List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade and FA

[Bramax]

Ginnivan kicked 40 in 2022. There’s more to footy than just goals scored.

Yep. Like getting banned by the AFL for 2 games for an illicit drugs sanction, not presenting for preseason in good shape, going to the races the day before a grand final (in which he had zero impact) and then acting like a complete dhead on social media gloating about his Premiership medal.

 

[Scritchyscroony]

Aside from a generally owed duty of care, clubs have OHS obligations on match day. This is in the CBA.
There are also medical standards that apply under the CBA that spell out the fiduciary nature of the club doctor’s relationship with the player and specific things they need to do.
It was obvious to the naked eye at the game (which I was) that he was not ok to play and he went back on for 20 minutes, with a jab from a doctor at quarter time( in the context of his injury my doctor relative says this will have made things more dangerous). Collingwood players were avoiding tackling him and were checking on him on field, encouraging him to go off. This was reported in the newspaper. Why did no one in that 20 minute period intervene from MFC? It is damning that these Pies players spoke with him (not to mention there is TV footage) and easy evidence to put forward that they owed a duty of care and breached it.

I’m no doctor but have worked in healthcare law and negligence claims for 2 decades. I am sure MFC and the doctor would have notified the insurers on this one.

If he had died, as was possible as reported by Christian, MFC who employ the doctor and the doctor could not only face a medical negligence claim. Directors would have to answer. This is way more serious than a disgruntled player wanting to help their brand and they would do best to let him move on.

It is a pretty easy legal claim to make out, and it would be a clear breach of the player contract allowing him to terminate it. I cannot see how a player can be expected to stay with a club who nearly killed them through negligence. Especially, when they showed a lack of care since and player welfare issues abound with the other issues that are already public. Again, what is the MFC Board doing?

There is a series of steps a player can go through under the CBA with timeframes to address a grievance (weeks not months). It starts at club level, escalates to the AFL and AFLPA and ends in a grievance tribunal that can make orders . You can still make a negligence claim in court which would take longer to resolve, even if you start the CBA process. The fact that the AFL says they ticked off what happened on the day puts them in the frame too. I suspect a good lawyer could run a truck through whatever internal “investigation” happened (if it’s anything like the umpiring reviews!). The AFL could then seek to point the finger back at Melbourne and say they relied upon MFC’s representations. No doubt, they would try and distance themselves given the gravity of the potential outcome.

Why would Christian talk about the Petracca brand? You would encourage a player to do so if you’re thinking about a future negligence claim as it impacts the economic loss component of compensation. I think his partner is a lawyer, so would know that any damages would include calculating $$ impact on all of his career interests. It would be part of discussions with the club to pressure them to facilitate a trade and avoid a potentially expensive and reputationally damaging claim.

On a human level, Christian has been at pains to say that his trauma was not just to him but his family. His parter who received a 3am call from the surgeon saying he may not make it would be distressed as well. It is clear that any decisions about his future at MFC take his family’s views into account. They are the ones who count in his eyes.

If I were his mother or partner, I would not want my son or husband to be in an unsafe environment like this ever again. I would not trust the club to have his welfare at heart. The family would quite understandably be asking him to move clubs and never go back. You would want him safe. He also has PTSD so a fresh start may be beneficial psychologically.

As Collingwood players demonstrated care for his welfare on the day and in the weeks that followed, I am unsurprised that it is where he, his family and his partner would want to be (aside from his Dad’s connection and his relationship with some of the players). Having a sense of “life is short”, may also mean he would rather live out his boyhood dream and play for Collingwood. I saw him say he watched Pendles 400th and he wanted to go there and be the one to carry him off. It was quite touching.

Clearly, the whole Melbourne club has some serious and long term issues in player welfare beyond this incident for which they have failed to take accountability to date. No doubt any lawyer would tell his management to raise those long term issues if the objective is to exit. I recall that there was a doctor who made legal claims against MFC about the coach pressuring him not to rest Brayshaw when he had concussion in 2020.this was again reported in the Herald Sun.

If I were Collingwood, I would lay low until his management and lawyers get agreement from MFC to agree to an exit first as Petracca holds a lot of cards here. If the negligence is bad enough, he may able to simply walk away. The AFL would have a terrible precedent set so it is everyone’s interests to reach a deal.

I cannot see Petracca staying there and he and his family would be determined to get to the Pies in the circumstances.

