Daisy's Legacy

Remove this Banner Ad

I didn't have a problem about Wellingham, Dawes, or Shaw leaving. But for some reason my response to Daisy has been different...

Being annoyed at players walking out on the club is hardly limited to Collingwood supporters. Look at some of the stuff being said about Karnezis on the Brisbane board :eek:
 
One misconception about Daisy

2013 was ruined by an ankle injury
2012 he was virtualy fit all year (missed 3 with a hammy early, but ankle wasn't hurt until late in the year) and just played poo all year except for 2 consecutive games against Gold Coast and someone else.

The calls of 2 years of not being fit are untrue, it's more like 1 plus a little bit.
 
rose jam said:
One misconception about Daisy

2013 was ruined by an ankle injury
2012 he was virtualy fit all year (missed 3 with a hammy early, but ankle wasn't hurt until late in the year) and just played poo all year except for 2 consecutive games against Gold Coast and someone else.

The calls of 2 years of not being fit are untrue, it's more like 1 plus a little bit.
Click to expand...

2010 and 2011 versions of Daisy seem like distant memories.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Lockyer24 said:
The only legacy he has left is that the club has hopefully had enough of drawn out contract negotiations from selfish players, and going forward we offer all players the most we can within the constraints of our salary cap in terms of building a team of 22 very good players on decent coin not 3 stars on massive coin and the rest none. If you don't like it then play in the two's for the rest of the year and leave.

I really liked the fact we downgraded Thomas' offer after he dicked us around all year.
Click to expand...

Think it is positive that the club has a firm line and sticks to it, but the thing that muddies the waters there is that players like Thomas did the right thing by the club and took lower deals than they might have been able to get through after the premiership, but then Cloke decided to put himself above the rest when negotiating his deal and that ethos took a pretty big hit. The difference between a Cloke and a Thomas is only that the one was accommodated, the other not. A lot will disagree, but for me Cloke was the one who opened Pandora's box, not Thomas and co.
 
I don't think the dust has settled on Dale's move yet, so it's probably too raw for a lot of people.

My take is that players moving elsewhere solely for more coin isn't all that admirable. I can completely understand if you're on the outer with the current coach, and want to move to get more opportunity/further your career. I can understand to a certain extent if you're in competition with a bunch of other guys who play essentially the same role, and you've got a clear run at a starting position at another club. I can understand if, as happened with Dawes, a change in gameplan means that the writing's on the wall, and your opportunities are going to be limited in future; you want to go where you're valued. I can understand if you've given it a fair crack at your current club, but feel it's time to head back home if an equitable trade can be tabled. I can even understand if you're in the twilight of your career and you've been playing at an elite level at a basket case club, and you just want to have a shot at a flag before you're washed up.

None of those applied with Dale. He was happy to cut corners on his rehab when getting paid good coin, and when a performance-based contract was the sensible option to any fair-minded observer, he jumped ship for more money. I know it's a business, but I don't think he was acting in good faith.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I don't think the dust has settled on Dale's move yet, so it's probably too raw for a lot of people.

My take is that players moving elsewhere solely for more coin isn't all that admirable. I can completely understand if you're on the outer with the current coach, and want to move to get more opportunity/further your career. I can understand to a certain extent if you're in competition with a bunch of other guys who play essentially the same role, and you've got a clear run at a starting position at another club. I can understand if, as happened with Dawes, a change in gameplan means that the writing's on the wall, and your opportunities are going to be limited in future; you want to go where you're valued. I can understand if you've given it a fair crack at your current club, but feel it's time to head back home if an equitable trade can be tabled. I can even understand if you're in the twilight of your career and you've been playing at an elite level at a basket case club, and you just want to have a shot at a flag before you're washed up.

None of those applied with Dale. He was happy to cut corners on his rehab when getting paid good coin, and when a performance-based contract was the sensible option to any fair-minded observer, he jumped ship for more money. I know it's a business, but I don't think he was acting in good faith.
Click to expand...


