Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 34

Thread: 'Djitti' calls

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Stuck in the middle with you
    Posts
    8,201
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Sockeye Salmon View Post
    It was fairly widely reported at the time that he got a 3 year deal. It's not as if it was just a figment of some posters imagination.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bulldog4life View Post
    Was it? It was widely reported on WOOF I give you that.
    I've not been able to find any confirmation of a three year deal on any site other than here.
    [B][COLOR="#0000CD"]Our club was born in blood and boots, not in AFL focus groups.[/COLOR][/B]

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Bulldog4life View Post
    Was it? It was widely reported on WOOF I give you that.
    You're right, it's one that we at WOOF got wrong. Unfortunately we all make mistakes, and given the club doesn't publicly disclose many details about contracts it is often difficult to get solid verification.

    2 years rather than 3 is certainly a more prudent list management decision, however we still got dudded on the trade by giving up a 3rd round selection Geelong only used to elevate a rookie - we could have done with another, earlier selection. If Geelong were only elevating a rookie, any pick what have been sufficient.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Shanghai
    Posts
    9,426
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Griffen#16 View Post
    You're right, it's one that we at WOOF got wrong. Unfortunately we all make mistakes, and given the club doesn't publicly disclose many details about contracts it is often difficult to get solid verification.

    2 years rather than 3 is certainly a more prudent list management decision, however we still got dudded on the trade by giving up a 3rd round selection Geelong only used to elevate a rookie - we could have done with another, earlier selection. If Geelong were only elevating a rookie, any pick what have been sufficient.
    So we payed overs, when a lower than 3rd round pick would have been fine. Correct?
    You don't develop courage by being happy in your relationships every day. You develop it by surviving difficult times and challenging adversity. ― Epicurus

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost Dog View Post
    So we payed overs, when a lower than 3rd round pick would have been fine. Correct?
    Yes. Geelong could have used any pick to upgrade Pods - so it appears we got bullied into giving up more than we should have.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    sydenham
    Posts
    12,607
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Griffen#16 View Post
    Yes. Geelong could have used any pick to upgrade Pods - so it appears we got bullied into giving up more than we should have.
    Hindsight is sometimes not a good thing
    Bring back the biff

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Griffen#16 View Post
    Yes. Geelong could have used any pick to upgrade Pods - so it appears we got bullied into giving up more than we should have.
    Who's to say that Geelong didn't have their eye on a player and thought they'd need our third rounder to get them? Then when draft day came along, that player was gone at pick 58 so instead they upgraded Pods with that pick and finished up for the day?

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kyabram
    Posts
    13,797
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    Who's to say that Geelong didn't have their eye on a player and thought they'd need our third rounder to get them? Then when draft day came along, that player was gone at pick 58 so instead they upgraded Pods with that pick and finished up for the day?
    They may have needed it in trade week, but after getting it their deal fell through. No one knows for sure.
    The curse is dead.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    Who's to say that Geelong didn't have their eye on a player and thought they'd need our third rounder to get them? Then when draft day came along, that player was gone at pick 58 so instead they upgraded Pods with that pick and finished up for the day?
    Certainly possible (although I'm unsure if they would've had the list space to still upgrade Pods if they'd selected someone else at 58?). I guess it's the end result of them using it to upgrade that's frustrating.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    39,500
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by bornadog View Post
    A lot of people on this forum were scathing of the Club about signing him for three, yet appears this is not true.
    Was that information shared by the coach?
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,880
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by GVGjr View Post
    Was that information shared by the coach?
    Don't know.
    FFC: Established 1883

    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    14,567
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    I was told by someone who should know that he was signed for 3 years.

    The story goes that it was in our best interests financially to sign him for 3 than 2 so we went that way... not sure if there was an option clause at the end of the 2nd year though.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Behind the goals, Geelong Rd end
    Posts
    6,465
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    Who's to say that Geelong didn't have their eye on a player and thought they'd need our third rounder to get them? Then when draft day came along, that player was gone at pick 58 so instead they upgraded Pods with that pick and finished up for the day?
    Maybe during trade week but draft day they didn't have list space to draft another player

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by Sockeye Salmon View Post
    Maybe during trade week but draft day they didn't have list space to draft another player
    Fair enough, if that's the case. I was confused about when final list lodgements had to be made, I suppose it makes sense that it would be prior to the national draft rather than the preseason draft, to ensure each delisted player gets equal chance to get back on a senior or rookie list.

    The point of my post was to highlight that there might have been a reason for offering pick 58 for him, other than general incompetence from Fantasia. We clearly wanted him on our list, and considering many on this board have been proven incorrect when it came to his contracted tenure at the club I figured there might be a chance the same might apply to the circumstances around the compensation provided to Geelong for his services.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    10,040
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    The point of my post was to highlight that there might have been a reason for offering pick 58 for him
    I liken this situation to Tim Callan, where we only gave up a pick downgrade (from 61 to 63 from memory) to get Callan to the club. We got a speculative player and we got to keep a sllightly worse pick. Geelong are very reasonable players during trade week (eg: Steven King, Charlie Gardiner, Tim Callan) so we should have easily been able to negotiate something similar for DJ and kept a slightly worse 3rd round pick, especally considering he was about to get delisted. DJ is very much a speculative trade and on the back of 3 games in 3 years at Geelong, giving up a 3rd round draft pick for him was well over the odds (especially considering he was about to get delisted) - it meant that our first 'live' pick in that draft was 70 odd.

    Anyway good luck to DJ. I'm not sold yet but Sunday's effort was encouraging. He still fumbles far too many ground balls for my liking, an area that really should be a strength for someone as agile and low to the ground as he is.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 'Djitti' calls

    Agree on his ball handling skills, and agree that he still has a long way to go with respect to earning an extension on his contract.

    Your point about the Cats being reasonable traders is fair enough, though I still don't think it accounts for either the Bulldogs having to offer a pick that was better than that potentially offered to them to secure his services, or them requiring that pick to use in another trade.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •