Polak a rookie & Cousins PSD pick 7 - AFL rejects Tiger request [merged]

[mightytiges]

cousins over a kid

no thanks

the afl are a effin joke

 

Gourdis > Cousins
Kleme > Cousins

the afl have made their decision and now we should make ours

no to cousins

our decision should be selecting the standout player of the pre-season draft

Cousins of pre-2007 is the standout player. What about Cousins of 2008/9? 30 year old who hasn't played footy for 15 months and counting, who did his hammy in that comeback game, who is a recovering drug addict with stipulations on him that don't apply to any other AFL player even those who are on two strikes. If we had been given pick 7 then we were getting him for nothing. Now we have to decide to pick him over a kid. Now this kid could end up a dud who doesn't last 2 years anyway or he could be the next Foley for all we know and ends up having a 10 year career. I think some supporters especially those ringing up SEN threatening to rip up their memberships   think Cousins is a 99% chance of being the player he was 2-3 years ago for us next year.

[mightytiges]

lol, even poor old Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls couldn't escape a sledge from a Tiger supporter on SEN!   

I heard that too - "Do we want Cousins or JON in the middle next year!"
 

The fact that the RFC are having an extraordinary board meeting tonight, to me, indicates they will take Cousins at Pick 6

Rhett Bartlett
www.rhettrospective.com

Cheers for that Rhett. Do you know if this EBM was pre-planned or organised since the AFL refused our request?

[torch]

ROFL! sorry people!

[wayne]

In hindsight, Richmond should have approached the AFL and asked if we could 'reactivate' a delisted player in light of news that Graham Polak's rehabilitation has stalled and would spend all of 2009 on the LTIL.

[mightytiges]

The excuse that Polak's situation differs to Rama's still doesn't stack up to me. Essendon could have given Rama another contract instead as when they were given permission to move Rama onto the rookie list they pulled that swifty drafting Mal Michael in the PSD after Michael had "retired" from Brisbane. Likewise we could have been callous and ruthless and paid Polak out of the last year of his contract to free up a senior list spot and washed our hands of him. Is that what we want  . Both players suffered from exceptional circumstances that affected their health greatly and their club is a player down whether that player was contracted or not at Oct 31.

[Francois Jackson]

The excuse that Polak's situation differs to Rama's still doesn't stack up to me. Essendon could have given Rama another contract instead as when they were given permission to move Rama onto the rookie list they pulled that swifty drafting Mal Michael in the PSD after Michael had "retired" from Brisbane. Likewise we could have been callous and ruthless and paid Polak out of the last year of his contract to free up a senior list spot and washed our hands of him. Is that what we want  . Both players suffered from exceptional circumstances that affected their health greatly and their club is a player down whether that player was contracted or not at Oct 31.

You know MT I have seriously had a gutfall of Andy the silly stuff and his sidekick

If it were the pies it would have been granted. I would put my house on that right now.

It’s a disgrace really

[Chuck17]

Agree there MT, I think to cut Polak and make the circumstances closer to Rama's could have affected the rehab and well being of Polly.  We showed good faith to him that we were not going to cut him and that he will always be a part of our team.

[WilliamPowell]

The excuse that Polak's situation differs to Rama's still doesn't stack up to me. Essendon could have given Rama another contract instead as when they were given permission to move Rama onto the rookie list they pulled that swifty drafting Mal Michael in the PSD after Michael had "retired" from Brisbane. Likewise we could have been callous and ruthless and paid Polak out of the last year of his contract to free up a senior list spot and washed our hands of him. Is that what we want  . Both players suffered from exceptional circumstances that affected their health greatly and their club is a player down whether that player was contracted or not at Oct 31.

As I said on another thread

With Rama Essendon looked after one of their own, that's what the Tigers have done with Polak. To say they are totally different is bizarre at best

The AFL set a precendent with Rama, they have ignored that precedent today..

Please explain

[one-eyed]

3aw reckon Richmond board members will meet very early tomorrow morning when Gary March returns from overseas. The PSD is at 10am.

[Hellenic Tiger]

This decision was an Eddie McGuire inspired decision.

