Ben there.....shoulda done that......

[Teflon]

Tried to put this in the Cousins thread but it just times out...

I havent posted on this as I wanted to digest the Board decision. I applaud them for being brave because it was a tough, unexpected choice.

I think they got it wrong.

Cousins isnt the sharpest bloke (see shave down effort) and Ive no doubt he has an addiction, a problem to be worked on BUT I still believe we jumped at shadows over the risks. Lets assume he relapses with the drugs IMHO the greatest risk is the potential loss of Premiership pts (yes a high price) but again a risk the club knew about 5 months ago....not just 12 hrs before the guys about to nominate for the draft. What other risks - yep the media attention?.....surely we could manage that? or the damage to the clubs name?....honestly....how lasting is it? (weve have had our share of bad boys and still survived - the clubs bigger than any individual who IF he stuffed up would have immediately been terminated). Besides, what about the positive - the club who "gave a guy a go" - there's some redemption from a "brand" perspective in that surely?


From all reports Cousins was over the line in his mind at St Kilda - even reportedly 'coolish' to the Lions cause he was going to the saints. I cant imagine what 'smoking gun' the Board pulled out at the last minute...to then front up with "we are on a youth bender" this simply made us a laughing stock. Do these people actually think before they go public? or do they honestly think we are all stupid?

I heard UD trucks on radio say they had no prblems with our decision asn that they were happy either way and infact, selfishly they suggested the Cousins exposure would have been phenomenal for them. I cant believe the executives in China from Jeld Wen were interfering in a club football decision just 12 hrs before Cousins was to nominate and IF the clubs due diligence was so superb.....wouldnt clarifying your major sponsors views have been dealt with long ago?

I left both Geelong/Hawthorn finals last year under no illusions...we are WAY behind these sides, do not have their youth talent coming through and will be soon seriously under siege from Carlton/Richmond (Richmond almost took us last year and we got lucky they couldnt kick straight). Ive said for a long time the list isnt what it was - the wheel turns fast in footy and 2004 is a million years ago...Im not suggesting Ben Cousins fixes all this, but I know he wouldve altered our structure.

Lets face facts Cousins was/is (possibly still) an elite midfielder who was lauded alongside Judd at his best. IMHO we do not have a mid at this level that consistently was/is a game breaker in the mould of Cousins - even at 80% Id wager he's still ahead of Ball, Montagna, Dal...and he kicks more goals than all of them. He wouldve simply added enormous flexibility to the midfield and yep.....all of a sudden Cameron Ling just doesnt walk to Dal Santo anymore......they have an extra and dare I say it elite midfielder to contend with (remember he was 6 years junior to the great Harvey in his last season...who had him as one of the best runners he has ever seen...).

So now to catch the mids of Cats/Hawks we have to hope Ball comes good (how long have weve been dreaming Luke Ball will catch Hodge ??....sadly hes groins have robbed him IMO). Pray Goddard develops the engine and can be freed from defence often enough, hope Dal Santgo finally breaks a tag or that Montagna/Gram can step up against the best in the business and not go AWOL?.....we also have to pray that Armitage can, first of all ensure hes a regular 22 player and THEN become a solid midfielder with the engine to run out a game at AFL level. After that its a long way back to Mqualter, Jones, Eddy, Gwilts and Co with a miracle ordered from Jack Stevens. Note I havent mentioned Hayes as I have him as a gun - but he too has never reached the heights of Cousins.

Im not potting our club here - Im attempting to take off the rose colored glasses and determine where we are really at and to me pinning your hopes on Maguires/Bakers return indicates we are in no mans land right now (the fact we are looking at Caroll indicates they aint that sure of Maguire....)

We had to have a dip at a Cousins and possibly Caroll to give our top 8-9 prime age, core players a chance to step up for a flag...I honestly think we may now go backwards before forwards for a little while. Who knows maybe till some of Saturdays kids come through in years to come.....

At least if we do go backwards in 09 it'll be on a Sunday....so its not like anyone will be watching...

IMHO we missed a chance.

[maverick]

Agree with every word.

I too think we missed a chance, our only short term chance IMO.

[JeffDunne]

I don't fault the logic from a football perspective but unless we know what the decision was based on then we can't possibly fault the decision (although I do have a problem with the song and dance routine in announcing the decision).

History will decide whether it was the right choice and it certainly will look like a dumb decision if Ben proves his critics wrong and tears us a new one like he did the last time he played against us.

