Player Watch Jordan De Goey

[Gone Critical]

Indefinite to me means we can adjust according to his behaviour and how we see fit
Great work from the club
This could be the making of this lad
I've mentioned before the company he has frequented has led him astray but then it's often the case with school mates , he needs to budy up with some wiser heads .

Who are you or Collingwood to make such a judgement. My mates from my school days are still a big glue in my life, had plenty of good times , done stupid and wise things. You would know nothing of how strong and significant the bonds that tie these young men together are.

 

[Scodog10]

Betcha they wouldnt

Of course not and therein lies the other issue I have with the decision. Pendles gets done on the verge of the finals and there’s no way we can do anything, but go hard...

This is something I don’t understand from some posters. You say the club would know who he’s hanging out with, I don’t disagree but I don’t know that either. If we assume they do, and they turn a blind eye, and don’t intervene in the player’s social life, as some people are suggesting, then the player spirals down and becomes a liability to the club (Gardner and Cousins), how does the club respond when questioned on what action they took on the information they had?

I don’t believe they turn a blind eye I just don’t think they’re as proactive as they could be with preventative measures.

What I would like the club to do is everything in their power to provide players the tools to not be in situations like this. If the club had done just that I don’t believe this punishment would have been possible. They can also respond by simply saying that they’d done just what I said above and despite that he made a terrible error in judgement so we’ll continue working with him to help him make better decisions. If that can’t be done then at some point in the future you part ways.

It really comes down to whether you think the club has done enough behind the scenes? Given everything we’ve heard and read in this thread I’m as close to certain as one can be that we haven’t. It’s a symptom of why we continue to wallow in mediocrity, IMO.

 

[sideswipe]

No. I am trying to illustrate that we don't live in a dry world where there is only laws and the state to deal with them and nothing else. I'm trying to dispel that rather autistic view.

WTF is a "rather autistic view"?

 

[left at home]

I don't think that this is about media appearances. The club could have imposed a substantially lesser sanction than it has without too much of a media flurry. In my opinion, based on nothing at all, the club has taken the temperature of the playing group and this is the result.

I don’t think you can totally discount what the sponsors ect would think on this,
But l also think you are right, that the playing group, led by the leadership have had enough, and Jordan certainly got the message

 

[Gone Critical]

No. I am trying to illustrate that we don't live in a dry world where there is only laws and the state to deal with them and nothing else. I'm trying to dispel that rather autistic view.

Well its a terrible example then. Everyone would agree parents should have a right to disipline their own children independant of the school.

 

[Pies2017]

Collingwood, clearly, and quite pretentiously have to uphold it's brand.
The AFL are the same, and when the season starts watch the poisonous advertisements of McDonalds, KFC, Sportsbet, Carlton Draught, and that's not to mention all the money all clubs make of pokies that makes it's way to the AFL headquarters that ruins lives and tares families apart.

It's all a load of bollox, take a step back and have a think about it.

There are a shitload of kids who make it at AFL but don't have the maturity to be the role models they forced to be because of the baying blood of the media and the fans who feed of it. A Collingwood scandal is of most interest.

Personally I care little about indiscretions like this at Collingwood or at other clubs. Although given the reality that these guys are for whatever reason purported to be role models and the unfair scrutiny that has been the blowtorch at our club you can understand Buckley and the players being well pissed off with JDG who's ****** up not once but twice.

That said, it would take real balls and integrity to not cave in to the pressures of sponsorship and the brand and just say 'looks this isn't our business, we'll leave it up to the law thanks, we'll also support JDG with guidance and counselling to help him in this tough time'.

How ironic has it been with Mark Robinson both times saying JDG has let Buckley down, is he taking the piss?

It's kind of laughable that one can't see how ridiculous our society is that we care more about the integrity of a young athlete than that of judges/police/politicians etc.

Yeah but we don’t give a **** about what pollies are doing in late September. A footy player can make cry by kicking (or missing) a GF winning goal. It’s not ideal, but we’re invested in this sports thing, takes us back to our tribal roots or something. Don’t you have to check your integrity at the door if you want to make a career of politics?

 

[bananatigz]

From an outsider’s perspective, I think the decision paints your club in a very positive light. The question of whether a player should be held to a higher standard or has an obligation to present as a role model is a valid one, but there’s no doubt that currently that is the case and the players are more than aware of that.

I think all parts of the decision are quite well reasoned. The fine was inevitable and like the overall package sent a message that the club was taking this extremely seriously and not brushing this under the carpet as most footy clubs have done in the past. I love the idea of having to work full time away from the club for 4 weeks, if that doesn’t give JDG an understanding of the privileged position he holds than nothing will. Indefinite suspension means he has to show the club he is serious about turning his behaviour around, but also leaves the door open if he proves himself that he doesn’t miss any of the regular season and does not inconvenience the team.

