fark joe daniher
3 Likes
Sure. Iâm not jumping up and down over it, or arguing with you per se.
I just think Iceyâs âSydney never wanted himâ is pretty hard to justify. Thereâs first hand quotes supporting it in the public domain.
They had a certain price they were willing to go to, we had a certain price we would let him go for. Thatâs the game, isnât it?
Here it is straight from the horseâs mouth (pun intended)
Longmire said the Swans thought theyâd put a âgood offer forwardâ to Essendon for Daniher.
âEssendon obviously wanted some younger players that we had and we werenât prepared to do that,â Longmire said.
âIn the end, we went really to the last minutes of the trade (period), trying to work through how it could get done. But Essendonâs priority, because he was a contracted player like us with Tom Papley, was they made the final call.â
If Sydney genuinely wanted him, they would have got him through paying too much. They were trying to play the game to see how much they could get without giving up much at all. FarkCarlton were doing the same thing, trying to get Papely and using his dadâs situation as leveredge. Sydeny didnât budge. I think Sydney genuinely thought, in the end, that they could maybe get 
if FarkCarlton gave them 9. FCFC didnât want to pay that for Papley though.
In the end there were two factors that caused it to never work. Sydney didnât really want to do it, and we didnât really want to let him go.
If we had been smart we would have shopped him around to find a decent bidder or got others involved. But we didnât and we screwed up. I wouldnât lump it all on Dodoro, others at the club were wanting him to stay too.
Sure it all seemed simple, but the reality was, it wasnât simple because no one was genuine in their offers.
Notice that last line about Papley, they didnât want him to leave so were not serious about trying to get 9 only from FarkCarlton.
I think they were interested, not super keen. I seem to remember it being reported that the plan was also instigated by Harley (as his former mentor), as opposed to him being a planned target from a list management perspective. Beatson certainly didnât make many comments about it
1 Like
I was makinf the point that Longmire is pretty clear they were serious about trading for Joe, and we knocked back their offer.
Overall it seems similar to our Dunkley situation, where it probably came as a surprise
Thatâs a silly reduction.
Thatâs like saying if you genuinely want this bottle of Coke, youâll pay $3,000 for it.
Two firsts (with a 2nd coming back) is absolutely not a âwe donât want himâ offer.
sure iyo
they had other options and refused to even consider them
but so did we
None of which means 2 firsts for an injured player isnât a fair offer.
Itâs been a few years so my memory is a little hazyâŚ
Sydney CEO Tom Harley, who was a friend of Daniherâs, persuaded him to come to the club. The agreement was made public by both parties. Sydney then reneged on their interest, I think because of salary cap restrictions. Rather than looking like fools for withdrawing interest, Sydney then cunningly used Carlton as a patsy - they agreed to trade a first and the pick they would receive from Carlton for Papley to Essendon for Joe. Trouble is, they never intended to trade Papley at all. Sydney then had plausible deniability. âWe wanted to land Joe but those jerks at Carlton wouldnât agree to a fair trade for Papley, meaning we couldnât get the currency to forward to Essendon. Itâs all Carltonâs fault.â
Happy to be corrected by those in the know or with a better memory than mine but this is why people say that the two first rounders offer was never on the table.
2 Likes
Itâs a fair offer if you have two firsts, not fair when you donât actually have them.
2 Likes
They had a future first as well. And if we were serious about rebuilding, a first plus a future first is good business.
Wasnât the final offer their 2019 and 2020 firsts ?
Thatâs what was reported, youâre implying that thatâs wrong, so do you know that thatâs incorrect?
(I know you have a good albeit 3rd hand source, so Iâm willing to take you on face value, but youâre dancing around itâŚ).
Basically yep.
I think we essentially expected that that 2020 first would be something like 10.
Ended up being 4, Logan McDonald.
It really only seems to be one person saying there was never 2 firsts on the table.
Their offer was Carltonâs first, not their own. They didnât have Carltonâs pick though.
1 Like
OK.
Fair enough.
Not behind closed doors, I suspect.
all this is very interesting ⌠actually thats a lie.
can we get back on track and talk about sacking this snake oil salesman? today would be a good day