Ben Cousins a Tiger (Merged) | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Ben Cousins a Tiger (Merged)

Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Redford said:
Number one. Single line would suit.

Redford said:
Your maths is amazing.

If a new sponsor had the balls to join us, it would give them unprecedented exposure.........the company that is. Not their balls.

Lately I've found your posting hilarious :hihi

Redford said:
If this were to happen (which I still have my doubts about) then how would Cameron look after some of the statements he's made recently ?

I think he will look silly to some, but others such as myself and many other posters, it was obvious that he left the door open this hole time.

Tygrys said:
Yes the headlines would reflect wonderfully on Richmond (just like it did for WC) if he does relapse? (assuming he has even stopped?). Especially after 15 other clubs rejected him and after his history. To think it would be anything other than a PR disaster is laughable. High risk for minimal short-term gain.

It seems most people disagree with your vision of a PR disaster, so I won't echo their thoughts.

Poor argument.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

The Club have released a statement which was just read by Mark Fine on SEN.

Basically confirmed they've applied to put Polak on the mature age rookie list but don't want to pre-empt the AFL's decision on that, so won't be commenting on who they might or might not be taking in the draft.

So it's going to be a two week circus it seems.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Freezer said:
The Club have released a statement which was just read by Mark Fine on SEN.

Basically confirmed they've applied to put Polak on the mature age rookie list but don't want to pre-empt the AFL's decision on that, so won't be commenting on who they might or might not be taking in the draft.

So it's going to be a two week circus it seems.

Not two weeks, PSD is on the 16th.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Freezer said:
WC had a well documented drug culture at the club. Richmond couldn't be further removed from WC in that respect. All the evidence is that he is clean - why question it? 15 other clubs might be wrong. If this happens, at least the Tigers have shown some balls to stand out from the crowd.

Clearly we're not going to agree on this. I think we have the off-field capabilities (read Wallace, March, Wright and Sheedy) to deal with this. If it goes wrong, we'll be seen as the club that gave him a chance - a chance that he will have blown.

Actually not only WC but Cousins has a well documented drug culture, as well. Remember when he ran from a booze bus, or his cocaine bender in LA, and let's not forget his rather colorful assortment of mates. And I guess his sudden lack of body hair is just bad timing? And sorry, but get serious, we may see ourselves 'as the club that gave him a chance' but no-one else will. Imagine if he had gone to Carlton and gets caught - this board and every other club board will go into meltdown. The headlines will scream and Richmond will be the object of derision. Kid yourself into believing otherwise, but that's human nature. And as for the 15 clubs being wrong...I guess they don't have a coach desperate for a contract renewal after four years of mediocrity. 15 clubs not wanting him should tell you something (including one that even hired a private investigator) tells us this is a risky gamble, one we shouldn't take.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

I think the drugs are an irrelevance now. Anyone who has to pee in a bottle three times a week to prove his innocence is either not going to transgress or has a spiffing substitute who drinks a lot of water. Seriously, if he transgresses he's gone and I can't see him avoiding detection.

So if we take the drugs out for a second we have a brilliant brownlow medallist who is facing the prospect of no-one picking him up, admittedly in his twilight years. He would walk into our number one midfield spot. Can't remember ever seeing a BM picked up for what would be half of David Rodan's last contract.

Like many others I like the idea of giving the guy another chance from both a humanitarian and on-field success perspective. My only real concern of course is that once a hard training party boy, always a hard training party boy. Has he sworn off the booze as well becuse he will need to. Actually he will also need to attend Sunday School and choir practice each week to avoid even half of the coming media storm.

So the only question is, can his head and hamstrings handle the return?
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Tygrys said:
Actually not only WC but Cousins has a well documented drug culture, as well. Remember when he ran from a booze bus, or his cocaine bender in LA, and let's not forget his rather colorful assortment of mates. And I guess his sudden lack of body hair is just bad timing? And sorry, but get serious, we may see ourselves 'as the club that gave him a chance' but no-one else will. Imagine if he had gone to Carlton and gets caught - this board and every other club board will go into meltdown. The headlines will scream and Richmond will be the object of derision. Kid yourself into believing otherwise, but that's human nature. And as for the 15 clubs being wrong...I guess they don't have a coach desperate for a contract renewal after four years of mediocrity. 15 clubs not wanting him should tell you something (including one that even hired a private investigator) tells us this is a risky gamble, one we shouldn't take.

The media, opposition fans, alleged Richmomd fans, footy boards etc have been piddling in their pants for years at our expense. Who gives a flying fox what they would say.
Claw's argument re drafting kids may have some validity but I can't wear people worrying about what the Feral Shun may print on the back of Vague Crutchinbum "exclusive".
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

My 2/- worth...

It's a calculated gamble with a lot going for and against it.