It will get messy in the short term but they will have to let him go on his terms. Paddy Ryder got to Port by threatening Essendon with the grievance process with the same management group.

It will be in the AFL’s interests to find a solution.

Once they agree to trade him out, only then should he nominate Collingwood.

This situation is unique. I believe it gets done in the end.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Fantastic summary. I wasn't thinking of it in this way. You've given me the first real glimmer of hope that he could actually get to us.
I know you are right about the negligence. It's obvious and not a hard case to run at face value. The last thing Melbourne FC or the AFL would want is to try to explain in court how allowing him back on the field was "correct process" and proper duty of care.

So getting to us is possible if he wants to use the negligence as leverage.

Let's hope he's angry enough to go that way .

 

[Bianconeri]

Yep. Like getting banned by the AFL for 2 games for an illicit drugs sanction, not presenting for preseason in good shape, going to the races the day before a grand final (in which he had zero impact) and then acting like a complete dhead on social media gloating about his Premiership medal.

Exactly! We already got rid of one dickhead, no need to add another.

 

[Bramax]

Exactly! We already got rid of one dickhead, no need to add another.

Yep. Sorry mate. I couldn’t resist the Ginnivan invite and I see your point.

 

[sideswipe]

Aside from a generally owed duty of care, clubs have OHS obligations on match day. This is in the CBA.
There are also medical standards that apply under the CBA that spell out the fiduciary nature of the club doctor’s relationship with the player and specific things they need to do.
It was obvious to the naked eye at the game (which I was) that he was not ok to play and he went back on for 20 minutes, with a jab from a doctor at quarter time( in the context of his injury my doctor relative says this will have made things more dangerous). Collingwood players were avoiding tackling him and were checking on him on field, encouraging him to go off. This was reported in the newspaper. Why did no one in that 20 minute period intervene from MFC? It is damning that these Pies players spoke with him (not to mention there is TV footage) and easy evidence to put forward that they owed a duty of care and breached it.

I’m no doctor but have worked in healthcare law and negligence claims for 2 decades. I am sure MFC and the doctor would have notified the insurers on this one.

If he had died, as was possible as reported by Christian, MFC who employ the doctor and the doctor could not only face a medical negligence claim. Directors would have to answer. This is way more serious than a disgruntled player wanting to help their brand and they would do best to let him move on.

It is a pretty easy legal claim to make out, and it would be a clear breach of the player contract allowing him to terminate it. I cannot see how a player can be expected to stay with a club who nearly killed them through negligence. Especially, when they showed a lack of care since and player welfare issues abound with the other issues that are already public. Again, what is the MFC Board doing?

There is a series of steps a player can go through under the CBA with timeframes to address a grievance (weeks not months). It starts at club level, escalates to the AFL and AFLPA and ends in a grievance tribunal that can make orders . You can still make a negligence claim in court which would take longer to resolve, even if you start the CBA process. The fact that the AFL says they ticked off what happened on the day puts them in the frame too. I suspect a good lawyer could run a truck through whatever internal “investigation” happened (if it’s anything like the umpiring reviews!). The AFL could then seek to point the finger back at Melbourne and say they relied upon MFC’s representations. No doubt, they would try and distance themselves given the gravity of the potential outcome.

Why would Christian talk about the Petracca brand? You would encourage a player to do so if you’re thinking about a future negligence claim as it impacts the economic loss component of compensation. I think his partner is a lawyer, so would know that any damages would include calculating $$ impact on all of his career interests. It would be part of discussions with the club to pressure them to facilitate a trade and avoid a potentially expensive and reputationally damaging claim.

On a human level, Christian has been at pains to say that his trauma was not just to him but his family. His parter who received a 3am call from the surgeon saying he may not make it would be distressed as well. It is clear that any decisions about his future at MFC take his family’s views into account. They are the ones who count in his eyes.

If I were his mother or partner, I would not want my son or husband to be in an unsafe environment like this ever again. I would not trust the club to have his welfare at heart. The family would quite understandably be asking him to move clubs and never go back. You would want him safe. He also has PTSD so a fresh start may be beneficial psychologically.

As Collingwood players demonstrated care for his welfare on the day and in the weeks that followed, I am unsurprised that it is where he, his family and his partner would want to be (aside from his Dad’s connection and his relationship with some of the players). Having a sense of “life is short”, may also mean he would rather live out his boyhood dream and play for Collingwood. I saw him say he watched Pendles 400th and he wanted to go there and be the one to carry him off. It was quite touching.

