News Ned Guy List Manager to leave after MD

Remove this Banner Ad

Kappa said:
I wouldn't sack him, but he's on notice. He needs some wins otherwise there are many others who can take his role.
Click to expand...

I'd go a bit further - the Beams recruitment / contract and the Treloar situation (both the contract extension and subsequent desire to move him on) have Ned teetering on the edge. You only get so many major stuff ups before the the axe needs to fall.
 
76woodenspooners said:
OK, so not that one? ️
Click to expand...

Sorry, didn’t see your previous post. Na, definitely not that one. It was a channel 9 Footy Classified interview with Craig Hutchinson hosting. It was an interview shortly after signing with us.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
If Ned stuffs up this trade and draft period he needs to be given the boot. Would prefer he be gone now but it’s too late and too close to draft and trade time

The contacts he has organised and the treatment of Treloar shows he has lost control of the list.

Let see what he does with Checkers (hopefully 2 year deal with triggers for a third )

And JDG paying his worth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

76woodenspooners said:
There are one of / combination of many reasons why Dayne might not have worked out. Typically the way it works is that senior management (Footy Manager / CEO) identify if the problem could have been avoided, whether there are learnings form it / negligence / etc ... and take appropriate action. And if senior management don’t do that, then it’s them who needs to go ... hence why some folks are calling for Walsh / Ed to be accountable for this and other things that didn’t work out.

For example: Ned Guy might have said “Look, there’s a 80% chance of Dayne quitting under a mental health cloud, and 20% chance that he’ll be a solid contributor”. To which Ned Guy’s bosses may have said “Well, they’re better odds than an 18 year old pick 20ish ... do it!!”

Would you call that a stuff up against Ned Guy?
Click to expand...
Interesting take here Spoon. Now put Adam Treloar in place of Beams and perhaps the learnings by the club has lead us to the current Treloar scenario, where he's up for trade. The likelihood of Treloar struggling next year given his past mental health issues and impacts Beams and Sidebottom, for different reasons but similar to Treloar and his family, absence had on our Team would play a part in the list decision making.

I don't know much about Ned but I have no doubt Geoff Walsh would be across all the goings on and I expect him to have his finger on the pulse.
 
76woodenspooners said:
Who is to blame for Dayne Beams not working out?

Is it the List Manager for picking him?

Is it the Club Doctor for not putting in place a successful mental health treatment plan?

Is it Dayne’s line coach / senior coach for not providing a psychologically safe environment for Dayne?

Is it ..., is it ..., is it ...

There are one of / combination of many reasons why Dayne might not have worked out. Typically the way it works is that senior management (Footy Manager / CEO) identify if the problem could have been avoided, whether there are learnings form it / negligence / etc ... and take appropriate action. And if senior management don’t do that, then it’s them who needs to go ... hence why some folks are calling for Walsh / Ed to be accountable for this and other things that didn’t work out.



Indeed.



It may be a stuff-up, or it may be a punt that didn’t work out.


For example: Ned Guy might have said “Look, there’s a 80% chance of Dayne quitting under a mental health cloud, and 20% chance that he’ll be a solid contributor”. To which Ned Guy’s bosses may have said “Well, they’re better odds than an 18 year old pick 20ish ... do it!!”

Would you call that a stuff up against Ned Guy?



Agree.



Disagree with that.

Whilst he is employed / contracted by the club, the club have an obligation to provide duty of care. That’s a legal and moral responsibility that transcends any opinions that the player group / player leadership may have.

Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that he goes to training, or hangs out in the locker-room with his team-mates, or is even allowed on-site ... it just means that he is supported ...

... and whilst we don’t know what level of support the club was / wasn’t providing him with - fair to say that if he needed to drive his car into a tree for his cry for help to be heard ...