[ausfatcat]

Everyone is forgetting why collingwood withdrew it's interest from him/


The potential loss of premiership points.......

[saintbrat]

(although I do have a problem with the song and dance routine in announcing the decision).
.

did the saints ever ask for the song and dance ?-- or did they go out of their way to keep all discussions including the Board meeting quiet>?

Saints players were not the only ones being asked about Ben- most teams captains, or leaders were- saw one from Port-

[JeffDunne]

(although I do have a problem with the song and dance routine in announcing the decision).
.

did the saints ever ask for the song and dance ?-- or did they go out of their way to keep all discussions including the Board meeting quiet>?

Saints players were not the only ones being asked about Ben- most teams captains, or leaders were- saw one from Port-

We might not have asked for it but we did facilitate it.

Did we even need to alert the world to the fact we'd be deciding at a specific board meeting (yes, we did tell the world that).

Personally I would have said SFA and announced our position to the world on draft day. Can't understand why we didn't TBH

[Teflon]

Everyone is forgetting why collingwood withdrew it's interest from him/


The potential loss of premiership points.......

Thats true and to me thats the biggie in terms of punishment but again, 12 hours before he nominates we didnt know that?

Cousins is simply a risk equation and I accept the Board weighed this and deemed it not aceptbale, what I cant understand is it took till 12 hrs before draft nomination deadline before we decide these same risks (that were there from the get go) were now insumrountable?

Collingwood pulled out weeks ago with less fanfare and no c**k and bull about youth and where we will be in 4 yrs EVERYONE knows had we recruited Cousins it was about us giving ourselves the best short-term shot at a flag.

One question I do have - given Archies comments about our new strategic longer term list view.....are we possibly acknowledging the window is just about shut?.......

[maverick]

(although I do have a problem with the song and dance routine in announcing the decision).
.

did the saints ever ask for the song and dance ?-- or did they go out of their way to keep all discussions including the Board meeting quiet>?

Saints players were not the only ones being asked about Ben- most teams captains, or leaders were- saw one from Port-

We might not have asked for it but we did facilitate it.

Did we even need to alert the world to the fact we'd be deciding at a specific board meeting (yes, we did tell the world that).

Personally I would have said SFA and announced our position to the world on draft day. Can't understand why we didn't TBH

I agree, why we feel the need to tell all and sundry what we are and aren't doing astounds me.

Can't help but think RL shakes his head at all of this....

[JeffDunne]

Collingwood pulled out weeks ago with less fanfare and no c**k and bull about youth . . .

Actually I think they did try that line on initially.

When it wouldn't float they went with the character assassination.

I'd have prefered we said nothing but I'll take the c**k & bull story over the character assassination any day thanks.

[Iceman234]

You would imagine the board/their investigators were waiting on certain last-minute information? Was it a scheduled board meeting or extraordinary? How far out was it scheduled if it was?

Or maybe they were just salaciously watching the SS forum debate about which number he would wear - 9 or 35 - and where the celebration for the 09 cup was going to be held...

They may have found more than mild amusement in that, as I did.

[Teflon]

(although I do have a problem with the song and dance routine in announcing the decision).
.

did the saints ever ask for the song and dance ?-- or did they go out of their way to keep all discussions including the Board meeting quiet>?

Saints players were not the only ones being asked about Ben- most teams captains, or leaders were- saw one from Port-

We might not have asked for it but we did facilitate it.

Did we even need to alert the world to the fact we'd be deciding at a specific board meeting (yes, we did tell the world that).

Personally I would have said SFA and announced our position to the world on draft day. Can't understand why we didn't TBH

I agree...it seemed to me that Collingwood simply said "no thanks".....while St Kilda has a secret Board meeting that every media knew the starting time to.....

and to then come out with that reasoning from Archie.....it smacked as if they made it up in the lift on the way down from the Sofitel FFS....

Has Nixon made any direct comments regarding St Kilda and its decision??

[Saintschampions08]

Agree with basically everything.

The most arrogant and annoying thing about the decision is the way the board told us, the supporters, the same people who voted them in and who they are representing. ...

A youth decision....your joking, may as well have said they didn't think he was good enough to be in our 22.

[JeffDunne]

You would imagine the board/their investigators were waiting on certain last-minute information? Was it a scheduled board meeting or extraordinary? How far out was it scheduled if it was?

Early in the discussions re Ben joining the Saints I remember hearing Burkie on KB's program.

He said then that the board would wait for the AFL approval before sitting down to evaluate whether we would try and draft him.