Sends a strong message, leaves the door open in terms of suspension during the season and provides JDG the strongest opportunity to learn and grow from this. Hats off, personally.

 

[TradeDraft]

Guess De Goey be the last 1 on the Long List to get a New Contract Offer IF he even Gets One

 

[TradeDraft]

I'm a little disappointed. I see next to no chance that De Goey is available for round 1 now, which is hugely disappointing considering he was our best onfield against Hawthorn last year and probably the only player who kept us in the game. It's a huge leg up to the Hawks.

Hopefully he puts his head down the next few weeks and is able to push for selection, but that seems unlikely.

I'm just not a huge fan of punishing the club in whole for the actions of 1 person. I'm glad he has vowed off alcohol all year, that he will make donations and also contribute to charity. As opposed to a club ban, I would've hammered him on the track, forcing his to start early and finish late.

I think this punishment reflects that he has larger issues than just this latest indiscretion. I get the feeling his attitude as a whole has been off for some time, and this was the final straw.

In any event, I am a huge De Goey fan, and really hope this is the turning point in his career. We need him this year.

Well that was his 2nd Strike and Club has not seen Improvement for De Goey so he Needs a Good Kick up the Ass because Club would not Hesitate to letting him go at Years End

 

[Pies2017]

Of course not and therein lies the other issue I have with the decision. Pendles gets done on the verge of the finals and there’s no way we can do anything, but go hard...



I don’t believe they turn a blind eye I just don’t think they’re as proactive as they could be with preventative measures.

What I would like the club to do is everything in their power to provide players the tools to not be in situations like this. If the club had done just that I don’t believe this punishment would have been possible. They can also respond by simply saying that they’d done just what I said above and despite that he made a terrible error in judgement so we’ll continue working with him to help him make better decisions. If that can’t be done then at some point in the future you part ways.

It really comes down to whether you think the club has done enough behind the scenes? Given everything we’ve heard and read in this thread I’m as close to certain as one can be that we haven’t. It’s a symptom of why we continue to wallow in mediocrity, IMO.

Completely agree with the middle part.

But this means we have to be ok with the club’s reach into the players’ personal life, which clearly some posters aren’t ok with.

Don’t know anything of the inner workings of the club to comment on whether we’ve failed JDG in this instance.

 

[TradeDraft]

Long bow. Cousins and Gardner were being befriended by serious crims.

De Goey is I assume hanging around with his mates from pre Collingwood and they are such a soft target. I am uncomfortable with the club being the arbiter of who he should associate with.

Well he should be Grown Up enough to know what he Should and Should Not Being Doing and These Mates he has just make him do bad things and are Terrible Role Models

 

[TradeDraft]

Who are you or Collingwood to make such a judgement. My mates from my school days are still a big glue in my life, had plenty of good times , done stupid and wise things. You would know nothing of how strong and significant the bonds that tie these young men together are.

Well then IF De Goey does not Change then he can go to another Club or go back to playing Local Footyso he can Play Footy and Hang Out with Mates

 

[TradeDraft]

WTF is a "rather autistic view"?

What do you think?

 

[Old Spice]

Well its a terrible example then. Everyone would agree parents should have a right to disipline their own children independant of the school.

I think the terrible example is to imagine that a club has no interest or say over a players conduct. Spectacularly naive when so much money is invested in these people who are brands in their own right. A player can opt to say I do what I want b but a club would then say farewell.

 

[Gone Critical]

I think the terrible example is to imagine that a club has no interest or say over a players conduct. Spectacularly naive when so much money is invested in these people who are brands in their own right. A player can opt to say I do what I want b but a club would then say farewell.

Where did I say they had no interest or say. I dont think they should have the right to impose massive , out of proportion penalties for something that occurred outside the club. I see them as having much less ownership of the players than you, that doesnt preclude their interest.

 

[Pies2017]

Long bow. Cousins and Gardner were being befriended by serious crims.

De Goey is I assume hanging around with his mates from pre Collingwood and they are such a soft target. I am uncomfortable with the club being the arbiter of who he should associate with.

That didn’t read well, I didn’t mean to infer that JDG is hanging out with criminals. I was talking to the issue of how far a club can reach into a players off field life and the Eagles came to mind as an example. I think they became the example in this area.

 

[noideaatall]

This is why I’m disappointed. As a club they absolutely knew of the type of people he was hanging around with and the questionable decisions he was making.
All this decision has done now is confirm that it took an incident for us to actually act on it. I feel like club and player have let us down equally and it just continues the frustration of the past few years!

Inclined to agree, particularly if the club was aware or believed his friendship group was a problem. It raises the question, has the club been able to offer alternatives? He is relatively young and been at the club for a significant portion of his life. Has he had every opportunity to develop more postive relationships during his time at the club?

Now if we had retained Gubby's services he could have been spending every second night and every weekend with some club supplied minder/trainer. Said mates would not have been a problem.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Indefinite is not same as infinite.