... the support he was getting clearly wasn’t very effective.
Click to expand...
He wouldn't have made the decision without agreement from other key players. That doesn't let him off imv. It's his remit. The little issue of giving up 2 first round picks and our apparent cap issues is also part of the equation here... NOT getting Beams on $500k and using the draft picks was clearly the better option for our list in our circumstances... even if Beams had won the B&F for us this year. This is a list managers decision. He has to wear it.

Regarding your bottom point about the support he was/wasn't getting... I think you're agreeing with me actually. When I said "fair enough" I was referring to how the player group allegedly reacted to what was allegedly done. I can understand that initial reaction. The player group's feelings of anger and distrust is natural. So the club is between a rock and a hard place but it is their role to smooth it over and fix it in the clubs best interests and the best interests of the players. They clearly weren't able to do this. Its disappointing that the club, the player group and Beams couldn't find a path back. End result:.. negative for all parties.

I really hope the club won't be hearing from Beam's lawyers any time in the future.
 
Bay Pie said:
Interesting take here Spoon. Now put Adam Treloar in place of Beams and perhaps the learnings by the club has lead us to the current Treloar scenario, where he's up for trade. The likelihood of Treloar struggling next year given his past mental health issues and impacts Beams and Sidebottom, for different reasons but similar to Treloar and his family, absence had on our Team would play a part in the list decision making.
Click to expand...

It’s a fair point to raise ...

... but I don’t buy it for one bit.

A couple of reasons:

(1) You can’t equate one person’s mental health issues with that of somebody else. Just because player 1 exited the game as a result of clinical depression triggered by the death of a parent, that’s no reason to assume in any way that the same fate will become of player 2 who has OCD and whose partner will be moving interstate with their child for work.

(2) Kudos to Treloar for having the grace to be open and public about mental health. This helps reduce the stigmatism and can encourage others to seek help when needed. But that doesn’t mean that Treloar should now be disadvantaged / exploited because he chose to go public about it ... so much for reducing stigmatism. Of course it doesn’t absolve Treloar for being responsible for it either, but let’s not forget that Treloar has done nothing wrong here. I’m a bit disappointed (but not surprised) that our Club / AFL / Mental Health Advocacy groups haven’t smashed Rendell for his comments around this ... they’re at least as out-of-line as his comments about recruiting aboriginal kids.

(3) What business is this of the club’s anyway? (Unlike Beams) Treloar is a contracted player. if his partner wants to move up to Queensland and if Adam intends to honour his contract ... then IMO the club should either support him or stay the heck out of it. Adam is an adult.

IMHO this has nothing to do with Kim moving to Queensland, and everything to do with wanting to clear salary cap. Are we seeing a new direction in the club here? In the past the club honoured contracts (Jarryd Witts, Nathan Buckley). Is the club now getting ruthless in its quest for success?

If so, I’m curious to see what affect that has on culture and performance.
 
Scritchyscroony said:
He wouldn't have made the decision without agreement from other key players. That doesn't let him off imv. It's his remit. The little issue of giving up 2 first round picks and our apparent cap issues is also part of the equation here... NOT getting Beams on $500k and using the draft picks was clearly the better option for our list in our circumstances... even if Beams had won the B&F for us this year. This is a list managers decision. He has to wear it.
Click to expand...

TBH, I don’t really get how this works. I’m assuming that list management decisions are made by the list management committee (Buckley, Walsh, Guy ... I know Ed and CEO were on that committee too, but don’t know if that is still the case). I’d imagine that Guy is just the point person who convene’s the meetings, writes the agenda, signs the contracts on behalf of the club, runs the negotiations, etc

Regarding your bottom point about the support he was/wasn't getting... I think you're agreeing with me actually. When I said "fair enough" I was referring to how the player group allegedly reacted to what was allegedly done. I can understand that initial reaction. The player group's feelings of anger and distrust is natural.
Click to expand...

Sure.

So the club is between a rock and a hard place ...
Click to expand...

Not Really. The club have a clear duty of care, and that over-rides any feelings the players have.