Clearly, the whole Melbourne club has some serious and long term issues in player welfare beyond this incident for which they have failed to take accountability to date. No doubt any lawyer would tell his management to raise those long term issues if the objective is to exit. I recall that there was a doctor who made legal claims against MFC about the coach pressuring him not to rest Brayshaw when he had concussion in 2020.this was again reported in the Herald Sun.

If I were Collingwood, I would lay low until his management and lawyers get agreement from MFC to agree to an exit first as Petracca holds a lot of cards here. If the negligence is bad enough, he may able to simply walk away. The AFL would have a terrible precedent set so it is everyone’s interests to reach a deal.

I cannot see Petracca staying there and he and his family would be determined to get to the Pies in the circumstances.

It will get messy in the short term but they will have to let him go on his terms. Paddy Ryder got to Port by threatening Essendon with the grievance process with the same management group.

It will be in the AFL’s interests to find a solution.

Once they agree to trade him out, only then should he nominate Collingwood.

This situation is unique. I believe it gets done in the end.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Rather than all that, why not give a few lines on how a negligence claim gets up on the current facts at hand. You can’t use “if”.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[larrikan]

Aside from a generally owed duty of care, clubs have OHS obligations on match day. This is in the CBA.
There are also medical standards that apply under the CBA that spell out the fiduciary nature of the club doctor’s relationship with the player and specific things they need to do.
It was obvious to the naked eye at the game (which I was) that he was not ok to play and he went back on for 20 minutes, with a jab from a doctor at quarter time( in the context of his injury my doctor relative says this will have made things more dangerous). Collingwood players were avoiding tackling him and were checking on him on field, encouraging him to go off. This was reported in the newspaper. Why did no one in that 20 minute period intervene from MFC? It is damning that these Pies players spoke with him (not to mention there is TV footage) and easy evidence to put forward that they owed a duty of care and breached it.

I’m no doctor but have worked in healthcare law and negligence claims for 2 decades. I am sure MFC and the doctor would have notified the insurers on this one.

If he had died, as was possible as reported by Christian, MFC who employ the doctor and the doctor could not only face a medical negligence claim. Directors would have to answer. This is way more serious than a disgruntled player wanting to help their brand and they would do best to let him move on.

It is a pretty easy legal claim to make out, and it would be a clear breach of the player contract allowing him to terminate it. I cannot see how a player can be expected to stay with a club who nearly killed them through negligence. Especially, when they showed a lack of care since and player welfare issues abound with the other issues that are already public. Again, what is the MFC Board doing?

There is a series of steps a player can go through under the CBA with timeframes to address a grievance (weeks not months). It starts at club level, escalates to the AFL and AFLPA and ends in a grievance tribunal that can make orders . You can still make a negligence claim in court which would take longer to resolve, even if you start the CBA process. The fact that the AFL says they ticked off what happened on the day puts them in the frame too. I suspect a good lawyer could run a truck through whatever internal “investigation” happened (if it’s anything like the umpiring reviews!). The AFL could then seek to point the finger back at Melbourne and say they relied upon MFC’s representations. No doubt, they would try and distance themselves given the gravity of the potential outcome.

Why would Christian talk about the Petracca brand? You would encourage a player to do so if you’re thinking about a future negligence claim as it impacts the economic loss component of compensation. I think his partner is a lawyer, so would know that any damages would include calculating $$ impact on all of his career interests. It would be part of discussions with the club to pressure them to facilitate a trade and avoid a potentially expensive and reputationally damaging claim.

On a human level, Christian has been at pains to say that his trauma was not just to him but his family. His parter who received a 3am call from the surgeon saying he may not make it would be distressed as well. It is clear that any decisions about his future at MFC take his family’s views into account. They are the ones who count in his eyes.

If I were his mother or partner, I would not want my son or husband to be in an unsafe environment like this ever again. I would not trust the club to have his welfare at heart. The family would quite understandably be asking him to move clubs and never go back. You would want him safe. He also has PTSD so a fresh start may be beneficial psychologically.

As Collingwood players demonstrated care for his welfare on the day and in the weeks that followed, I am unsurprised that it is where he, his family and his partner would want to be (aside from his Dad’s connection and his relationship with some of the players). Having a sense of “life is short”, may also mean he would rather live out his boyhood dream and play for Collingwood. I saw him say he watched Pendles 400th and he wanted to go there and be the one to carry him off. It was quite touching.