It could be the same. You never know. De Goey may never display the desired attitude. Ultimately it's the supporters who suffer. With the injuries to Elliott and Wells looking longer term than anticipated, this potentially infinite suspension is stripping the gloss off the appeal of our season opener. There are 16 clubs in the competition but only Collingwood seems to feature in these pre-season shenanigans.

 

[mike123]

From an outsider’s perspective, I think the decision paints your club in a very positive light. The question of whether a player should be held to a higher standard or has an obligation to present as a role model is a valid one, but there’s no doubt that currently that is the case and the players are more than aware of that.

I think all parts of the decision are quite well reasoned. The fine was inevitable and like the overall package sent a message that the club was taking this extremely seriously and not brushing this under the carpet as most footy clubs have done in the past. I love the idea of having to work full time away from the club for 4 weeks, if that doesn’t give JDG an understanding of the privileged position he holds than nothing will. Indefinite suspension means he has to show the club he is serious about turning his behaviour around, but also leaves the door open if he proves himself that he doesn’t miss any of the regular season and does not inconvenience the team.

Sends a strong message, leaves the door open in terms of suspension during the season and provides JDG the strongest opportunity to learn and grow from this. Hats off, personally.

Unfortunately four weeks with the VFL team hurts his round one chances. It should have been two weeks at most.

 

[Scodog10]

Completely agree with the middle part.

But this means we have to be ok with the club’s reach into the players’ personal life, which clearly some posters aren’t ok with.

Don’t know anything of the inner workings of the club to comment on whether we’ve failed JDG in this instance.

I don’t have too many issues with the club reaching into the personal lives of players. It’s been going on for umpteen years in playing contracts and they’re the most important asset the club has. The caveat being that it’s done in the right way and if you can empower the players to be proactive about that themselves even better.

It probably comes down to your definition of failure. A bit grey that one and one that could get very circular.

FWIW McLure on SEN was just talking about how proactive JDG was in setting his own punishment. It could just be the remorse, but hopefully it’s an acknowledgement that change is needed.

 

[Gone Critical]

That didn’t read well, I didn’t mean to infer that JDG is hanging out with criminals. I was talking to the issue of how far a club can reach into a players off field life and the Eagles came to mind as an example. I think they became the example in this area.

Tell me what you know of his mates. Do you know how strong their ties are, do you know anything about their history together, how they may have been there for each other at different times etc.

These players are people first, footballers 2nd. When all the fanfare dies down and they are back into ordinary life it wont be the footy club who is there for them it will be their mates and family.

Again a real slippery slope for people on a keyboard or even the club telling him he should ditch his mates.

 

[Apex36]

Of course not and therein lies the other issue I have with the decision. Pendles gets done on the verge of the finals and there’s no way we can do anything, but go hard...

Can’t really agree with this. Pendles has been a model citizen for over a decade now, it’s a stark contrast to JDG who’s was already treading on thin ice. If you think that this punishment is purely over this isolated incident then I’m not sure what to say. This was just the straw that broke the camels back with Jordy.

My 2c on the punishment:

On first glance I was shocked and thought it was extremely heavy handed, but after thinking about it, I like it better than what he copped last year. By saying his suspension is indefinite, it gives the club flexibility that putting a number on it doesn’t allow, whilst also placating the noisy crowd demanding he be sacked. He could be available within the first couple of rounds this way, rather than missing a third of the year, with a simple statement from the club saying “We’re really pleased with the way Jordy had conducted himself over the past x weeks. His training standards have lifted dramatically and we believe he now understands how privelaged he is to be in an AFL list” etc etc.

Whether or not it turns out that way is anyone’s guess, but this at least sends JDG a message whilst still keeping the door open slightly for him to get games reasonably early, which is something he can hold on to and work towards.

I also like the 4 weeks of working in the real world. The kid needs to have his eyes opened and realise how good he has it compared to the majority of us stuck in 9-5 work.

Fingers crossed this has the right effect and is the making of him. I hope that guys like Maxwell and Caff work closely with him and provide good support, the kid needs to still feel like he’s wanted at the club for this to actually work.

 

[Apex36]

What do you think?

That was a crack at OS, not you mate.

 

[Gone Critical]

Inclined to agree, particularly if the club was aware or believed his friendship group was a problem. It raises the question, has the club been able to offer alternatives? He is relatively young and been at the club for a significant portion of his life. Has he had every opportunity to develop more postive relationships during his time at the club.

Now if we had retained Gubby's services he could have been spending every second night and every weekend with some club supplied minder/trainer. Said mates would not have been a problem.

OMG so you know his mates are not a positive in his life. Not sure where the feeling an employer has a right to control an employee so fully comes from.

 

[sideswipe]

What do you think?

I was genuinely puzzled as to what the previous poster meant when he used that term. Am on your side Tradey.