Eddie lobbies poorer clubs eg Dogs Saints Roos be against it or no home game against us.
Furthermore his pull at AFL board level in terms of attendances change guernseys priority picks salary cap etc also suggests a fairer system to keep the Pies competitive.

The way I see it if the Pies cannot rort the rules or find a loophole in the system then nobody can. I think that if their was no Ben Cousins involved and we went for two youngsters tomorrow there would not be a fuss and media frenzy about this and be seen as a correct decision by the footy club.

This proves to me that until we win games of footy become entrentched in the 8 and play in grannies and start winning them to really awake the sleeping giant we will go nowhere in situations such as this and lose to the wishes of the Collingwood inspired AFL. Then and only then will you find then Collingwood wanting to suck our rear ends hoping we play an away game against them that will guarantee 90000 at the G and a plethoa of other things with us. Then we can call them small fry and get what we want as we will have the money, crowd pull, members AFL support to do what we want.
Anyone here old enough to remember the Windy Hill Brawl in 1974. I wan born later that year but didn't Graham Richmond go from being suspended indefinentely or for the remainder of the season and having a $2000 fine which back then was the equivalent of a squillion dollars in todays money for his part in the melee to having his fine and suspension rescinded. Success and money equals power as was the case with us in 1974. Lets hope we get there again and then as far as Eddie is concerned he can whine like the hungry leper that he is as all his protest will fall on deaf ears. Lesson learned Tigers now get on with making the right decisions and move forward so we can stuff everyone off and become the most feared predator in the AFL jungle and not a pushover to the ilk of Andy D and Eddie.

[TFL]

Wallace just drove into Punt Road about 30 mins ago.

Cousins will be us next year 

[Infamy]

Wallace just drove into Punt Road about 30 mins ago.

Cousins will be us next year 

You do know he works there you know
Talk about grasping straws

[bushranger]

Just let this be until tomorrow, then we can say yahoo we got him or who ever we finally get.

[one-eyed]

AFL Commission pulls Tigers' tail on Cousins deal
Mike Sheahan
December 15, 2008 11:00pm

THE AFL Commission has called Richmond's bluff and in so doing the message has been sent loud and clear: if you want Ben Cousins, you assume all risks.

The Commission has deemed Richmond to be opportunistic in their cheeky bid to park the injured Graham Polak on the rookie list, creating a vacancy for Cousins on the primary list.

It has surprised many observers by denying the Richmond request on Polak, leaving the Tigers with only their pre-existing No. 6 selection in today's pre-season draft to claim the fallen West Coast champion.

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou is known to be have been keen to see Cousins get another chance. Perhaps Demetriou doesn't always get his way, after all.

So, now it's up to the Tigers. Do they remain faithful to their oft-declared promise to take a rookie at No. 6 today? Or do they gamble on one of the great players of the modern era, a 30-year-old champion with a drug problem that many believe remains as significant as it has been for 10 years?

It is a tough call. Cousins might be the difference between missing the finals and finishing in the top four in 2009.

Then again, he might be no different to the troubled star who ultimately forced West Coast to delist him.

The Cousins camp has performed poorly in recent months. There has been no contrition, no show of faith, no credible bid for public understanding and sympathy.

He has told several clubs he is desperate for another chance, yet he hasn't convinced them he has changed his ways. Or his shady associates.

Now it's down to Richmond president Gary March and coach Terry Wallace.

The strong suspicion is that Wallace is driving the push for Cousins, with March mindful of the inevitable backlash among sponsors and supporters that will follow if Cousins falls over. What we say is this: if the Tigers were prepared to take Cousins in at Punt Rd with a possible second selection today, they should take him with their solitary pick.

It is ludicrous to suggest any rookie could match the impact of Cousins, on or off the field.

Cousins in the right shape and frame of mind is a top-10 player.

He is a champion. He is capable of lifting the Tigers into premiership contention. His history, though, says he is just as capable of succumbing again to his addiction.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24804815-10389,00.html

[mightytiges]

Either way I'll be glad this circus will be over come midday tomorrow.