Tadhg to come back??

[Triple B]

Mate, I realise that a fair whack of what you say on this forum is just to stir @@@@ and generally I find you pretty funny, but you're seriously off your tree on this.

You're into Coney for buggering off and I think that's fair enough. Kennelly has put in something like eight years at the Swans and played a big part in winning the flag. He stayed on the field and got his teammates to pop his shoulder back in just so he could play on FFS!!!

His loyalty and commitment can hardly be questioned on those grounds alone.

And yet, let's look at his reason for going home? To honour his deceased father and play for the county in which he grew up and where he was taught to play football.

Enough said

Excellent summation.

[connolly]

Mate, I realise that a fair whack of what you say on this forum is just to stir @@@@ and generally I find you pretty funny, but you're seriously off your tree on this.

You're into Coney for buggering off and I think that's fair enough. Kennelly has put in something like eight years at the Swans and played a big part in winning the flag. He stayed on the field and got his teammates to pop his shoulder back in just so he could play on FFS!!!

His loyalty and commitment can hardly be questioned on those grounds alone.

And yet, let's look at his reason for going home? To honour his deceased father and play for the county in which he grew up and where he was taught to play football.

Enough said

I'm not questioning his motive in going home. But i do raise the issue of how it was done and whether he really was committed after the 2006 season. He did suffer injuries but really he was not committed to the club as a professional club has a right to expect. Thats not to denigrate the bloke as a person (although the timing was ordinary) but to state the obvious - his heart wasn't in it in 2008, he was playing injured and he left for two reasons. He assessed that the club didn't have another premiership around the corner (as did O'Keefe) and his age pressed him to play GAA. Kerry needed that extra classy player to beat Tyrone this season and went after Kennelly. Thats all well and good for Kenelly but it undermines the morale of the squad that remains with the club. As a 28 year old (assuming Kerry win the All Ireland) who comes back, he might still have something to offer, but surely on a greatly reduced contract because we really do need to recruit that marque player in 2010. The caravan moves on.

[connolly]

I hate to disagree with your well thought out criticism, connolly, but wasn't Paul Morwood part of the Edelston recruiting drive that culminated in the Swans 1986-7 finals appearances (the first in nearly a decade)? Although he didn't participate (because he was discarded again like a used tissue). And when Rantall came back, the Swans played finals the following season for only the second time since 1945. Finals doesn't give credibility?



Actually, I think I might have written "He just went home". Where his family are. Goodness forbid that he have tight family connections and aspirations beyond the Swans (after having given up the bulk of his youth - late teens to mid-20s to commit to a game he knew nothing about in a country where he knew no one).



Did you have the same feelings about Gerard Healy when he went before his contract was up? Don't forget Tadhg had some serious injuries but played on despite the fact that I can guarentee that recurrent gleno-humeral and patella dislocations will physically dibilitate him later in life.

Cut the guy some slack.

As a club we had no credibility during the Edelstein era. Which shows that on field success is not the be all and end all of footy clubs. The club is bigger than the individual and whatever Kennelly decides in 2010 we owe him absolutely nothing in terms of a return. He will be nearing the end of his career, injury prone and walked when others stayed. Would prefer to see the club end the relationship, which he breached anyway and we all move on. Sentiment should play no part in the decision, particularly for a player who walked out. It is really important the club doesn't become player driven. Some of the recent decisions indicate that it might be - extending Barry's contract, Crouch continuing and Kennelly returning. They have all given great service to the club, in Kennelly's case up to 2008, and we should value that but not mistake gratitude for loyalty.

[dimelb]

... whatever Kennelly decides in 2010 we owe him absolutely nothing in terms of a return. He will be nearing the end of his career ... Sentiment should play no part in the decision ...

I think this is the essence of what you are saying, and I agree. The question is not whether we owe him - I don't think we do - but whether he can still give us something - and I think he can. And we are first in the queue - and if he returns, a queue there will be.

[pinkemu]

I think this is the essence of what you are saying, and I agree. The question is not whether we owe him - I don't think we do - but whether he can still give us something - and I think he can. And we are first in the queue - and if he returns, a queue there will be.

We, Everyone all the time makes it sound as though we have a say (forums)
I agree dime, If Tadhg was to come back (no matter the capacity) he is ours (We)

[goswannies]

As a club we had no credibility during the Edelstein era.

