Player Watch Rory Sloane - Retired

Remove this Banner Ad

cmndstab said:
I'm not sure I agree with that. He says he thinks he has more to offer to the team - that's him saying he believes him playing on is in the club's best interest. He also says that if they disagree then he'll accept it (not like he has a choice, of course).

The only potential disagreement here is if he thinks he has something to offer, and the club doesn't. Which, frankly, is probably the case for every single player the club has ever delisted.



I'm not sure what else you expect him to do. He's been asked if he wants to keep playing. He does want to keep playing, but he knows there is a reasonable chance his career won't continue. How should he answer that question?

I guess he could avoid radio interviews altogether, but otherwise he's pretty much played it with a straight bat. "I want to keep playing. I think I still have something to offer. If the club disagrees then I'll accept it."
Click to expand...

with a flat bat like just about every contentious question ever asked, exactly as they're trained to. "It's a long season and there's still a few rounds to go, there's a few moving parts but I'm concentrating on what I can contribute this year. We're still focussing on wins and playing finals. I'm sure I'll sit down with the club at some point and we'll talk about what next year looks like."

or his option, "they'll have to delist me, I'm not going willingly"
 
1970crow said:
I don't th8nk anybody is criticising Sloane for wanting to play on. The criticism is that he's forcing it to play out in the media and getting his mates to chime in on his behalf, knowing that it puts pressure on the club. There is also criticism as to his delusion that he has anything to offer this week, let alone next year. But yes, if he's extended it's on the club, not him. But we can bin the fantasy that he is a club first player, it's always been about him and that's his right too.
Click to expand...
He hasn’t got much self awareness either by the looks.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Tarasque36 said:
I thought it at the start of the year, and I haven't changed my mind, in fact, evidence over the 19 rounds backs it up.

Sloane would make a perfect permanent sub. Experienced voice on the bench through the first half, then he plays the second when it's a touch slower and has versatility. Easier on his body so he can maintain a higher level.
No need to have youngsters waste a week with a couple of quarters only, or players we should have pushing for selection.
Then leading to a nice retirement at the end of the year, maybe a year as SANFL captain to replace Wright.
Click to expand...
Thanks for reading, Nicksy
 
Who can blame the guy for wanting to play on? No one is going to give up a big six figure salary. I don't know if he has made plans for after footy or whether he has any business interests, but anyone in his shoes would do the same thing
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Geoffa32 said:
Time to retire Sloaney.

Sub is not your game


On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

Really. Had 12 touches and less than 50 % game time. Couple of centre clearances. 83% eff, a goal and 8 score involvements

As a sub thought he was pretty good.

Slow though and would like to see him retire

We have 3 weeks. I don’t see the club letting him go out without a farewell game. So if he doesn’t retire leading into the Swans game I reckon he will be back next year


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
John Who said:
Can see that same mark happen again on top of Boak in the foreseeable Crows v Port Slowdown. :)
Click to expand...
It did look like something out of the Slowdown lol.
 
rabidcrow said:
Really. Had 12 touches and less than 50 % game time. Couple of centre clearances. 83% eff, a goal and 8 score involvements

As a sub thought he was pretty good.

Slow though and would like to see him retire

We have 3 weeks. I don’t see the club letting him go out without a farewell game. So if he doesn’t retire leading into the Swans game I reckon he will be back next year


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
He's absolutely not retiring. I suspect he gets re-signed, the question is what the plans are for next year. If we also re-sign Crouch, I do think we need to have a clear idea of what Sloane's role is going to be (SANFL captain? half-forward flank? specialist sub?), as I doubt he's going to be a core midfielder.
 
Executive Landlord said:
Terrible sub appearance so you can cross that off for all the people he has a role to play. He's finished
Click to expand...

if he'd been determined sub at selection then it'd be either omitted or managed, but you can't do that to Rory Sloane. So they named him in the 22 to avoid that and then it looks like a change to the 23 come game day. So the pissants avoided making it look like he was no longer selected in the best 22.
 