... but it is their role to smooth it over and fix it in the clubs best interests and the best interests of the players.
Click to expand...

I get the impression that the club are terrible at doing this.

They clearly weren't able to do this. Its disappointing that the club, the player group and Beams couldn't find a path back. End result:.. negative for all parties.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% ...

... but there’s still more to play out here. Let’s not forget that neither the club nor the AFL have announced Dayne’s retirement yet.

I really hope the club won't be hearing from Beam's lawyers any time in the future.
Click to expand...

I doubt it ... if he had any intentions along those lines he wouldn’t have been so vocal in the media in the last week.
 
76woodenspooners said:
It’s a fair point to raise ...

... but I don’t buy it for one bit.

A couple of reasons:

(1) You can’t equate one person’s mental health issues with that of somebody else. Just because player 1 exited the game as a result of clinical depression triggered by the death of a parent, that’s no reason to assume in any way that the same fate will become of player 2 who has OCD and whose partner will be moving interstate with their child for work.

(2) Kudos to Treloar for having the grace to be open and public about mental health. This helps reduce the stigmatism and can encourage others to seek help when needed. But that doesn’t mean that Treloar should now be disadvantaged / exploited because he chose to go public about it ... so much for reducing stigmatism. Of course it doesn’t absolve Treloar for being responsible for it either, but let’s not forget that Treloar has done nothing wrong here. I’m a bit disappointed (but not surprised) that our Club / AFL / Mental Health Advocacy groups haven’t smashed Rendell for his comments around this ... they’re at least as out-of-line as his comments about recruiting aboriginal kids.

(3) What business is this of the club’s anyway? (Unlike Beams) Treloar is a contracted player. if his partner wants to move up to Queensland and if Adam intends to honour his contract ... then IMO the club should either support him or stay the heck out of it. Adam is an adult.

IMHO this has nothing to do with Kim moving to Queensland, and everything to do with wanting to clear salary cap. Are we seeing a new direction in the club here? In the past the club honoured contracts (Jarryd Witts, Nathan Buckley). Is the club now getting ruthless in its quest for success?

If so, I’m curious to see what affect that has on culture and performance.
Click to expand...
Sorry mate, don't agree at all. Once bitten, twice shy. I'm a paying member. If Treloar wants some time off next year to go see his family, why am I paying him to do that? Same as Sidey this year. I totally understand the players point of view but I'd expect the club be able to mitigate that risk? Why can't the club have learned from existing players mental health issues and do something about it before it happens? Protect the Clubs and their members interests. Does the club let something that's a very real possibility to occur, happen again? Once he goes up there, he's not coming back until Kim is ready to return. If he does come back, he's going to rue that missed time with his family, very soon after returning. Kids change so much during those first few years of life and Treloar is going to miss a massive chunk of that and he'll realise that once he heads up there. What if she signs another contract up North and the club has to go through this all again? She's still got many good years left at that level if she's good enough. Matt Rendall has spoken very candidly of Treloar's mindset and Treloar himself has spoken about it. I recall his poor form when he split from his former girlfriend.

The club gets left without a key player during the season again.

As far as the salary goes, you believe the club extended a guy, 2 years before his contract expired, on a higher wage, to reduce the salary cap issues? Doesn't make sense. His original deal was $4M over 6 years starting in 2016. I'm yet to hear a reason, that makes sense, why we would extend a guy for more money to save money? Perhaps you believe his deal is closer to $600-$700k post 2021 and that's what we're trying to clear. I doubt it as there would have to be other reasons for moving him on. That's a reasonable wage for a player of his ilk. Interesting the media claim was originally $900k p.a., now it's $800k p.a. If it's $600k/$700k p.a. does that sort of kill the story it's all about salary cap. If we are willing to pay a chunk of his salary to move him on, doesn't that defeat the purpose of a salary dump?

The supporters are the lifeblood of the club. The players/coaches/admin staff/board etc are representatives of the club, at this present time.

