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?

jayfox said:
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?

Jason King said:
Polak without doubt should not be on the senior list. No negative on Polak, thats just how an organisation should run.
I agree.Regardless of wether we get Benny or not.

And McChins should shut the *smile* up for once in his fatheaded life.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Tygrys said:
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.

The obvious counter to Claw's argument is the benefit in adding one of (possibly R Harvey was better) the best "gut busting" runners the game has ever seen to the list. A bloke who could teach Lids, Cotch, Foley etc etc how and what is required to be the best. A bloke who would be desperate, not just to play again, but desperate to show the world he is one of the best. A bloke desperate to have some success and who has proven he can drag others up a level. If the pay-off was developing a midfield like the Eagles once had, or the 3-peat Lions had I don't count that as minimal.

You may win more often backing short prices but when you back a winning long shot the pay-off is worthwhile.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

jayfox said:
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

Cheers Jayfox. And for what its worth I also think it is an appropriate action taken by the club regardless of Cousins.

Still as negotiations go, 15 refusals and one bite makse for a good negotiation as the employer.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

People make it sound like we'd be drafting Ben out of the goodness of our hearts, purely for his personal benefit. If we drafted Ben it would be for what we hope he'd do for our team, same as we should do for every draft pick. If it doesn't work out it's a spot wasted that an up an coming young kid could have used. A lot of serious thought has to be weighed up.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

In other news TOM BOSLEY is darn near the 1000 post mark, I suppose Aunty Rosey should not have taken a risk on him all those years ago either? Is that what you anti-Cousins posters are saying?
Wake up guys Cousins and Tom Bosley are on the way. Cousins to the RFC, TB to the magical 1000 mark....

Feel free to start a new tribute thread to TOM BOSLEY or a combine it with a new WELCOME to the RFC BEN thread

Either way is cool

Peace ;)
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Wow, have a look at the thread on Big Footy.

On the first page, 100% of the population has supported Richmond thinking we made a "great decision" and are happy to see us pick him up.

We've definitely got public support on the issue (which further lowers the risk of a PR backlash should Ben relapse).
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

rosy23 said:
People make it sound like we'd be drafting Ben out of the goodness of our hearts, purely for his personal benefit. If we drafted Ben it would be for what we hope he'd do for our team, same as we should do for every draft pick. If it doesn't work out it's a spot wasted that an up an coming young kid could have used. A lot of serious thought has to be weighed up.

No doubt Rosy. But I don't think any of the young kids are throwing themselves forward as genuine senior list players. All those being considered have some deficiencies whether they be skill, speed, fitness, size etc. Sure, rookie list some of these and have them working on those deficiencies but, right at the moment, Cousins v Klemke is a no brainer IMO.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

rosy23 said:
People make it sound like we'd be drafting Ben out of the goodness of our hearts, purely for his personal benefit. If we drafted Ben it would be for what we hope he'd do for our team, same as we should do for every draft pick. If it doesn't work out it's a spot wasted that an up an coming young kid could have used. A lot of serious thought has to be weighed up.

Given our history of drafting youngsters there's a good chance we'd waste the spot anyway. Either way it's a punt.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

RFC not KFC said:
The obvious counter to Claw's argument is the benefit in adding one of (possibly R Harvey was better) the best "gut busting" runners the game has ever seen to the list. A bloke who could teach Lids, Cotch, Foley etc etc how and what is required to be the best. A bloke who would be desperate, not just to play again, but desperate to show the world he is one of the best. A bloke desperate to have some success and who has proven he can drag others up a level. If the pay-off was developing a midfield like the Eagles once had, or the 3-peat Lions had I don't count that as minimal.

You may win more often backing short prices but when you back a winning long shot the pay-off is worthwhile.

If it's just about teaching Lids, Cotch and Foley etc, let's employ him as a specialist midfield coach and keep our youth policy (such as it is) uncompromised. Everyone (including I would assume the redoubtable Claw) would be happy. And even if he imploded the bad PR (assuming we cared) would definitely be containable having only given him a job (certainly not in the same league as if he was a player).
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Harry said:
the extra pick is for gourdis

Yeah, I think i mentioned it earlier in this thread. It does some parallels with Gourdis nominating for the PSD yesterday after spending all pre season at Richmond and not really being linked with anyone else for PSD. Rumours suggest that the WA teams may be interested and they have rookie picks before us so if we want an U18 as well as Gourdis we would need to take Gourdis in the PSD (for a second time).

Who knows what is going on. If it was for Gourdis, you would think that the club would incur no harm in saying this publicly?
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Yes/NO

Hmmmmmmmm.


If its a second pick in the PSD - then I can live with it - along with another kid.

it just doesn't standout as a must do descision though.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

RFC not KFC said:
Given our history of drafting youngsters there's a good chance we'd waste the spot anyway. Either way it's a punt.

Are you stalking me tonight? :help
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

Tygrys said:
If it's just about teaching Lids, Cotch and Foley etc, let's employ him as a specialist midfield coach and keep our youth policy (such as it is) uncompromised. Everyone (including I would assume the redoubtable Claw) would be happy. And even if he imploded the bad PR (assuming we cared) would definitely be containable having only given him a job (certainly not in the same league as if he was a player).

Youth policy? Why is Sugar still on the list? Why did we only draft 2 blokes from the superdraft of U18s this year? Youth policy is the nost over-used term in football. It's a convenient way of saying we don't think we can give it a nudge this year.
 
Re: Ben Cousins a tiger?

RFC not KFC said:
Youth policy? Why is Sugar still on the list? Why did we only draft 2 blokes from the superdraft of U18s this year? Youth policy is the nost over-used term in football. It's a convenient way of saying we don't think we can give it a nudge this year.

And you do? So our rebuild is finished and it's time to top up huh?