Indicates to me that the meeting would have been planned some time ago.

[Iceman234]

One question I do have - given Archies comments about our new strategic longer term list view.....are we possibly acknowledging the window is just about shut?.......

But it was just one of the reasons Teffers, not the be-all.

It may well have been used to bolster the other reasons.

Maybe we'll never know the REAL reasons, maybe he's just bad to the bone and we don't want him. Maybe he's going to embarrass whoever picks him up.

Maybe, if, maybe......

He was never here, move on.

[chook23]

The loss of points etc

would not happen

Afl clear him to play....stating they wish a club to pick him up to help his road to recovery

Can not then punish the club that gives/gave him that chance


the potential loss of points etc was to do with West Coast etc

[Saintschampions08]

The loss of points etc

would not happen

Afl clear him to play....stating they wish a club to pick him up to help his road to recovery

Can not then punish the club that gives/gave him that chance

Not only that, they would gain a large amount of criticism for deflecting the blame if they did that.

Docking premiership points would really bring the game into disrepute.

[Teflon]

One question I do have - given Archies comments about our new strategic longer term list view.....are we possibly acknowledging the window is just about shut?.......

But it was just one of the reasons Teffers, not the be-all.

It may well have been used to bolster the other reasons.

Maybe we'll never know the REAL reasons, maybe he's just bad to the bone and we don't want him. Maybe he's going to embarrass whoever picks him up.

Maybe, if, maybe......

He was never here, move on.

Its hard to knwo isnt it?

I mean we all agree its a nonsense excuse made up by the club so we are supposed to believe this "raft" of reasons that are a mystery?

Id prefer they also simply said nothing and left draft day speak for them.

Time will ultimately tell on this - as I said in my OP.......I just hope Jack Stevens can catch Joel Sellwood in an awful hurry prior to Nick Riewoldt turning 30.....

[Iceman234]

One question I do have - given Archies comments about our new strategic longer term list view.....are we possibly acknowledging the window is just about shut?.......

But it was just one of the reasons Teffers, not the be-all.

It may well have been used to bolster the other reasons.

Maybe we'll never know the REAL reasons, maybe he's just bad to the bone and we don't want him. Maybe he's going to embarrass whoever picks him up.

Maybe, if, maybe......

He was never here, move on.

Its hard to knwo isnt it?

I mean we all agree its a nonsense excuse made up by the club so we are supposed to believe this "raft" of reasons that are a mystery?

Id prefer they also simply said nothing and left draft day speak for them.

Time will ultimately tell on this - as I said in my OP.......I just hope Jack Stevens can catch Joel Sellwood in an awful hurry prior to Nick Riewoldt turning 30.....

Yes I would have preferred them just say "St Kilda won't be pursuing blah blah blah"

To give their reasons just gives nu-nu supporters ammo to throw at them.

And if there's other reasons that are confidential, well FFS (not aimed at you Tef) "confidential" files are marked "CONFIDENTIAL", usually in BOLD RED, for a reason.

Because they're confidential...

[Teflon]

I agree re the confidential and they must be left at that.

I posted in another thread that Im also bemused the AFL cleared him when he obviously hasnt provided a hair test....why would they do that?

Look I think he needed to be managed - but I back our club in to be able to do that and in the event it didnt work we simply sack him and hes finished. I still fail to see how this would "sink the club" as some doomsayers would have you believe.

I absolutely believe there's a fair amount of christian moral do-gooders on high horsers here who clearly have never made a mistake nor granted a second chance...(no not aimed at you Iceman).

I vividly recall watching him at TD 14 mths ago. He was unstoppable, a freak and cant but help think we've jumped at shadows a little.

Surprised Nixon hasnt directly attacked us....

[Saintschampions08]

One question I do have - given Archies comments about our new strategic longer term list view.....are we possibly acknowledging the window is just about shut?.......

But it was just one of the reasons Teffers, not the be-all.

It may well have been used to bolster the other reasons.

Maybe we'll never know the REAL reasons, maybe he's just bad to the bone and we don't want him. Maybe he's going to embarrass whoever picks him up.

Maybe, if, maybe......

He was never here, move on.

Its hard to knwo isnt it?

I mean we all agree its a nonsense excuse made up by the club so we are supposed to believe this "raft" of reasons that are a mystery?

Id prefer they also simply said nothing and left draft day speak for them.

Time will ultimately tell on this - as I said in my OP.......I just hope Jack Stevens can catch Joel Sellwood in an awful hurry prior to Nick Riewoldt turning 30.....

Yes I would have preferred them just say "St Kilda won't be pursuing blah blah blah"

To give their reasons just gives nu-nu supporters ammo to throw at them.

And if there's other reasons that are confidential, well FFS (not aimed at you Tef) "confidential" files are marked "CONFIDENTIAL", usually in BOLD RED, for a reason.

Because they're confidential...

If they're confidential, then say something like 'St kilda has decided not to pursue Ben Cousins'. Don't give a reason that everyone with an IQ > 5 will know is obvious bulls***.

I have no problems if the reason is confidential, i do have problems however when they make a statement that is like telling you your an idiot.

[Iceman234]

I agree re the confidential and they must be left at that.

I posted in another thread that Im also bemused the AFL cleared him when he obviously hasnt provided a hair test....why would they do that?

No idea, no answer.

Look I think he needed to be managed - but I back our club in to be able to do that and in the event it didnt work we simply sack him and hes finished. I still fail to see how this would "sink the club" as some doomsayers would have you believe.

I would gladly have taken 12 months off work to be his minder 24/7 at a cool 250k - plus benefits

I absolutely believe there's a fair amount of christian moral do-gooders on high horsers here who clearly have never made a mistake nor granted a second chance...(no not aimed at you Iceman).

I've made plenty so Thank Goddly-diddly it's not aimed at me. Documented many times I think people deserve a chance or two.

I vividly recall watching him at TD 14 mths ago. He was unstoppable, a freak and cant but help think we've jumped at shadows a little.

Saw a bloke at the Footscray Mall last week - he was unstoppable, and couldn't help but think he was jumping at shadows as well

Surprised Nixon hasnt directly attacked us....

She's resigned and is a lame duck until March, and gave her last opinions to Eddie - oh, wrong Nixon...

[Saint Mik]

I agree re the confidential and they must be left at that.

Surprised Nixon hasnt directly attacked us....

So why doesnt that make you think that the club just may of got it right.

There is more to it than just the risk IMO but just what well that gets back to your first comment.

Nixon normally jumps at the media when he has something to say but sometimes you just have to accept it and move on and giving the Saints a spray would not do BC any favours going forward.

[Iceman234]

The loss of points etc

would not happen

Afl clear him to play....stating they wish a club to pick him up to help his road to recovery

Can not then punish the club that gives/gave him that chance


the potential loss of points etc was to do with West Coast etc

So, hypothetically, if he goes to the Lions and absolutely flogs us in a game, with 4 possessions to 1/2 time then 27 in the 2nd half, then in 6 weeks time tests positive to Meth, you won't have an issue with that and you won't be demanding the four points? You will be here passively saying "settle guys it's all good, the AFL cleared him."

You'll be supporting the AFL's decision that once they pass him, the premiership point rule doesn't apply....

[Mr Magic]

The loss of points etc

would not happen

Afl clear him to play....stating they wish a club to pick him up to help his road to recovery

Can not then punish the club that gives/gave him that chance


the potential loss of points etc was to do with West Coast etc

So, hypothetically, if he goes to the Lions and absolutely flogs us in a game, with 4 possessions to 1/2 time then 27 in the 2nd half, then in 6 weeks time tests positive to Meth, you won't have an issue with that and you won't be demanding the four points? You will be here passively saying "settle guys it's all good, the AFL cleared him."

You'll be supporting the AFL's decision that once they pass him, the premiership point rule doesn't apply....

Actually I think you'll find that the AFL have changed their stance on the 'points issue'. Some weeks ago they stated that they would remove points and even a premiership if a player who has had an influence on teh result tests positive. Given that players (including) Cousins will be subjected to 'hair tests' which will detect drug usage from the previous 3 months, there amy well be huge ramifications?

[Saint Mik]

The loss of points etc

would not happen

Afl clear him to play....stating they wish a club to pick him up to help his road to recovery

Can not then punish the club that gives/gave him that chance


the potential loss of points etc was to do with West Coast etc

So, hypothetically, if he goes to the Lions and absolutely flogs us in a game, with 4 possessions to 1/2 time then 27 in the 2nd half, then in 6 weeks time tests positive to Meth, you won't have an issue with that and you won't be demanding the four points? You will be here passively saying "settle guys it's all good, the AFL cleared him."

You'll be supporting the AFL's decision that once they pass him, the premiership point rule doesn't apply....

Here we go BC is getting on the gear again at 1/2 time is he.

Some people just talk shyte when it comes to BC