SA Footy

Ok i'm interested to see if i'm in the minority here.. Do you think that clubs should continue to select players who they know have intentions of leaving? If so why, if not why?

Personally i think yes. I think the player is contracted to do a job, trust them to do that job and i'm sure as a professional their output will remain the same as the first game they ever played. I think dropping someone because they want to leave is petty and childish.

I also think yes. We were clearly a better football side with lever in it instead of keath or whoever. So you gotta pick him.

No.

Team continuity and culture overrides the benefits of one player being perceived to be better than another.

morell wrote:No.

Team continuity and culture overrides the benefits of one player being perceived to be better than another.

'
got any stats to back that up?

The bigger one that I never understood over the years, were the instances of departing players not being welcome at a clubs B&F despite playing that season (and generally others) for them/

Depends, if they are good (aka guns) and can help you win games through their brilliance, you play them.

if they are so so and not going to help you win games off their own boot, nah don't play them

we would have had to forfeit a few games late in the year if we didnt play those lads

bennymacca wrote:we would have had to forfeit a few games late in the year if we didnt play those lads

You kind of did last Saturday when they played anyway.

No, if the player hasn't been forthright with their intentions and has lost the respect and confidence of the playing group.
Yes, if opposite of above.

LMA wrote:No, if the player hasn't been forthright with their intentions and has lost the respect and confidence of the playing group.
Yes, if opposite of above.

yep this is fair i think

Tough one
Players are contracted to end of Oct. If clubs dropped players cause they won't sign for the following year, a simple lawyer could argue this is in breach

Contracts in football these days aren't worth the paper they're written on it seems, both sides of the party.

Talk like this is why players will never say they are leaving until the end of season, You owe it to your club, supporters and players to play the best players that give you a chance to win every week.

I think the trade period should be longer and no negotiations should be made outside of the trade period.

Too much speculation is made during the season causing players to get side-tracked and supporters to get antsy towards their own and then draw conclusions once decisions are made.

Doing it this way will ensure players are playing with 100% commitment til the end to improve their dollar value.

Depends on where you are on the 'premiership clock' if you cant win the flag no point playing a bloke who is leaving. Wouldn't be giving up a serious premiership crack though because of it.

The other hidden factor that as fans we don't see is what impact if any the players decision is having on the playing groups morale. If his made his decision clear the playing group are completely unhappy etc the bloke might as well stay at home and not bother even training lol.

whufc wrote:Depends on where you are on the 'premiership clock' if you cant win the flag no point playing a bloke who is leaving.

Could play him to hope for an injury LOL

morell wrote:No.

Team continuity and culture overrides the benefits of one player being perceived to be better than another.

Of course you select them if they are in your best 22 for that match. If anyone thinks sacrificing a match ( in this instance a Grand Final ) is worth it to make a stance against a player on the move they're kidding themselves.

What happens if round 1 next year all the Port boys decide they aren't going to play because of the manner the club treated Jackson Trengove's departure?

Goes both ways. Clubs would have made decisions on players well before the player knows he's on the outer, some list management teams would have next years planned already.

Of course you pick them.

Booney wrote:

morell wrote:No.

Team continuity and culture overrides the benefits of one player being perceived to be better than another.

Of course you select them if they are in your best 22 for that match. If anyone thinks sacrificing a match ( in this instance a Grand Final ) is worth it to make a stance against a player on the move they're kidding themselves.

What happens if round 1 next year all the Port boys decide they aren't going to play because of the manner the club treated Jackson Trengove's departure?

Goes both ways. Clubs would have made decisions on players well before the player knows he's on the outer, some list management teams would have next years planned already.

Of course you pick them.

Exactly, and what if they kick the winning goal of the GF after the siren and the whole state wants you to be Premier? Then you stay.

Booney wrote:

morell wrote:No.

Team continuity and culture overrides the benefits of one player being perceived to be better than another.

Of course you select them if they are in your best 22 for that match. If anyone thinks sacrificing a match ( in this instance a Grand Final ) is worth it to make a stance against a player on the move they're kidding themselves.

What happens if round 1 next year all the Port boys decide they aren't going to play because of the manner the club treated Jackson Trengove's departure?

Goes both ways. Clubs would have made decisions on players well before the player knows he's on the outer, some list management teams would have next years planned already.

Of course you pick them.

Well said Boon

Booney wrote:

morell wrote:No.

Team continuity and culture overrides the benefits of one player being perceived to be better than another.

Of course you select them if they are in your best 22 for that match. If anyone thinks sacrificing a match ( in this instance a Grand Final ) is worth it to make a stance against a player on the move they're kidding themselves.

What happens if round 1 next year all the Port boys decide they aren't going to play because of the manner the club treated Jackson Trengove's departure?

Goes both ways. Clubs would have made decisions on players well before the player knows he's on the outer, some list management teams would have next years planned already.

Of course you pick them.

They probably wont play next year because of that, i understand he is very popular. By that i mean maybe will they be 5% off their best because they dont have 100% committment to the cause knowing the club could knife them just the same at any point. And then their president will question their endeavour and commitment to the cause and tell them to move on.