Clearly, the whole Melbourne club has some serious and long term issues in player welfare beyond this incident for which they have failed to take accountability to date. No doubt any lawyer would tell his management to raise those long term issues if the objective is to exit. I recall that there was a doctor who made legal claims against MFC about the coach pressuring him not to rest Brayshaw when he had concussion in 2020.this was again reported in the Herald Sun.

If I were Collingwood, I would lay low until his management and lawyers get agreement from MFC to agree to an exit first as Petracca holds a lot of cards here. If the negligence is bad enough, he may able to simply walk away. The AFL would have a terrible precedent set so it is everyone’s interests to reach a deal.

I cannot see Petracca staying there and he and his family would be determined to get to the Pies in the circumstances.

It will get messy in the short term but they will have to let him go on his terms. Paddy Ryder got to Port by threatening Essendon with the grievance process with the same management group.

It will be in the AFL’s interests to find a solution.

Once they agree to trade him out, only then should he nominate Collingwood.

This situation is unique. I believe it gets done in the end.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Thank you. This is the best summation of the actual facts that we know about. This is why it is outrageous that MFC, Lyon, Swartz and some media have played they are the victim here not Trac considering the seriousness of his welfare. Surely they would be better off wrapping their arms around him with love and acknowledging all that you wrote. It’s a bizarre juxtaposition to the treatment of Oliver over a sustained period of time. I want the best for him now. I have a feeling the Pies will play a part eventually.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[larrikan]

Rather than all that, why not give a few lines on how a negligence claim gets up on the current facts at hand. You can’t use “if”.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

There’s no rather than all that. That is the facts as we know it. The last part of AFL intervening is the crux of it. The threat of court with even a loss for Trac is so damaging to their brand that a resolution will be mediated first. It’s only opinion and yours may differ in a legal sense but the AFL puts brand management first.

Based on the performance of MFC president and what we know of Pert then I would back the AFL and Trac in this should it play out this way.

It’s going to get real messy or he just returns to MFC because some major damage control beyond the scope of thinking now happens.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Hardas]

There’s no rather than all that. That is the facts as we know it. The last part of AFL intervening is the crux of it. The threat of court with even a loss for Trac is so damaging to their brand that a resolution will be mediated first. It’s only opinion and yours may differ in a legal sense but the AFL puts brand management first.

Based on the performance of MFC president and what we know of Pert then I would back the AFL and Trac in this should it play out this way.

It’s going to get real messy or he just returns to MFC because some major damage control beyond the scope of thinking now happens.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

That makes sense to me.
If things are so bad that he insists that he wants out, it could blow up other 'brands' besides his.
The AFL will NOT want it to go that far.

 

[Swooop]

Aside from a generally owed duty of care, clubs have OHS obligations on match day. This is in the CBA.
There are also medical standards that apply under the CBA that spell out the fiduciary nature of the club doctor’s relationship with the player and specific things they need to do.
It was obvious to the naked eye at the game (which I was) that he was not ok to play and he went back on for 20 minutes, with a jab from a doctor at quarter time( in the context of his injury my doctor relative says this will have made things more dangerous). Collingwood players were avoiding tackling him and were checking on him on field, encouraging him to go off. This was reported in the newspaper. Why did no one in that 20 minute period intervene from MFC? It is damning that these Pies players spoke with him (not to mention there is TV footage) and easy evidence to put forward that they owed a duty of care and breached it.

I’m no doctor but have worked in healthcare law and negligence claims for 2 decades. I am sure MFC and the doctor would have notified the insurers on this one.

If he had died, as was possible as reported by Christian, MFC who employ the doctor and the doctor could not only face a medical negligence claim. Directors would have to answer. This is way more serious than a disgruntled player wanting to help their brand and they would do best to let him move on.

It is a pretty easy legal claim to make out, and it would be a clear breach of the player contract allowing him to terminate it. I cannot see how a player can be expected to stay with a club who nearly killed them through negligence. Especially, when they showed a lack of care since and player welfare issues abound with the other issues that are already public. Again, what is the MFC Board doing?

