Miller Time (Herald-Sun)

[one-eyed]

MILLER TIME
Jon Ralph - The Buzz
Herald-Sun
Thursday, September 8, 2011

Richmond's recruitment of Brad Miller, Shaun Grigg, and Bachar Houli this year can only be deemed an unqualified success.

The Tigers seem certain to take Adelaide ruckman Ivan Maric, but are unlikely to make any controversial delistings.

Shane Tuck will sign on for another year, while Miller is a chance to play on.

The club will wait to gauge his interest in playing on, with a role as a development coach also a distinct possibility.

Like most clubs the Tigers will wait until after their best-and-fairest award and maybe even the trade period to announce their delistings.

Don't expect many surprises, with Richmond keen to build their talent rather than trade it off.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/the-real-story-behind-why-brendan-fevola-wont-be-back-at-carlton/story-fn6cisdj-1226131808708

[10 FLAGS]

I can see a supporter revolt if the likes of Jackson and co. are still on the list by the end of the trade period. A membership boycott could be on the cards.

[Hellenic Tiger]

I can see a supporter revolt if the likes of Jackson and co. are still on the list by the end of the trade period. A membership boycott could be on the cards.

I like you 10F hope that Jako is gone by October 31.
TBH I think what he is demanding on his new contract won't be fulfilled by the club and if his last 10 minutes on Sunday are anything to go by then he'd be lucky to be retained for a packet of twisties.

[WilliamPowell]

The Tigers seem certain to take Adelaide ruckman Ivan Maric, but are unlikely to make any controversial delistings.

Yep the controversy will come from who ends up staying i reckon 

[Coach]

What is a controversial delisting? Our club is full of spuds, some young blokes and a few good players. Delisting a spud is never controversial...even if it upsets a few coteries

[WilliamPowell]

What is a controversial delisting? Our club is full of spuds, some young blokes and a few good players. Delisting a spud is never controversial...even if it upsets a few coteries

Problem is the ones we think are "spuds" are usually the ones the media think are our better players eg Jackson or Connors...

De-list those types fans are happy experts call it controversial

And stop knocking coterie members ... I am one of those and darn good one too   

 

[Coach]

I miss the days when coteries were part time list managers

[WilliamPowell]

I miss the days when coteries were part time list managers

If I was a list manager there would be some "controversial de-listings" 

[Hellenic Tiger]

What is a controversial delisting? Our club is full of spuds, some young blokes and a few good players. Delisting a spud is never controversial...even if it upsets a few coteries

Problem is the ones we think are "spuds" are usually the ones the media think are our better players eg Jackson or Connors...

De-list those types fans are happy experts call it controversial

And stop knocking coterie members ... I am one of those and darn good one too   

 

Has to happen WP otherwise we will never be better than a bottom half of the table side.
Jackson got a fair serve this week post match throughout the media. I'm hoping his papers are stamped. Connors too. 20 games in five seasons is nowhere near good enough.

[WilliamPowell]

Has to happen WP otherwise we will never be better than a bottom half of the table side.
Jackson got a fair serve this week post match throughout the media. I'm hoping his papers are stamped. Connors too. 20 games in five seasons is nowhere near good enough.

Agree with you Tucker

Point I was trying to make was:

We (fans) see a "spud" get de-listed and think it's great

The media seem to see some of "spuds" as our better players so if they were to be de-listed they'd call it "controversial"

[Hellenic Tiger]

Has to happen WP otherwise we will never be better than a bottom half of the table side.
Jackson got a fair serve this week post match throughout the media. I'm hoping his papers are stamped. Connors too. 20 games in five seasons is nowhere near good enough.

Agree with you Tucker

Point I was trying to make was:

We (fans) see a "spud" get de-listed and think it's great

The media seem to see some of "spuds" as our better players so if they were to be de-listed they'd call it "controversial"

I know WP what you meant.
Always making it worse than what it is. Let them in this case maybe some silly club might see through it and pick one of these spuds up.

[Loui Tufga]

Unfortunately this is not the year to be making wholesale list cuts As I have wrote before I very much doubt if we will delist anyone who is under contract leaving very little that is actually out of contract.
The big one really is Jackson, out of contract this season and you would imagine he would be chasing at least a new 3 year deal. We would be mad to offer him any more than one so in theory the best option is to try and h=get a trade done if we can.
I would be furious if the club offered him a contract that exceeds next season.....

[Jackstar is back again]

I miss the days when coteries were part time list managers

If I was a list manager there would be some "controversial de-listings" 

I would delist 20.

[Loui Tufga]

I miss the days when coteries were part time list managers

If I was a list manager there would be some "controversial de-listings" 

I would delist 20.

Agree but would you do it this season or hang out till next

[Jackstar is back again]

you already know they cant play.
We dont have a magic wand to wave and turn them into champions.