
Tend to agree, but I never think losing a required player is an enormous triumph. It 'may' turn out that we lucked out with Tauru, but we don't know yet. He could go down tomorrow and be an injury bust. We never know what tomorrow brings.All the posters whinging about losing Battle are right about one thing. We were happy to lose him for first round compensation (why we dangled him) and guess what, we got what we wanted. The article trying to make Hawthorn out to be geniuses by them predicting we would come in at the 11th hour with an increased contract to guarantee a first round selection, guess what, we got it. They clearly paid him enough to trigger it. If Higgins goal is touched on the line and we get two top ten midfielders it would be unanimous on here it was a fantastic process.
The article also confirms that we are trying to learn from losing him and put in place a more family friendly environment. Also is this a standard industry wide practice? Did all clubs have this except for us? Doubt it. Seems like Hawthorn are well out ahead in this space and we are learning from it. Good on them.
If Tauru even scratches the surface of his potential the whole thing is an enormous triumph. Have we had a culture of losing lots of players we didn’t want to recently? Battle is the only one, so it isn’t some ingrained problem that we need to solve.
Sent from my SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app