There is a series of steps a player can go through under the CBA with timeframes to address a grievance (weeks not months). It starts at club level, escalates to the AFL and AFLPA and ends in a grievance tribunal that can make orders . You can still make a negligence claim in court which would take longer to resolve, even if you start the CBA process. The fact that the AFL says they ticked off what happened on the day puts them in the frame too. I suspect a good lawyer could run a truck through whatever internal “investigation” happened (if it’s anything like the umpiring reviews!). The AFL could then seek to point the finger back at Melbourne and say they relied upon MFC’s representations. No doubt, they would try and distance themselves given the gravity of the potential outcome.

Why would Christian talk about the Petracca brand? You would encourage a player to do so if you’re thinking about a future negligence claim as it impacts the economic loss component of compensation. I think his partner is a lawyer, so would know that any damages would include calculating $$ impact on all of his career interests. It would be part of discussions with the club to pressure them to facilitate a trade and avoid a potentially expensive and reputationally damaging claim.

On a human level, Christian has been at pains to say that his trauma was not just to him but his family. His parter who received a 3am call from the surgeon saying he may not make it would be distressed as well. It is clear that any decisions about his future at MFC take his family’s views into account. They are the ones who count in his eyes.

If I were his mother or partner, I would not want my son or husband to be in an unsafe environment like this ever again. I would not trust the club to have his welfare at heart. The family would quite understandably be asking him to move clubs and never go back. You would want him safe. He also has PTSD so a fresh start may be beneficial psychologically.

As Collingwood players demonstrated care for his welfare on the day and in the weeks that followed, I am unsurprised that it is where he, his family and his partner would want to be (aside from his Dad’s connection and his relationship with some of the players). Having a sense of “life is short”, may also mean he would rather live out his boyhood dream and play for Collingwood. I saw him say he watched Pendles 400th and he wanted to go there and be the one to carry him off. It was quite touching.

Clearly, the whole Melbourne club has some serious and long term issues in player welfare beyond this incident for which they have failed to take accountability to date. No doubt any lawyer would tell his management to raise those long term issues if the objective is to exit. I recall that there was a doctor who made legal claims against MFC about the coach pressuring him not to rest Brayshaw when he had concussion in 2020.this was again reported in the Herald Sun.

If I were Collingwood, I would lay low until his management and lawyers get agreement from MFC to agree to an exit first as Petracca holds a lot of cards here. If the negligence is bad enough, he may able to simply walk away. The AFL would have a terrible precedent set so it is everyone’s interests to reach a deal.

I cannot see Petracca staying there and he and his family would be determined to get to the Pies in the circumstances.

It will get messy in the short term but they will have to let him go on his terms. Paddy Ryder got to Port by threatening Essendon with the grievance process with the same management group.

It will be in the AFL’s interests to find a solution.

Once they agree to trade him out, only then should he nominate Collingwood.

This situation is unique. I believe it gets done in the end.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Thank you Queenie Hearts for that outstanding post.

Couldn’t agree more with that overview and recommendation to just let things play out.

CP’s physical injuries will all heal.

The psychological fallout could go either way - however, there could be no higher chance of full recovery there than to come to a team that firstly you supported as a kid, that your close family also support, and a team that cared above and beyond when your life was in jeopardy on the field and have been allegedly following up on his wellbeing since.

I’m sure messages from people like Darcy and Pendles and Nick saying we all love you here mate, come and play with us, would be like gold for CP in contrast to his own club’s seemingly appalling lack of care and support.

And a special shout out to elements in the Media .
In general, your behaviour has been right up there with a pack of dogs, starting with the baying on game day, “ why aren’t Collingwood going after him??” ( I’ve never felt so physically sickened by a commentator as that) to the Brand Petracca and harden up type commentary since.

The poor bloke, he comes across to me as a caring, intelligent soul and this will clearly be increasing his mental trauma.

Be intriguing how this all plays out, cos the media dogs seem to have their claws well sharpened.

I truly can’t work out if they simply don’t understand the extra damage they’d be doing or if they are just campaigners that have no caring whatsoever for an absolute icon of the game.

 

[sideswipe]

There’s no rather than all that. That is the facts as we know it. The last part of AFL intervening is the crux of it. The threat of court with even a loss for Trac is so damaging to their brand that a resolution will be mediated first. It’s only opinion and yours may differ in a legal sense but the AFL puts brand management first.

Based on the performance of MFC president and what we know of Pert then I would back the AFL and Trac in this should it play out this way.

It’s going to get real messy or he just returns to MFC because some major damage control beyond the scope of thinking now happens.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Give it a rest. I was asking a specific question about a specific matter - the negligence claim angle - rather that all the other points raised in that post.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Big Bryza]

Peatling is a 24yo midfielder who just had a career year where he averaged 14 disposals a game.

