| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Happy for him to be re-signed but his form tapered off markedly in the second half of the season I thought and he went back to being the good average Goldsack of old albeit at both ends of the ground.
He was not alone though.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
 |
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
|
|
|
|
Seth
Joined: 15 Nov 2000
Location: In the study!
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Thank goodness some sanity prevails. All Goldy wanted was a 3 year deal and some security. It wasnt about the money. Good on him, always been a big fan. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Well I guess once Lumumba said he wanted to leave. Goldsack came so much more Important.
So was to Money or just an extra Season he wanted?
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
rocketronnie
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Location: Reservoir
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| RudeBoy wrote: | | rocketronnie wrote: | | The meeting with Buckley would be to only announce the agreement reached between the club's negotiators and Tyson's management. Given that its a bit rich lauding a "triumph for Bucks" lol. Buckley would have little to do with the negotiation process apart from the final announcement to Goldsack. |
So let me get this right. When players decide to leave it's because they hate Bucks, but when a player commits to stay at Collingwood after a meeting with Bucks, it's got nothing to do with Bucks??? Ummm.....whatever.  |
Talk about over-saucing the pudding. Buckley may well have told him he is required etc. which I'm sure was re-assuring for Goldsack. However the real nuts and bolts stuff - the stuff that makes or breaks whether he stays or goes is done between player management and negotiators - thats what ultimately decides whether a player stays or goes - not a nice cup of tea with Bucks. Therefore statements such as "triumph for Bucks" delivered in a crowing tone are nothing but hyperbole. Capiche?
_________________
"Only the weak believe that what they do in battle is who they are as men" - Thomas Marshall - "Ironclad". |
|
|
|
|
nomadjack
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Location: Essendon
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^^
And what role does a player being happy with the direction and culture of the club play in his decision to stay? You know, that stuff that is primarily set by the coach you've been so critical about? |
|
|
|
|
BazBoy
Joined: 11 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: The Goldie --a Pie till 2017 | |
|
Just on Collingwood.com.au that Goldie signed for 3 more seasons
And Rocket commented his involvement as a leader went way up in 2014
Giving encouragement and advise to kids all of which respect him highly
_________________
I'm not arguing--just explaining why i am right |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| rocketronnie wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | rocketronnie wrote: | | The meeting with Buckley would be to only announce the agreement reached between the club's negotiators and Tyson's management. Given that its a bit rich lauding a "triumph for Bucks" lol. Buckley would have little to do with the negotiation process apart from the final announcement to Goldsack. |
So let me get this right. When players decide to leave it's because they hate Bucks, but when a player commits to stay at Collingwood after a meeting with Bucks, it's got nothing to do with Bucks??? Ummm.....whatever. |
Talk about over-saucing the pudding. Buckley may well have told him he is required etc. which I'm sure was re-assuring for Goldsack. However the real nuts and bolts stuff - the stuff that makes or breaks whether he stays or goes is done between player management and negotiators - thats what ultimately decides whether a player stays or goes - not a nice cup of tea with Bucks. Therefore statements such as "triumph for Bucks" delivered in a crowing tone are nothing but hyperbole. Capiche? |
According to Goldsack “I don’t think there is a better place to play football and get the best out of yourself than Collingwood."