I don't buy the cynicism towards Wallace; I think he's behaved with sincerity and loyalty towards the task of rebuilding the club, rather than short term success. And I don't think recruiting Cousins would be about a few years of success.

I have thought him the most remarkable player in the game for years. I remember a few years ago when Geelong were 10 goals ahead of WC, and Cousins willed them back into it.

If he were capable of teaching the young guys something about what it takes to be a premiership midfielder, he would be worth his weight in gold.

The one thing that makes me hesitate is the legacy--or lack of it--of Cousins/Judd at West Coast. They go, the club tanks. Was nothing really passed on?

The biggest negative for me is not drugs, but his "colourful" friends. We do not want our young players drawn into that kind of milieu. But if Ben is clean on drugs, he won't be so interesting to those types...
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Tigers of Old said:
Maybe McGuire is better informed than Richmond is.
After all Collingwood did speak with the Police Commissioner & hire a PI before knocking Cousins back.

He wouldn't support Polak onto the rookie list ToO. Shouldn't have any bearing on whether we take Cousins or not.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

RFC not KFC said:
The media, opposition fans, alleged Richmomd fans, footy boards etc have been piddling in their pants for years at our expense. Who gives a flying fox what they would say.
Claw's argument re drafting kids may have some validity but I can't wear people worrying about what the Feral Shun may print on the back of Vague Crutchinbum "exclusive".

Two points. Firstly Claw's argument is what stresses me most about the Cousins adventure. If he was in his early 20's the potential pay-off could be fantastic and quite possibly worth the risk. Cousins unfortunately isn't young, and the pay-off is minimal in comparison and not worth the risk. Secondly, I respect your argument about not giving a toss about what anyone else thinks. I think one can mount an argument in support of that (albeit the sponsors present and future could present a problem if Cousins imploded). What I was refuting is the nonsense that we'll be looked at as some good samaratans for giving him another chance after 15 other clubs thought better of it. No we will be rediculed and mocked by other supporters and by the press for having been so naive, pathetic and desperate. To put it bluntly we will be a laughing stock. Should we care - debateable, but let's not pretend the followers of the other 15 clubs wouldn't do what we would do ourselves if roles were reversed.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

This quote from The Age makes it sound certain that it is all for Cousins -

Richmond were contacted on Wednesday night but declined to comment directly on Cousins.

But, in a statement, the club said: "The Richmond Football Club confirms that it wrote to the AFL seeking permission for Graham Polak to be placed on the rookie list for 2009, under compassionate grounds.

"The application was made with the full support of Polak, in the knowledge that he is still undertaking extensive rehabilitation after suffering an acquired brain injury earlier this year.

"The Richmond Football Club does not want to preempt the decision of (the) AFL commission and as such will not be making comment about potential draft selections until a decision is handed down next Monday."

http://news.realfooty.com.au/sport/tigers-poised-for-move-on-cousins-20081210-6vss.html
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

WesternTiger said:
He wouldn't support Polak onto the rookie list ToO. Shouldn't have any barring on whether we take Cousins or not.

Fair enough but he knows our game though I'd vouch.

If Cousins comes to Tigerland we reap what we sew, however it turns out.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

It's a punt. That's for sure.

One question - I was of the understanding that the AFL Commission RULE on this issue. They are merely asking the clubs for their opinion, but it isn't a vote. Isn't that right?

In the end, Eddie may find himself looking in the mirror of reality - and finding nobody gives a stuff what he thinks. This isn't about whether Eddie thinks we should get Cousins, it's about whether the AFL think Polak should go on the LTIL.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Richmond's position is totally different to WCE. WCE gave Cousins a number of chances before he was officially suspended. Richmond will give him one and one chance only. If he fails a drug test, if he runs from cops, if he passes out outside Crown, if he farts in the wrong direction he will be gone. The only way Richmond jeopardises its reputation is if they also decide to turn a blind eye to some incidents or choose not to ackowledge his problems. This is impossible to happen. The AFL will be all over him anyway.

Richmond are giving him a shot. From BF reactions, most opposition supporters are applauding Richmond's stance (assuming it is our stance ;)). Funnily enough, the only supporters that aren't are Collingwood (fair enough) and Hawthorn supporters (you'd think after winning the premiership they would move on from the TW affair??)
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Tigers of Old said:
Fair enough but he knows our game though I'd vouch.

If Cousins comes to Tigerland we reap what we sew, however it turns out.

Agree completely and not supportive of it however I think the Polak onto the rookie list is a different issue and I cannot see what the argument of the other clubs will be.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Tigers of Old said:
lol @ the avatar hopper. :cutelaugh
Thought I'd stay topical. Hey, at least it's some relief from the Chimp avatars!
(Yes, I admit to putting "Ben Cousins, chimp" into google images and coming up short!)