NSolis said:
He's absolutely not retiring. I suspect he gets re-signed, the question is what the plans are for next year. If we also re-sign Crouch, I do think we need to have a clear idea of what Sloane's role is going to be (SANFL captain? half-forward flank? specialist sub?), as I doubt he's going to be a core midfielder.
Click to expand...

if it's a choice between crouch and Sloane it's as easy a choice as being offered a straight swap young Daicos for Keays.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jenny61_99 said:
In the presser Nicks said Sloane was happy to do whatever the club needed when asked about making him sub. Are you all that are calling him a selfish twat really sure he’s a selfish twat?
Click to expand...

yeh, he's selfish, what else is nicks going to say? I judge him by his own words and actions. Any reason thst you can think of that he wasn't dropped to sub on Thursday at selection? When was the last time someone in the 22 became the 23rd? The sub has been around for quite a few years, so cast your mind back.
 
1970crow said:
yeh, he's selfish, what else is nicks going to say? I judge him by his own words and actions. Any reason thst you can think of that he wasn't dropped to sub on Thursday at selection? When was the last time someone in the 22 became the 23rd? The sub has been around for quite a few years, so cast your mind back.
Click to expand...
Don’t know the reason… maybe they thought that they couldn’t play all three of Sloane Crouch and Keays? Maybe he’d read Big Footy! Whatever the reason, Nicks had the courage to make the call. Don’t reckon he would have added “Sloane was happy to do whatever the club needed” if that wasn’t true.
 
jenny61_99 said:
Don’t know the reason… maybe they thought that they couldn’t play all three of Sloane Crouch and Keays? Maybe he’d read Big Footy! Whatever the reason, Nicks had the courage to make the call. Don’t reckon he would have added “Sloane was happy to do whatever the club needed” if that wasn’t true.
Click to expand...

if they didn't think they could play thise 3, then why not make that call on selection night? This isn't a part time gig like your local footy club, nobody has closed up the local ag store and shot to training, this is all these blokes do. In terms of 'courage', nicks showed none. Dropping Sloane was an easy decision in terms of performance and our so called 'selection integrity', and yet we managed to find a way to weasel out of listing Sloane's name with either an 'omitted' or 'managed' label beside it. And in terms of what Sloane is "happy" to do, it's pure spin. No different to how he let the club appoint Dawson as captain. Sloane should have zero say, why do we feel the need to pamper his ego? We dropped him, but we coukdnt do it Thursday night and it needs to come with a qualification that he's "happy". Do junior players need that same qualification?
 
1970crow said:
if they didn't think they could play thise 3, then why not make that call on selection night? This isn't a part time gig like your local footy club, nobody has closed up the local ag store and shot to training, this is all these blokes do. In terms of 'courage', nicks showed none. Dropping Sloane was an easy decision in terms of performance and our so called 'selection integrity', and yet we managed to find a way to weasel out of listing Sloane's name with either an 'omitted' or 'managed' label beside it. And in terms of what Sloane is "happy" to do, it's pure spin. No different to how he let the club appoint Dawson as captain. Sloane should have zero say, why do we feel the need to pamper his ego? We dropped him, but we coukdnt do it Thursday night and it needs to come with a qualification that he's "happy". Do junior players need that same qualification?
Click to expand...
Who ****ing cares why, when or how? That it was done is the most important thing. Nicks has built a strong camaraderie amongst this team that has these fellas wanting to play for him, us and each other. If they want to show respect to a past captain and legend of our club by not dropping him but moving him to the sub position on game day, so be it! Sloane doesn’t deserve a “you suck just retire” that you would serve him with.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch Rory Sloane - Retired

Similar threads

1970crow
Universal Love Congratulations Rory Sloane - 250 games
Replies
14
Views
697
thebirdman 24
T
adelaidecrows
List Mgmt. Walker, Smith must retire or be retired. Immediately.
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
budget
B
JPetro83
Should the club tap Tex and Rory on the shoulder now? possible farewell game
2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
dylan123
dylan123
adelaidecrows
Roast Roo has to go and he can take Nicks with him....Sloane, Murphy and Smith can go as well.
Replies
1
Views
669
craig crowing
C

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top