Seems a pretty straight forward endorsement of the Bucks regime. Capiche? |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| rocketronnie wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | rocketronnie wrote: | | The meeting with Buckley would be to only announce the agreement reached between the club's negotiators and Tyson's management. Given that its a bit rich lauding a "triumph for Bucks" lol. Buckley would have little to do with the negotiation process apart from the final announcement to Goldsack. |
So let me get this right. When players decide to leave it's because they hate Bucks, but when a player commits to stay at Collingwood after a meeting with Bucks, it's got nothing to do with Bucks??? Ummm.....whatever. |
Talk about over-saucing the pudding. Buckley may well have told him he is required etc. which I'm sure was re-assuring for Goldsack. However the real nuts and bolts stuff - the stuff that makes or breaks whether he stays or goes is done between player management and negotiators - thats what ultimately decides whether a player stays or goes - not a nice cup of tea with Bucks. Therefore statements such as "triumph for Bucks" delivered in a crowing tone are nothing but hyperbole. Capiche? |
I think you might be confusing the technical with the practical...... Technically, neither Buckley or goldsack had much to do with drafting the contract, but I would think that the relationship between coach and player might have a fair bit to do with a player deciding to stay at his club of choice for less money rather than move onto another club for more money.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: Re: The Goldie --a Pie till 2017 | |
|
| barrybc41 wrote: | Just on Collingwood.com.au that Goldie signed for 3 more seasons
And Rocket commented his involvement as a leader went way up in 2014
Giving encouragement and advise to kids all of which respect him highly |
I love the sack, but I suspect that just like in 2010, when Goldsack is the last player picked or cant get a game, then the pies will have a powerhouse team again.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
Member 7167 
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| rocketronnie wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | rocketronnie wrote: | | The meeting with Buckley would be to only announce the agreement reached between the club's negotiators and Tyson's management. Given that its a bit rich lauding a "triumph for Bucks" lol. Buckley would have little to do with the negotiation process apart from the final announcement to Goldsack. |
So let me get this right. When players decide to leave it's because they hate Bucks, but when a player commits to stay at Collingwood after a meeting with Bucks, it's got nothing to do with Bucks??? Ummm.....whatever. |
Talk about over-saucing the pudding. Buckley may well have told him he is required etc. which I'm sure was re-assuring for Goldsack. However the real nuts and bolts stuff - the stuff that makes or breaks whether he stays or goes is done between player management and negotiators - thats what ultimately decides whether a player stays or goes - not a nice cup of tea with Bucks. Therefore statements such as "triumph for Bucks" delivered in a crowing tone are nothing but hyperbole. Capiche? |
I do not fully agree. The coach has a lot to do with how many games a player is earmarked to play in coming seasons along with the position and role. I would suggest that the coach just might have a whole lot of say and influence in this area. This also influences the term of the contract and the remuneration being offered.
One of the main reasons Luke Ball left the A'ints is due to the amount of game time that planned to be made available to him. Luke left them as he wanted more game time. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: Re: The Goldie --a Pie till 2017 | |
|
| E wrote: | | barrybc41 wrote: | Just on Collingwood.com.au that Goldie signed for 3 more seasons
And Rocket commented his involvement as a leader went way up in 2014
Giving encouragement and advise to kids all of which respect him highly |
I love the sack, but I suspect that just like in 2010, when Goldsack is the last player picked or cant get a game, then the pies will have a powerhouse team again. |
Agree. Ditto Blair. When your established role players are forced out, you know your headed in the right direction. |
|
|
|
|
ANNODAM 
Rebel Heart Tour - The Forum, Los Angeles 27/10/2015.
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Location: Eltham, VIC.
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I love the Sack, after all, he did kick the first goal at the GF replay.
RESPECT!
_________________
WE WERE ROBBED, RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, RIGHT IN FRONT OF MEEE!
N.Y METS, N.Y GIANTS, PENRITH PANTHERS & HOBART HURRICANES FAN.
WE ALL LOOK GOOD AT TRAINING, IT'S THE MATCHES THAT COUNT! |
|
|
|
|
September Zeros
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Behind you
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | | September Zeros wrote: | | Defender wrote: | | "perceptive fellow" aren't anti Goldsack. |
"perceptive fellow" missed the point......again. |
Err no... we didn't. We still go for the Pies.. just like people still want to play for the Pies... regardless of management... |
To quote Tyson:
"I've been here for eight years now and I don't think there is a better place to play football and get the best out of yourself than Collingwood."
Yeah he must really hate the Collingwood management.
congrats and well done Goldy!
_________________
No Pressure, No Diamonds
They used to be a happy team at hawthorn.
________________
Last edited by September Zeros on Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:36 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
Stinger
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Location: Canberra
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | | Happy for him to be re-signed but his form tapered off markedly in the second half of the season I thought and he went back to being the good average Goldsack of old albeit at both ends of the ground. |
I disagree that his form tapered off. As a forward he was doing his job and hit the scoreboard in a few games and tackling the shit out of any running back flanker that looked like breaking a line. Hit the scoreboard, tackle = good = noticed = good form Goldy.
Then when the injury carnage started he went back to more defensive and negating roles. Run with role, shut down role = low possession = not noticed = form drop... wrong.
He doesn't run through the middle so doesn't get the benefit of a high possession count to get noticed. Still I thought he played some good games late. Such as against Port and West Coast, even the Hawks, albeit in a different capacity. Plus as an added bonus - shut down Thomas when we played the Blues. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