Chuck.jpg
 
Baltimore Jack said:
I don't know if Daisy was talking to other clubs, but I take your word for it.

But so what, White was talking to us (assuming the media can be believed) before Sydney had made a decision on him
Pebbles certainly was, because he has said so publicly. Sydney were desperate to keep him and offered him far better terms than we did.
My point is this, Daisy did nothing out of the ordinary and he did nothing that we haven't done in getting players to our club.

Shaw at the time was contracted to us, regardless of any future decision we might decide to make about that.
He therefore must have agreed to go.
That is the rule.
Daisy also made exactly the same decision to go.

That's how they are the same
Click to expand...
I have no problem if Sydney supporters are upset at White and Brisbane supporters are at Karnezis, GWS at Adams, it's natural. I'm just pointing out the difference between Thomas and Shaw and why there is a different reaction between the two with the fans.

Also with Shaw wanting to go, I'd say it's more he accepted to leave after he was told the club wanted to trade him. Like I was saying before, no player with any currency would want to stay after they've been told the club doesn't want them around. Daisy on the other hand was saying he's leaving and you can match my offer if you'd like.

Put it into a situation which you might be able to relate to. Say you had a job, then your boss said they're not going to renew your contract as they don't want you around. They'd help you find a new position elsewhere. Would you agree to move on with their help or stay there until your contract expired?

Now compare that to someone who you worked with, that the company wanted to keep, but found a position at a rival company that paid more.

The similarity is that both people leave by choice, but the reasons are a lot different.

Jelly Bean said:
If Heath wanted to stay, he would have. He was contracted, and the rules prevent trading a player who doesn't want to leave.

Dale Thomas also wanted to stay, however the offer to him wasn't appropriate. So he left.
Click to expand...
A contract guarantees pay. Clubs terminate contracts all the time.
 
I was upset at first because he was playing everyone. I listened to his Nova interview when he said a lot of people will have egg on their faces in the end because as he speaks his manager is in talks with Collingwood. Then he says a lot of people that threw the number 13 jumpers in rubbish bin will start looking for them again. That is where it hurts. Be straight up and not give the supporters false hope.
He knew he was leaving to join papa Malthouse & should have just shut up.
I also understand his situation. He probably knows his ankle is stuffed and went for security.
I would prefer the stupid scum pay his $700k a season than he be on big bucks with us.
We will get a gun player with pick 6 who will replace him & will be 7 years younger.
I still have the prick on my wall. Stuck with him.
A mate gave me a collage for my birthday with Swan, Pendles, Beams and Daisy.
I bloody can't throw it away. Signed by all of them.
I would never have bought it, but I can't throw away a birthday present.
 
Ed D said:
I have no problem if Sydney supporters are upset at White and Brisbane supporters are at Karnezis, GWS at Adams, it's natural. I'm just pointing out the difference between Thomas and Shaw and why there is a different reaction between the two with the fans.
Click to expand...
The difference is who was pushing the disconnect, when it is club driven - ie H.Shaw, Tarrant etc - players are still lauded as greats....often some fans upset ad question the club, but soon forgotten.

When it is player driven - ie Thomas, N.Davis etc - the fans can't accept it....how dare a good player want out, why couldn't they be up front to us in the media, where is the loyalty etc.

slightly change Ed's scenario ad Put it into a situation which i think sums it up, relating to two different workmates.

Workmate A, (h.shaw) the boss said they're not going to renew their contract. They'd help them find a new position elsewhere. Workmate A takes it badly, but they eventually find a new gig and are better off.

Workmate B, (daisy) was a popular person who that the company wanted to keep, but they found a position at a rival company that paid more so they left.

Collingwood supporters would only want to catch up with a beer with workmate A....opting to delete contact and not even sign the farewell card of workmate B.
 
rose jam said:
One misconception about Daisy

2013 was ruined by an ankle injury
2012 he was virtualy fit all year (missed 3 with a hammy early, but ankle wasn't hurt until late in the year) and just played poo all year except for 2 consecutive games against Gold Coast and someone else.

The calls of 2 years of not being fit are untrue, it's more like 1 plus a little bit.
Click to expand...
I remember he hurt his ankle early in the 2012 season. One game against Geelong he ran out and half time and the trainer but him on his back and took his sock off while the other boys jogged around.
 
Ed D said:
Wrong. Contracts can be terminated against a players will, the only thing a player is entitled to is the amount of money the contract states. As soon as the club decided they wanted to trade Shaw, the only way he could have stayed would be if he pleaded with Buckley to stay and changed his mind. No player would do that if they held currency and their coach doesn't want them.
Click to expand...

This is not true. The AFL has a rule that says contracted players can't be traded unless they agree to it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

rose jam said:
One misconception about Daisy

2013 was ruined by an ankle injury
2012 he was virtualy fit all year (missed 3 with a hammy early, but ankle wasn't hurt until late in the year) and just played poo all year except for 2 consecutive games against Gold Coast and someone else.

The calls of 2 years of not being fit are untrue, it's more like 1 plus a little bit.
Click to expand...

Thats how I remember it too. On his wiki page it says he played 20 games (out of a possible 25?) in 2012, which is quite a few for someone who was supposed to have had an injury-disrupted year
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I don't think the dust has settled on Dale's move yet, so it's probably too raw for a lot of people.

My take is that players moving elsewhere solely for more coin isn't all that admirable. I can completely understand if you're on the outer with the current coach, and want to move to get more opportunity/further your career. I can understand to a certain extent if you're in competition with a bunch of other guys who play essentially the same role, and you've got a clear run at a starting position at another club. I can understand if, as happened with Dawes, a change in gameplan means that the writing's on the wall, and your opportunities are going to be limited in future; you want to go where you're valued. I can understand if you've given it a fair crack at your current club, but feel it's time to head back home if an equitable trade can be tabled. I can even understand if you're in the twilight of your career and you've been playing at an elite level at a basket case club, and you just want to have a shot at a flag before you're washed up.

None of those applied with Dale. He was happy to cut corners on his rehab when getting paid good coin, and when a performance-based contract was the sensible option to any fair-minded observer, he jumped ship for more money. I know it's a business, but I don't think he was acting in good faith.
Click to expand...

You hit the nail on the head!
 
Shpeshal Ed said:
OP is deluded.

Thomas wanted to leave and Thomas wanted more money. You're naive to believe anything else. If he TRULY wanted to stay and he TRULY was happy with less money than Carlton was offering, we would have kept him.
Click to expand...

It simply ain't that simple.

This was Thomas' big contract, cashing in on his great form from 10/11, when he was what a top 20 player in the league.

He may hv initially been very keen to stay at Collingwood.

His mgr may hv been started negotiations thinking 600k is reasonable but to shoot for closer to 700k, Collingwood unfortunately think he is 400k plus performance incentives....clearly something would hv to give.

Mgr inform Dale, so he tests the water.....and he finds that lucrative 700k contract they were hoping to get from Collingwood.

Collingwood no intention of matching the 700k, so Dale leaves.

If Collingwood TRULY wanted to keep him, they would have.
 
I personally think Daisy would have stayed had he not of injured his ankle again. 2 years with barely any football would be very frustrating.
In his interviews he still speaks kindly of the club and bucks. But talks about how a fresh start helps. Mentally he was probably tapped, personally I don't understand the fresh start line, but allot of players do it
 
doppleganger said:
The difference is who was pushing the disconnect, when it is club driven - ie H.Shaw, Tarrant etc - players are still lauded as greats....often some fans upset ad question the club, but soon forgotten.

When it is player driven - ie Thomas, N.Davis etc - the fans can't accept it....how dare a good player want out, why couldn't they be up front to us in the media, where is the loyalty etc.

slightly change Ed's scenario ad Put it into a situation which i think sums it up, relating to two different workmates.

Workmate A, (h.shaw) the boss said they're not going to renew their contract. They'd help them find a new position elsewhere. Workmate A takes it badly, but they eventually find a new gig and are better off.

Workmate B, (daisy) was a popular person who that the company wanted to keep, but they found a position at a rival company that paid more so they left.

Collingwood supporters would only want to catch up with a beer with workmate A....opting to delete contact and not even sign the farewell card of workmate B.
Click to expand...

Spot on...
I have no hard feelings for any players who left Collingwood over the last few years, but Daisy is definitely different. I'll always be appreciative of his role in our premiership win though... but for personal reasons in that I have a 10yo son, who was born in Qld, who's mother and her side of the family are League supporters (and his step-dad tells him that AFL is shit and won't let him watch it at home) - he still is a mad Collingwood supporter, and prefers it to League by far. He's only got to know the players better in the last few years, and Daisy was his favourite so I got him his first propper AFL guernsey with 13 on it last year only for his idol to go to the team I've taught him to hate most... Arghhh, F*** you Daisy!
 
Until he retires from carlscum he is dead to me and has no legacy, when he does retire though i will remember him as a collingwood champion. As much as i hate the man right now, it can't be forgotten that he was probably our best overall players across the 2 grand finals. 2010 was one of the best days of my life and without daisy it probably wouldnt of happened. So when that day comes when he and MM leave the scum. They will both be Collingwood legends in my mind, but until then the only coach that matters is bucks and the only #13 that i'll love is tay!!
 
jjsmitty8 said:
I've got a few viewpoints on this.

1) I whole heartedly believe that MM was a big part in his decision to go to Carlton.

2) I will give him shit in round 7 because that's footy and he deflected to our biggest rival. He had the opportunity to stay at our club on a fair salary but decided against it, so that's life.

3) Footy is a job, if I got offered a significant amount more to go to another company and do the same thing I would strongly consider.

4) I'm glad Collingwood didn't decide to match the offer, and over pay him just for the sake of keeping him.
Click to expand...
I must reply to this post because it has all the salient points about Thomas and his departure.I agree strongly that the biggest reason that he joined the scum is that MM went there and if Malthouse had stayed and honoured his contract then Thomas probably would still be here but I am F----- glad he,s gone and none of this bullshit from me about how I will think better of him when he leaves them because I will not ever change my present view.
He is done and dusted as a bloke the same as N Davis who I cannot bring myself to think better of even though time has past.I also am very content with compensation the club received for him,the writing was on the wall about Thomas,s leaving after the Richmond match last season and it became fait accompli when Malthouse joined the Blues.
 
doppleganger said:
It simply ain't that simple.

This was Thomas' big contract, cashing in on his great form from 10/11, when he was what a top 20 player in the league.
Click to expand...

If Carlton want to pay players based on 2010 / 2011 form then I don't have a problem with that.

I prefer a team who pays their players based on what they can bring to the team in 2014 and beyond.

Collingwood no intention of matching the 700k, so Dale leaves.

If Collingwood TRULY wanted to keep him, they would have.
Click to expand...

If Collingwood TRULY thought Daisy was worth $700k per year out of the salary cap for 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and optionally 2018, then yes, they would have kept him.

Turns out they didn't - doesn't take much imagination to understand why.
 
TheWing121 said:
In his interviews he still speaks kindly of the club and bucks. But talks about how a fresh start helps. Mentally he was probably tapped, personally I don't understand the fresh start line, but allot of players do it
Click to expand...

A lot of players have good media training and know the right things to say.

When was the last time you heard a player say "Look, the coach was an absolute tosser. He clearly had no idea what he was doing. Couldn't put up with it any more." ?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Daisy's Legacy

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top