Davies is a 22yo depth player for GC who averages 15 disposals a game.

I'm not real excited by those two.

Tell me you've done no research into those numbers without telling me...

 

[Big Bryza]

Imagine Jordy, Trac and Stringer in a center bounce

The defensive pressure would be off the charts.

 

[sydney_gws]

Aside from a generally owed duty of care, clubs have OHS obligations on match day. This is in the CBA.
There are also medical standards that apply under the CBA that spell out the fiduciary nature of the club doctor’s relationship with the player and specific things they need to do.
It was obvious to the naked eye at the game (which I was) that he was not ok to play and he went back on for 20 minutes, with a jab from a doctor at quarter time( in the context of his injury my doctor relative says this will have made things more dangerous). Collingwood players were avoiding tackling him and were checking on him on field, encouraging him to go off. This was reported in the newspaper. Why did no one in that 20 minute period intervene from MFC? It is damning that these Pies players spoke with him (not to mention there is TV footage) and easy evidence to put forward that they owed a duty of care and breached it.

I’m no doctor but have worked in healthcare law and negligence claims for 2 decades. I am sure MFC and the doctor would have notified the insurers on this one.

If he had died, as was possible as reported by Christian, MFC who employ the doctor and the doctor could not only face a medical negligence claim. Directors would have to answer. This is way more serious than a disgruntled player wanting to help their brand and they would do best to let him move on.

It is a pretty easy legal claim to make out, and it would be a clear breach of the player contract allowing him to terminate it. I cannot see how a player can be expected to stay with a club who nearly killed them through negligence. Especially, when they showed a lack of care since and player welfare issues abound with the other issues that are already public. Again, what is the MFC Board doing?

There is a series of steps a player can go through under the CBA with timeframes to address a grievance (weeks not months). It starts at club level, escalates to the AFL and AFLPA and ends in a grievance tribunal that can make orders . You can still make a negligence claim in court which would take longer to resolve, even if you start the CBA process. The fact that the AFL says they ticked off what happened on the day puts them in the frame too. I suspect a good lawyer could run a truck through whatever internal “investigation” happened (if it’s anything like the umpiring reviews!). The AFL could then seek to point the finger back at Melbourne and say they relied upon MFC’s representations. No doubt, they would try and distance themselves given the gravity of the potential outcome.

Why would Christian talk about the Petracca brand? You would encourage a player to do so if you’re thinking about a future negligence claim as it impacts the economic loss component of compensation. I think his partner is a lawyer, so would know that any damages would include calculating $$ impact on all of his career interests. It would be part of discussions with the club to pressure them to facilitate a trade and avoid a potentially expensive and reputationally damaging claim.

On a human level, Christian has been at pains to say that his trauma was not just to him but his family. His parter who received a 3am call from the surgeon saying he may not make it would be distressed as well. It is clear that any decisions about his future at MFC take his family’s views into account. They are the ones who count in his eyes.

If I were his mother or partner, I would not want my son or husband to be in an unsafe environment like this ever again. I would not trust the club to have his welfare at heart. The family would quite understandably be asking him to move clubs and never go back. You would want him safe. He also has PTSD so a fresh start may be beneficial psychologically.

As Collingwood players demonstrated care for his welfare on the day and in the weeks that followed, I am unsurprised that it is where he, his family and his partner would want to be (aside from his Dad’s connection and his relationship with some of the players). Having a sense of “life is short”, may also mean he would rather live out his boyhood dream and play for Collingwood. I saw him say he watched Pendles 400th and he wanted to go there and be the one to carry him off. It was quite touching.

Clearly, the whole Melbourne club has some serious and long term issues in player welfare beyond this incident for which they have failed to take accountability to date. No doubt any lawyer would tell his management to raise those long term issues if the objective is to exit. I recall that there was a doctor who made legal claims against MFC about the coach pressuring him not to rest Brayshaw when he had concussion in 2020.this was again reported in the Herald Sun.

If I were Collingwood, I would lay low until his management and lawyers get agreement from MFC to agree to an exit first as Petracca holds a lot of cards here. If the negligence is bad enough, he may able to simply walk away. The AFL would have a terrible precedent set so it is everyone’s interests to reach a deal.

I cannot see Petracca staying there and he and his family would be determined to get to the Pies in the circumstances.

