New Recruiter Departs

teagueyubeauty · **Joined:** Sat Oct 14, 2006 11:28 am **Posts:** 6450

Oh, he must have been a cauliflower.... Synners is with the club in this one :0)

Where did Doc's post go?

aramari · **Posted:** Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:09 pm

Do Doc et al stand by their previous statements that it was personal (as in not club-related) and we shouldn't ask questions?

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 16902

ThePsychologist · **Joined:** Sun May 03, 2009 9:52 am **Posts:** 7893

Whether he was good or bad, it's just another issue in a long line of issues regarding our List Management & Recruiting Departments.

If he was no good why did we chase him? If he was good why did he leave so quickly? What was our due diligence?

In the end it's another poor decision by the club and yet no one takes responsibility. AGAIN

Quote by Shane Rogers when Luke Williams joined the club “One of the club’s goals is to bring good people to the club and Luke certainly fits the bill."

yet one of the key roles of a recruiter is to judge the character of a player. :roll:

Nick · **Joined:** Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:52 pm **Posts:** 1857

This is embarrassing.

How can someone leave for personal reasons and then bob up at another club in such a short amount of time?

So the personal reasons can't have been health related.

They can't be attitude/professionalism related either, otherwise how did he get a job within what, a month, of quitting here?

Princes Park Whistler · **Posted:** Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:05 pm

And Richmond just waiting there with a vacancy. They are starting to become like us with Coll`.

Rod Waddell · **Joined:** Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:49 am **Posts:** 1632

Well well well. If this is fair dinkum then Mr Rogers has much to answer for.

harker · **Joined:** Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:27 am **Posts:** 2334

Rod Waddell wrote:

Well well well. If this is fair dinkum then Mr Rogers has much to answer for.

If what is fair dinkum?

Rogers is our chief recruiter. What and who does he have to answer to other than Malthouse and the footballing department.

He didn't have to answer to Williams. What are you suggesting?

AGRO · **Posted:** Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:47 pm

A fair question to ask at next weeks AGM perhaps.

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 16902

AGRO wrote:

A fair question to ask at next weeks AGM perhaps.

Nah...you wouldn't get an answer - and inappropriate to ask during AGM. Afterwards better - but you still won't get an answer.

ThePsychologist · **Joined:** Sun May 03, 2009 9:52 am **Posts:** 7893

harker wrote:

Rod Waddell wrote:

Well well well. If this is fair dinkum then Mr Rogers has much to answer for.

If what is fair dinkum?

Rogers is our chief recruiter. What and who does he have to answer to other than Malthouse and the footballing department.

He didn't have to answer to Williams. What are you suggesting?

Does he answer to Malthouse?

Rod Waddell · **Joined:** Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:49 am **Posts:** 1632

harker wrote:

Rod Waddell wrote:

Well well well. If this is fair dinkum then Mr Rogers has much to answer for.

If what is fair dinkum?

Rogers is our chief recruiter. What and who does he have to answer to other than Malthouse and the footballing department.

He didn't have to answer to Williams. What are you suggesting?

Obvious questions:

1. Did he headhunt Williams & if so the reason/s?
2. Was any due diligence undertaken?
3. What was his input in his 5 months
4. Was any of our drafting ntel at risk given he left so close to the national draft?
5. Why did he leave citing personal reasons only to resurface a month or so later at another club
6. Was the CFC aware of his intention to cross to another club?

There may be more questions. Harks you may add more.

emtwenty · **Joined:** Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:29 pm **Posts:** 7074

Apparently he is in charge of monitoring the state leagues for Richmond. Definitely not as prestigious as being 2IC to Wells at Geelong.

camel · **Posted:** Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:20 am

I think his first task is to identify the differences in output between Richard Tambling and Lance Franklin.

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 16902

camelboy wrote:

I think his first task is to identify the differences in output between Richard Tambling and Lance Franklin.

He gets a DeLorean DMC-12 as a work car though? That's impressive.

billc3 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:41 pm **Posts:** 4549

camelboy wrote:

I think his first task is to identify the differences in output between Richard Tambling and Lance Franklin.

Boy...and I'm still haunted by the Mansfield/Chapman fiasco.... Yeesh

camel · **Posted:** Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:38 am

DocSherrin wrote:

camelboy wrote:

I think his first task is to identify the differences in output between Richard Tambling and Lance Franklin.

He gets a DeLorean DMC-12 as a work car though? That's impressive.

The best thing Jay Schulz ever did was lose them their TAC sponsorship so that Williams can now go 88mph with impunity. :lol:

CK95 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:22 pm

camelboy wrote:

The best thing Jay Schulz ever did was lose them their TC sponsorship so that Williams can now go 88mph with impunity. :lol:

harker · **Joined:** Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:27 am **Posts:** 2334

emtwenty wrote:

Apparently he is in charge of monitoring the state leagues for Richmond. Definitely not as prestigious as being 2IC to Wells at Geelong.

Is he? Willaims was doing that job by default anyway. :smile:

One for the price of two then?

aramari · **Posted:** Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:45 pm

DocSherrin wrote:

No.

Thanks. So it was a failed hire.

Any read on if it was a flawed Williams or a flawed structure / ill defined role / too many cooks issue?

New Recruiter Departs

Who is online