As for the effect of the culture and performance, what was he effect not having Beams and Sidebottom contributing at the end of last year?
 
Last edited:
76woodenspooners said:
TBH, I don’t really get how this works. I’m assuming that list management decisions are made by the list management committee (Buckley, Walsh, Guy ... I know Ed and CEO were on that committee too, but don’t know if that is still the case). I’d imagine that Guy is just the point person who convene’s the meetings, writes the agenda, signs the contracts on behalf of the club, runs the negotiations, etc



Sure.



Not Really. The club have a clear duty of care, and that over-rides any feelings the players have.



I get the impression that the club are terrible at doing this.



Agree 100% ...

... but there’s still more to play out here. Let’s not forget that neither the club nor the AFL have announced Dayne’s retirement yet.



I doubt it ... if he had any intentions along those lines he wouldn’t have been so vocal in the media in the last week.
Click to expand...

Is it normal to have your president on the "list management committee" across the AFL I wonder?

But the clubs duty of care inherently includes looking after the feelings and interests of the whole player group. Given the allegation, I'd say protecting the group from what was a criminal act is the overiding one. At least initially till the dust settles. Hence rock and hard place.

I get the impression we are not good at smoothing out conflicts too. Listening to Buckley, I'd've though he was the guru master at this kind of bridge building.
 
Scritchyscroony said:
Is it normal to have your president on the "list management committee" across the AFL I wonder?
Click to expand...

wouldn’t have thought so. Don’t know if that changed as a result of the review.

Ed has justified crashing meetings before on the basis that he is the representative of the members ...

... which cracks me up. I imagine the entire cast of this footy forum sitting in observation of selection committee each week with their buckets of popcorn and pitching in with their peanut gallery remarks.

But the clubs duty of care inherently includes looking after the feelings and interests of the whole player group. Given the allegation, I'd say protecting the group from what was a criminal act is the overiding one.
Click to expand...

They’re not necessarily competing interests. Both interests can be served without compromising each other.
 
partypie said:
I'd go a bit further - the Beams recruitment / contract and the Treloar situation (both the contract extension and subsequent desire to move him on) have Ned teetering on the edge. You only get so many major stuff ups before the the axe needs to fall.
Click to expand...

Particularly when you have zero runs on the board, but we'll never know what Guy's actual role is and how much say or sway he has - I doubt he has that much to be honest - I can't see our crew deferring to a young newby former player manager.
 
Apples said:
Off topic completely, but where oh where did this 'learnings' abomination come from?
Click to expand...

Apart from Borat ...

... it’s a common thing in the tech space. Theory is that the tech is novel and there aren’t many / any experts ... so it’s less about doing a good job and more about if you make mistakes then you take ‘learnings’ from them.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Haven't caught the last few pages of the thread but it seems like Ned got appointed with the job of fixing the TPP. I don't think there'd be a single player on our list whom isn't new, recontracted or extended during his short time at the club.

But then at the same time he was given the job of "keeping the list together"

Was he maybe just given 2 tasks which couldn't be accomplished hand in hand?
 
I’m sure Ned’s a top bloke but the last 3 years have been a disaster and our list management and TPP is in a mess.

Three years ago when he was appointed we all would have thought the situation would have improved by now. Instead, we’ve got multiple back ended deals all maturing at once, so we have to force contracted players out as salary dumps with everyone knowing we will need to take a crappy trade deal for them and still pay some of these huge contracts once they’ve left.

Clubs are lining up to bend us over now. No player with options would choose us,the current list would be so frustrated at what is happening and apprehensive of their own situation. Lots of players will be in contact with their managers now.

If you’d told me three years ago that at the end of 2020 Jeremy Cameron, Joe Daniher and Ben Brown were actively exploring options for a new club and we couldn’t get ourselves into the conversation on any of them I would have been pretty disappointed and yet here we are.