It will get messy in the short term but they will have to let him go on his terms. Paddy Ryder got to Port by threatening Essendon with the grievance process with the same management group.

It will be in the AFL’s interests to find a solution.

Once they agree to trade him out, only then should he nominate Collingwood.

This situation is unique. I believe it gets done in the end.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Hello pies fans, was reading this and agree, but remember Essendon didn't provide a safe workplace, apparently got a fine from the I think WorkCover Vic, however it was barely reported.
AFL will want to avoid a court case here, I think will encourage Gold Coast or GWS to let a good young prospect go to keep Melbourne happy ( as part of a 3 way trade as Petracca will go carlton).
If for example GWS win a flag, they could
trade Riccardi, Leake for pick 8 from Essendon.
Essendon trades Riccardi, Leake, 2025f1 for Petracca, 2025r2.

GWS will be given generous compo for Perryman as FA leaving to go Hawthorn.

 

[Scodog10]

I’ve sat back on the Stringer stuff because it’s a genuinely tough one. On the one hand you have a guy with an amateur approach to professional sport, but on the other he is as gifted as any in the league (to rank 12 and 19 league wide for goals and score involvements when you look maybe 70% match fit is insane).

If the club chooses this path I have faith that it can work because as a unit our forward mix is more hard working than brilliant so I think we can accommodate some more magc. He’s a contract year footballer so I’d keep him hungry with a triggered two year deal and unlike Essendon I just wouldn’t play him if he’s the Jake Stringer

25

Jake Stringer

Age

30

Ht

192cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.9

3star

K

8.5

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.5

4star

G

1.8

5star

D

8.5

2star

K

7.0

3star

HB

1.5

1star

M

2.8

3star

T

3.8

4star

G

2.5

5star

D

7.2

2star

K

4.8

2star

HB

2.4

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.4

4star

G

1.4

5star

show.

I can’t help feeling that he’s a big stage performer that only needs 10 possessions in a PF to win us a game and is the type of guy that in the right environment can do a Brian Harris. I’m not gunning for it as I would Peatling or Petracca, but I say go for it if the club are keen.

 

[In Fly We Trust]

There’s no rather than all that. That is the facts as we know it. The last part of AFL intervening is the crux of it. The threat of court with even a loss for Trac is so damaging to their brand that a resolution will be mediated first. It’s only opinion and yours may differ in a legal sense but the AFL puts brand management first.

Based on the performance of MFC president and what we know of Pert then I would back the AFL and Trac in this should it play out this way.

It’s going to get real messy or he just returns to MFC because some major damage control beyond the scope of thinking now happens.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

There is no doubt the AFL will protect their brand at ALL costs. They have a long sordid history of cover ups and jobs for the boys all in the name of protecting the brand.

Have a read of The Boys Club by Michael Warner for a great insight into the real AFL.

Gil was a master puppeteer with the cover up and this will be Andrew Dillons first real brand management issue. If this story keeps growing in the media, as I suspect it will, the back room meetings and moves by the AFL will start and Trac will get his way given his appalling treatment by the MFC.

A plus for us is that the current head of AFL football is Laura Kane who has black and white running through her veins.

Imagine the brand repair that will be done by Trac returning to his rightful home at Collingwood, playing for his childhood team and returning to greatness to lift the 2025 Premiership Cup with his team mates!

Dare to dream Pies fans, this is going to be a media circus for the next 6 weeks until this all plays out.

We just need Trac to nominate us and only us and the AFL masters of spin will help create the narrative to make it happen to protect the AFL brand.

And let’s face it, there is a high possibility that it could be two non Melbourne teams in the years GF which will be a disaster for the AFL and when Collingwood goes well, the AFL goes well so they will want to see one of the big Melbourne clubs in the 2025 GF to repair the losses from this year.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[NMBB]

I’ve sat back on the Stringer stuff because it’s a genuinely tough one. On the one hand you have a guy with an amateur approach to professional sport, but who is as gifted as any in the league (to rank 12 and 19 league wide for goals and score involvements when you look maybe 70% match fit is insane).

If the club chooses this path I have faith that it can work because as a unit our forward mix is more hard working than brilliant so I think we can accommodate some more magc. He’s a contract year footballer so I’d keep him hungry with a triggered two year deal and unlike Essendon I just wouldn’t play him if he’s the Jake Stringer show.

