@stone1_matthew No, you never do that. You only ever act in the best interests of the club. Every other consideration is secondary. Brisbane have obviously taken a policy position (eg Ah Chee) of “when we say something, we mean it” on the grounds that it will benefit the club in the long run.
@HeathLyons@Picksthepunter@aflratings_GM If someone says “I have an asset. I don’t want to sell it. I would only sell it if someone paid me $x” then of course it’s fair for them to tell someone to bugger off if they’re offered less than $x.
@HeathLyons@Picksthepunter@aflratings_GM Nothing unfair about it at all. He’s contracted and Brisbane have said, right from the start, that he’d only be traded for a first round pick. For some reason best known to themselves, Essendon ignored that.
@ScottStakes@Markm106 St Kilda didn’t seem to have any problem doing the Sam Marshall trade. The reality is that Brisbane said, right from the start, it’d have to be a first round pick for them to trade Coleman. Essendon were fools to ignore that statement.
@aflratings_GM Brisbane never put him on the market and only ever said they’d have to get a first round pick if he was to be traded. If Essendon led Coleman down the primrose path then that is on them.
@ProbeAway@adrian78melb@traderadio Remember they have to pay a premium of 20%. Anyway, that will determine it: if they can get Murray then they’ll do it, if they can’t then they won’t.
@adrian78melb@traderadio It doesn’t but I’m pretty sure 21 won’t get them Murray. So I strongly suspect they’d rather keep Coleman for at least a year, with the possibility of re-signing him. He’s a very good player.