Also, everyone applauding the club for these “ruthless” decisions we’re about to make on players like Treloar, Phillips, Cox, Stevo etc need to wake up. We are going to have to accept way less than what these players are worth because other clubs can see we’re desperate. There’s no chance of a pick 5 for Treloar, even if we do bully him into leaving. And we’ll have to pay part salary on most of those guys so what’s the point.

At least when we dismantled the list in 2013 we did it properly, and were able to have 7 first round draft picks in three years. This is just a dumpster fire.

if you’d told me 18 months ago we’d be looking to trade Stevo, I would have assumed pick 1 and more must be on the table as a starting point. Nup. We like to sell low. I hope pick 20-25 turns into a nice player because that’s all we’ll be getting...

Every club that talks trades with us right now will be salivating. We are a live kill.
 
Rohan25 said:
If you’d told me three years ago that at the end of 2020 Jeremy Cameron, Joe Daniher and Ben Brown were actively exploring options for a new club and we couldn’t get ourselves into the conversation on any of them I would have been pretty disappointed and yet here we are.
Click to expand...

In terms of the key forward, I believe the other reason is because Buckley does not really want a big forward? In his 9 years at the club who has been our best tall key forward? What key tall forward have we developed? In terms of development it would be Mason Cox? Who basically was a hail mary.
 
Gee whiz. Who would have thought that employing people without legitimate qualifications and experience would cause so many problems?
 
To me it seems that Ned has lost control of the cap and the list. He hasn’t handled Treloar situation with any professionalism and has decrease his trade value.

Now Stevo is being labelled is a loose unit.

The club itself has been so quite its deafening.
Someone needs to lead this Club.
All I want to hear is that is some type of plan for next year and beyond and there is method in their madness.

But strongly believe Ned needs to go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Markfs said:
i strongly support the club being quiet and not making announcements. I think it's the right strategy for a club that has so many supporters with mental health issues.
Click to expand...

Problem is by not talking it creates tension for players and obviously someone at the club has loose lips and is talking and it’s creating havoc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
omen_au said:
Problem is by not talking it creates tension for players and obviously someone at the club has loose lips and is talking and it’s creating havoc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

first of all, I didnt say that the list management committee shouldnt talk to the players..... just not talk to the public...or to the fabulous damo and other media types.

second, if players are using the media to get some leverage or to air a gripe, then the list management committee needs to just to ignore the slightly unhinged members and the media types too.

To talk about trades, the club would have to:

1. tell the truth - and lose all bargaining power it has with other clubs
2. lie - and cause tension with the players.

Discussing negotiations with the media partway through negotiations is plainly stupid....,even if it seems to be non-specific. One example is Nathan Buckley talking about the Tom Lynch situation before a deal was done.

I saw Ned Guy's media conference at the end of last year - either trade or draft not sure which one. He gave short one sentence replies to questions that said nothing... one game at a time, type thing. Absolutely perfect.

Will a certain part of the fans get upset....maybe....stuff em.... i want premierships and blabbing about trades hurts those chances.
 
omen_au said:
Problem is by not talking it creates tension for players and obviously someone at the club has loose lips and is talking and it’s creating havoc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...



Or maybe NO-ONE'S talking and this is upsetting the media so much that they've dished on us from a great height!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

News Ned Guy List Manager to leave after MD

Similar threads

TradeDraft
Player Watch Ned Long
16 17 18 19 20
Replies
476
Views
24K
Granit1962
G
jmac70
Roast Missing finals after a flag
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
4K
Pie eyed
Pie eyed
domus
Leaving Early
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
3K
Timmy from Thomastown
T
Prexm
2025 List changes
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
204
Views
9K
sr36
sr36
Jen2310
VFL VFL pre-season 2025 (list changes, updates)
Replies
3
Views
224
TradeDraft
TradeDraft
76woodenspooners
List Sizes
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
Markfs
Markfs
adammania9
Opinion 2024 Collingwood list rankings
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Chief
Chief

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top