I can’t help feeling that he’s a big stage performer that only needs 10 possessions in a PF to win us a game and is the type of guy that in the right environment can do a Brian Harris. I’m not gunning for it as I would Peatling or Petracca, but I say go for it if the club are keen.

Is there room for Stringer and Schultz? Just asking

 

[Scodog10]

Is there room for Stringer and Schultz? Just asking

Shoota is one of the primary reasons we can play a guy like Stringer. I also think one of the reasons Shoota struggled more in 2024 than 2022/23 was playing so deep. Between him and McReery pushing further afield, as we saw late year, I think we get a better look forward of centre. Perhaps we could even see Hill on a wing more often so to answer your post succinctly absolutely and I’d say it would be a mid rotation under the most pressure so Lipinski.

 

[JLC]

Are people believing that Stringer could have a Hogan like renaissance?

 

[Anzacday]

Give it a rest. I was asking a specific question about a specific matter - the negligence claim angle - rather that all the other points raised in that post.

Rather than all that is dismissive of the original post and hardly encourages further interaction.
A simple would you mind explaining…. may have have been a better approach?

PS: Thanks Queenie Hearts for posting what some of us may have been thinking/wondering and welcome back!

 

[sideswipe]

There is no doubt the AFL will protect their brand at ALL costs. They have a long sordid history of cover ups and jobs for the boys all in the name of protecting the brand.

Have a read of The Boys Club by Michael Warner for a great insight into the real AFL.

Gil was a master puppeteer with the cover up and this will be Andrew Dillons first real brand management issue. If this story keeps growing in the media, as I suspect it will, the back room meetings and moves by the AFL will start and Trac will get his way given his appalling treatment by the MFC.

A plus for us is that the current head of AFL football is Laura Kane who has black and white running through her veins.

Imagine the brand repair that will be done by Trac returning to his rightful home at Collingwood, playing for his childhood team and returning to greatness to lift the 2025 Premiership Cup with his team mates!

Dare to dream Pies fans, this is going to be a media circus for the next 6 weeks until this all plays out.

We just need Trac to nominate us and only us and the AFL masters of spin will help create the narrative to make it happen to protect the AFL brand.

And let’s face it, there is a high possibility that it could be two non Melbourne teams in the years GF which will be a disaster for the AFL and when Collingwood goes well, the AFL goes well so they will want to see one of the big Melbourne clubs in the 2025 GF to repair the losses from this year.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

Boys Club was an horrendous piece of garbage. Warner has one agenda and fits a narrative around it. Think you are over-stating the AFL’s involvement/interest in this. Other than the circumstances on KB - the medical assessment etc which I believe the afl has reviewed - this is a matter for the club(s).

Whilst definitely not a puppeteer, Dillon has been involved in every big AFL matter since as far back as the Carlton sanctions. He won’t be involved here.

Although if Trac ends up at the Tigers I will think differently!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Scodog10]

Are people believing that Stringer could have a Hogan like renaissance?

No I’m not. Primarily because Hogan was done with chronic calf issues and Perth life wasn’t for him. Stringer with all his faults is still a damn good footballer so if he had a Hogan level turnaround he probably wins the Brownlow next year.

 

[jmac70]

Are people believing that Stringer could have a Hogan like renaissance?

Stringer is not a likeable guy, for obvious reasons. But if he comes to us for a year and kicks 60 goals, I’m on board.

Will need a new nickname. Maybe Jake the Snake

 

[Scodog10]

Boys Club was an horrendous piece of garbage. Warner has one agenda and fits a narrative around it. Think you are over-stating the AFL’s involvement/interest in this. Other than the circumstances on KB - the medical assessment etc which I believe the afl has reviewed - this is a matter for the club(s).

Whilst definitely not a puppeteer, Dillon has been involved in every big AFL matter since as far back as the Carlton sanctions. He won’t be involved here.

Although if Trac ends up at the Tigers I will think differently!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

You don’t happen to have close relationships with anyone involved in said “boys club” do you? Because people could suggest you would have a conflict of interest if that were the case.

 

[GCPie]

Rather than all that, why not give a few lines on how a negligence claim gets up on the current facts at hand. You can’t use “if”.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

You do know the S in OHS stands for Safety.

 

[sideswipe]

You don’t happen to have close relationships with anyone involved in said “boys club” do you? Because people could suggest you would have a conflict of interest if that were the case.

Close relationships are for losers.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app