't believe any of the rumours until confirmed by the club, or Trav himself.

All I really want is for Trav (and others) to find form and win the grand final. After that, I really don't care what happens.

roar wrote:Everyone needs to accept we don't really know anything except that Trav isn't playing well, ATM. And he's not alone there. We will only know if he's staying or going at the end of the year. Anyone can claim anything they like but I won't believe any of the rumours until confirmed by the club, or Trav himself.

Fair enough. However, it's fair to say that The Club has made an offer in an effort to secure the services of Travis Cloke beyond 2012 and that has been rejected.

Dave The Man wrote:I think if they do that we don't get Composted for Cloke walking

Its what is in the compost that matters Dave.

I am not sure the last offer was ever rejected. I think we just called time on it. To try and assist Travis with his form, this year.

ANNODAM wrote:I don't get this.

So just because the Club have called off negotiations, what makes people think he's gone?

I think Travis will stay, FWIW.

I think Travis has informed the club he is going. The AFL culture doesnt allow us to make that public, and we need him. So the club says "we are putting negotiations on hold till the end of the season".

Why don't we go for Travis Boak instead?

John Wren wrote:

nulla wrote:We are talking about a father who has advised his son that there is 1.5 million more over five years on offer.

Would you as a father advise not to negotiate with Collingwood or state they will need to come close to the other offers or stitch up something long term post football.

Ablett, Judd and Scully all went for the money... ask them did they make a bad decision?

I am all for Cloke staying and think that he will.... but if my manager was pushing me into a corner and telling me that I should ignore an extra 1.5 million over five years I would sack him.

how can anyone begrudge someone for looking out for his kid? also, given that cloke is a professional footballer who has earned a golden ticket, how can anyone begrudge him from getting the most out of his situation?

i am not privvy to anything the club or the cloke party has said. i find it incredible and somewhat staggering how so many seem so informed and can happily put forward their views (character assassinations more often than not) in such a forthright manner.

i don't get it.

NO one begrudges a NORMAL father looking after his kids best interests, I have often advised my own kids on career choices, but I dont push it on them. Old man Cloke seems a control freak, and is not your normal type Dad, just a domineering type with massive ego to boot. His boy has been offered an excellent and fantastic deal by the Pies -see figures above-yet he still wants to play hardball and drag this out. Does he really THINK his son, who averages 1-2 goals a game, and misses that many sodas its a frigging joke, is a Superstar like Buddy ??? One day ol Daddy Cloke and his clan will learn a hard lesson, that pure greed and avarice is not good, money cant buy everything, and sometimes, sometimes, you must BACK OFF and let your kids make their own decisions. All hes doing is ruining his boys footy career, for the allmighty buck. Pure and simple, its all bout greed is good.

Pie 65 wrote:Seems there are different opinions of what exactly happened and it will end up, one person's word against another person's word. And most of it is contradictory. But you must know something else...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/demons ... 6432167209

[Evidence given during this week's committal hearing has been contradictory.

The woman Jurrah allegedly assaulted did not mention his name while on the witness stand, while another alleged victim said they only argued and had no physical contact.

Basil Jurrah - who claims the footballer inflicted a "skull-deep" 7cm wound with a machete - admitted to being drunk at the time.

An eye-witness, meanwhile, said Basil was so drunk that night he could only stand and hold the machete, while Jurrah was acting to defend himself.
This morning, witness James Turner claimed Basil had brought the machete to the brawl.

Jurrah, he said, was "telling people to stop fighting".

Lawyers for Walker and Fry also asked the bulk of the charges be dismissed.

Walker's lawyer said that, at arraignment, he would plead guilty to causing Basil Jurrah harm.

Steve Robson, prosecuting, withdrew one of the charges because the alleged victim did not attend court to give evidence.

The remainder of the allegations, he said, should go to trial.

oh dear, it needs to go to trial to sort it out in lay terms. Just because he said, she said doesn't give the judge the opportunity to call proof. Judge was merely working out if is should go to trial based on enough proof or concerns that we need to hear more and this will come out at the trial.

It called legal process and needs to be followed in this manner to ensure all people gain a fair opportunity of stating their version of events.

So far we have various versions of the "truth". A trial will allow these be to heard, cross examination etc . Whether Jurrah is guilty or not, the judge at trial will have the jurisdiction to call and hear all of this. I haven't read where the trial is or any other information at this stage but assume it's in NT which has a different hearing court because they come under federal law and not State, well that's how it used to be anyway. Or was it in WA? Will look further soon but as it will be an interesting case due to the tribal issues and law as well, not that this over rides but I firmly believe should have some bearing but won't.

And unlike others I would much prefer to leave my opinion on whether he 'dun it' till all the facts are known. Surely there is some issue around statement changes and motives to do so. It would not have gone to charge or trial unless they felt their was something there. But I hope the truth comes out. Issues in law where families are concerned can be most complex and hard to cut through the mustard.

I'm almost certain that eddiesmith is David Cloke.

Are they exactly the same?

Robbie wrote: I just hope you are able to make your peace with your father, and he can justify his actions to God.

bit dramatic surely...??

ha ha out of control

If old man cloke is backing his son for 5 years then why not accept the clubs contract clause that the 5th year is performance based.

If he gets to 5 years and he is ripping games apart then give him the cash if not then he doesn't deserve it. On that kind of cash you would expect him to be ripping most games apart with the occasional quiet game for the entire 5 years not the opposite which we is currently producing.

Imagine what your employer would say to you if you demanded double the salary but say I will only give you results on 1 or 2 days of the working week on average and if I am having a good week then possibly up to 4 days and the rest I will give you absolutely nothing or complete garbage.

leonmagic wrote:I'm almost certain that eddiesmith is David Cloke.

+1