Who says the club had no cedibility? How are you measuring this?

Which shows that on field success is not the be all and end all of footy clubs.

So what is the "be all and end all". Bob Skilton says he'd trade everything for a premiership. Arguably our greatest player uses a premiership as the yearstick of his career success. Coaches are sacked annually for not bringing on field success (I think Plough might beg to differ with you).

The club is bigger than the individual.

You get no argument there but I don't recall reading a single post in this thread that stated that Tadhg is bigger than the club. So what's your point?! I think much of the sentiment is that if he wants to come back, he'd be welcome (at least by W&WOers - save petty minority who hold a grudge).

and whatever Kennelly decides in 2010 we owe him absolutely nothing in terms of a return.

And I for one never said we owed him anything. What I do feel is he may well have something to contribute, I would welcome him back as a player and a person. And we don't have to use a draft pick to get him.

He will be nearing the end of his career.

Time will tell as, if he plays to 32-34 we will have got more out of him than many other guys we've drafted

injury prone.

Are you a Dr or a physio and have access to his medical file? A bad run of injuries doesn't mean he's necessarily injury prone forever. If he can get his shoulder right and his knee right with a year out of the game (as opposed to a few months like he's tried to in the past) there is a reasonable chance he can come good.

and walked when others stayed.

Before you bag him again on this (yet again), how about you bag supporters who stopped turning up to games in the mid-90's when they didn't win often. You talk about other players not leaving... how about those that left but didn't want to come back? And I don't begrudge them that either. Players have a right to go where they want, when they want. It's their job. Sure, we as fans, do get upset when a favourite son leaves. But Tadhg never grew up loving the Swans. The Swans put a lot of time, effort and money into him... but he rewarded them time and again too.

Some of the recent decisions indicate that it might be - extending Barry's contract, Crouch continuing and Kennelly returning. They have all given great service to the club, in Kennelly's case up to 2008, and we should value that but not mistake gratitude for loyalty.

The gratitude vs loyalty argument isn't really the point. Can he make a meaningful onfield contribution if he comes back? Would he be the worst player on the list? Would he play more senior games than the the worst player on the list? Would he warrent delisting sooner than the worst player on the list? If he's better than our worst player, he's worth having. If you're going to get rid of someone, get rid of the worst player. If Tadhg is our worst player, don't renew his contract.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Can he make a meaningful onfield contribution if he comes back? Would he be the worst player on the list? Would he play more senior games than the the worst player on the list? Would he warrent delisting sooner than the worst player on the list? If he's better than our worst player, he's worth having. If you're going to get rid of someone, get rid of the worst player. If Tadhg is our worst player, don't renew his contract.

Best post so far.

[Robbo]

Personally I don't want him back. We already have Mattner, Shaw and Malceski.

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

he walked out so seeya tiger nice knowin ya.

Surprisingly I disagree with you this time. BUT I would ensure that if he came back his new contracts would be for little more than match payments & that he would have to stipulate in writing that if he was to return to Ireland again he could only do so after we had released him from our squad & not been penalised as a club. Or he would be deemed to be in breach of contract.

He still seems like a bit of a mummy's boy though. After what was it, 9 years in Sydney, you think he'd have been able to live without Nuala doing up his shoelaces for him, wouldn't you?

Still if we got him for not very much & we gave him a THOROUGH medical test before we sign him (ie putting the shoulder under extreme match-like conditions), he would most definitely be a plus for the club.

Still not happy about the way he left us. But sometimes we have to let sentiment go & do what is best for the team. If emotion had its way none of us would have EVER wanted Lockett up in Sydney after what he did to Peter Caven (and Foreign Legion) that day in 1994.

JF

[ROK Lobster]

I'm with Bevo on this one. If he wanted to go home, fine. But not after saying he did not want to and getting a spot on the list. He wasn't 18 and homesick. He was old enough to see out a commitment even if he had changed his mind.

[dimelb]

I'm with Bevo on this one. If he wanted to go home, fine. But not after saying he did not want to and getting a spot on the list. He wasn't 18 and homesick. He was old enough to see out a commitment even if he had changed his mind.

That's true for lots of jobs, but not this one: if his heart's not in it, we're not going to get much out of him, better he sorts out the longstanding issue and restart with a clear mind.

[ROK Lobster]

That's true for lots of jobs, but not this one: if his heart's not in it, we're not going to get much out of him, better he sorts out the longstanding issue and restart with a clear mind.

Sorry mate, I can't agree. It's a job like any other. The club has tried to show for a long time what discipline and sheer bloody hard work can achieve. If his heart is not in it he just has to work that bit harder until his time is upo, then walk away.

The club is travelling a little better than I thought it would this seasn - maybe Tadhg is thinking the same...

[connolly]

Who says the club had no cedibility? How are you measuring this?

I measure it by the fact we couldn't hold players. When the money ran out they left in droves. In the late 80's the club was struggling to buy the bandages. We failed to hold future champions. We were an embarassment. I know i was there every week and watched a dispirited mob who some weeks didn't even try. We were a revolving door for players. It wasn't the losing that hurt it was watching teams from a great club turn it up, players that played for themselves and a club that stood for nothing.

So what is the "be all and end all". Bob Skilton says he'd trade everything for a premiership. Arguably our greatest player uses a premiership as the yearstick of his career success. Coaches are sacked annually for not bringing on field success (I think Plough might beg to differ with you).

A strong club culture of loyalty and committment is more enduring than a couple of seasons in the finals. Its interesting you use the example of Skilton. Could have left us at any time in the late sixties for big contracts when we were real strugglers. A champion who stuck with us through the thin years. Skilton didn't trade everything, especially a premiership for his club loyalty.

You get no argument there but I don't recall reading a single post in this thread that stated that Tadhg is bigger than the club. So what's your point?! I think much of the sentiment is that if he wants to come back, he'd be welcome (at least by W&WOers - save petty minority who hold a grudge).

[I]The club should send a message. It is bigger than any individual, especially one who breaks its contracts.[/I]


Are you a Dr or a physio and have access to his medical file? A bad run of injuries doesn't mean he's necessarily injury prone forever. If he can get his shoulder right and his knee right with a year out of the game (as opposed to a few months like he's tried to in the past) there is a reasonable chance he can come good.

So you want to recruit a 28 - 29 year old with a history of shoulder and knee problems in a game which is faster than 3 seasons ago? Why? Lets get a really good marqee player, use Kennelly's considerable payments to ramp up the really good players contract payments. Who would you rather have Pavlich or Kennelly? As far as i know Pav doesn't hanker to go to Croatia. Lets try and get the Pav and leave the irish nonsense where it belongs - in the past.


Before you bag him again on this (yet again), how about you bag supporters who stopped turning up to games in the mid-90's when they didn't win often. You talk about other players not leaving... how about those that left but didn't want to come back? And I don't begrudge them that either. Players have a right to go where they want, when they want. It's their job. Sure, we as fans, do get upset when a favourite son leaves. But Tadhg never grew up loving the Swans. The Swans put a lot of time, effort and money into him... but he rewarded them time and again too.

He was rewarded in his contract, which he broke. Rewards stopped at that point. We are not the St Vincent de Paul and he has the local priest for spiritual support and solace. We are a football club not a counselling session. Favourite son he wasn't, prodigal son he aint.


The gratitude vs loyalty argument isn't really the point. Can he make a meaningful onfield contribution if he comes back? Would he be the worst player on the list? Would he play more senior games than the the worst player on the list? Would he warrent delisting sooner than the worst player on the list? If he's better than our worst player, he's worth having. If you're going to get rid of someone, get rid of the worst player. If Tadhg is our worst player, don't renew his contract.

Thats not the issue. It is - are there better players at his age and physical condition to recruit? He has a track record of disloyalty and homesickness. The answer is yes there are younger, better, fitter, and faster players that we can recruit. And we should. Kennelly is the last player on earth we should offer a "family" or sympathy contract to. Let him test his worth in the marketplace. Any takers for an aging, injury prone player with a record of breaking contracts, putting himself first and injuries? Collingwood? Bombers? Geelong? Year right. Tigers? Probably.

[waterfowl]

Tadhg Kennelly - Against All Odds

Part 1

YouTube - (HD) Tadhg Kennelly - Against All Odds 1/3

Part 2

YouTube - (HD) Tadhg Kennelly - Against All Odds 2/3

Part 3

YouTube - (HD) Tadhg Kennelly - Against All Odds 3/3

[Rob-bloods]

no