Mitch Thorp nominates for ND

[H_T 3,047]

He nominated for the ND?!

You know what this means - he doesn't want to play for us.

He has hurt us emotionally and I would be livid if we picked him up.

I want an apology from him.

Cuts deep.

[deanox 9,922]

if we want to take him it doesnt matter whether we get him at 50 or 66 either. if we decide we want him not macdonald we can take him late and not have a pick in the PSD.

we might have been unwilling to commit to either just yet and as a result told thorp to go ND as he was less liekyl to get picked up than macdonald in the ND leaving him to go through to pick 50.

Our options are open, but I think we are keen on macdonald and were more interested in securing him.

[beelzebub 23,376]

we cant use 66

[H_T 3,047]

Agreed.

edit: In reference to deanox's post.

Edited November 18, 2009 by High Tower

[The Chazz 4,077]

we cant use 66

We can, but it means not using PSD1. Wont happen, but it isn't impossible.

[beelzebub 23,376]

givien the plausibility of throwing away PSD1...we wont and cant use 66

If we have made some form of commitment to someone totake at 1 ( psd) theres no slots left.. lets not get too cute.

[The Chazz 4,077]

givien the plausibility of throwing away PSD1...we wont and cant use 66

If we have made some form of commitment to someone totake at 1 ( psd) theres no slots left.. lets not get too cute.

You've taught us too well Belze!!!

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Ah really?

My last post went over a few heads so you're not alone...

I got it on the first try rpfc. Well played... I chuckled a little on the inside.

[beelzebub 23,376]

You've taught us too well Belze!!!

touche

[deanox 9,922]

we cant use 66

we can bub, as mentioned above, but i only suggest it because it could mean we have a situation where we were not sure what other players were doing.

say we wanted macdonald but he had not committed to us or the PSD yet, and we told mitch thorp we couldnt guarentee him PSD 1 but were keen on him pending this other outcome. thorp is going to then nominate for the ND while we wait on the decision of the other player. we could take thorp at 66 if the other player went earlier in the ND or we could pass on him to use PSD1.

Where will thorp go in the ND? I'm not sure, having done nothing in his 3 years you would assume no higher than 30 at least, meaning 34 he should be around, but not sure if he would last to 50 or 66. it could simply be a case of us not having decided who we were picking and not giving assurances to multiple players.

[titan_uranus 25,020]

Thorp at 50 mightn't be such a bad thing, and I reckon he'll probably last till then. Not sure if he'll be worth 34.

[beelzebub 23,376]

we can bub, as mentioned above, but i only suggest it because it could mean we have a situation where we were not sure what other players were doing.

say we wanted macdonald but he had not committed to us or the PSD yet, and we told mitch thorp we couldnt guarentee him PSD 1 but were keen on him pending this other outcome. thorp is going to then nominate for the ND while we wait on the decision of the other player. we could take thorp at 66 if the other player went earlier in the ND or we could pass on him to use PSD1.

Where will thorp go in the ND? I'm not sure, having done nothing in his 3 years you would assume no higher than 30 at least, meaning 34 he should be around, but not sure if he would last to 50 or 66. it could simply be a case of us not having decided who we were picking and not giving assurances to multiple players.

theoretically yes... practically...NO (66)

Something Im sure a lot of us kep overlooking.. ( myself included ) is there are a lot of selections.. and strangely a lot of players..lol. We're nearing the end of our somewhat straightforward selctions at 18 with 34 and 50 likely to go speculative in one form or another.. At 34 some teams are only just getting into it, many only up to their 3rd selection. They ( other teams ) will still be shopping in the kiddies dept, let alone the trade-in aisle. Theres every chance Thorpe would still be there at 50. In the unlikely event Meesen or Newton go then thoughts of a rookie surface, dont like our chances though.

1 and 2 are obvious for all but order.. 11 and 18 likely to go tall... 34 and 50 will be best of the rest...from whatever vintage. PSd seems all but destined for JM now. Thats where it will finish

[Dee Fan 3,247]

It would appear that Thorp may have stress fractures in his foot, if so Bye Bye.

Reported by an Ology poster that attends training and said he wasn't there because of injury.

That'll throw a lot of "Phantom Drafts" out the window if true.

Edited November 20, 2009 by RobbieF

[Rogue 585]

^ Disappointing.

[titan_uranus 25,020]

It would appear that Thorp may have stress fractures in his foot, if so Bye Bye.

Reported by an Ology poster that attends training and said he wasn't there because of injury.

That'll throw a lot of "Phantom Drafts" out the window if true.

Well that sucks. For player and for club.

I hope this doesn't increase the likelihood we'll take Tenace.

Edited November 20, 2009 by titan_uranus

[Guest hangon007]

It would appear that Thorp may have stress fractures in his foot, if so Bye Bye.

... Geez what a surprise that is.

[Redleg 40,925]

It would appear that Thorp may have stress fractures in his foot, if so Bye Bye.

Reported by an Ology poster that attends training and said he wasn't there because of injury.

That'll throw a lot of "Phantom Drafts" out the window if true.

That should have him available at 50.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

That should have him available at 50.

Are you thinking Red Herring? We wouldn't be that devious would we?

[beelzebub 23,376]

Are you thinking Red Herring? We wouldn't be that devious would we?

lol.....we've come a long way if we are !!

[Redleg 40,925]

Are you thinking Red Herring? We wouldn't be that devious would we?

No we are too honest for that. That would be a Collingwood tactic. He won't be training for now with stress fractures.

[Gooner 9]

Well that sucks. For player and for club.

I hope this doesn't increase the likelihood we'll take Tenace.

I wouldn't mind us taking a punt on Tenace. He's 24, and won't be 25 until mid next year, and a year younger than MacDonald. He's got talent, he just hasn't fulfilled it yet. I'd probably go for MacDonald, but I wouldn't be too upset if we take Tenace.

Ideally Thorp will slip through. He's got problems with injuries, but could be worth a punt. That's usually what the PSD is for anyway.

[titan_uranus 25,020]

He's got talent, he just hasn't fulfilled it yet.

I don't buy that for a second.

Ideally Thorp will slip through. He's got problems with injuries, but could be worth a punt. That's usually what the PSD is for anyway.

Stress fractures in the foot scare me. I still think he'd be a good addition to the team, but probably not with stress fractures.

[Footynut 302]

I don't buy that for a second.

Stress fractures in the foot scare me. I still think he'd be a good addition to the team, but probably not with stress fractures.

We can trust the FD on this one.

We can be sure if the rumour is true it will be bye bye....

But if it is a red herring the draft could be pick 50 M. Thorpe.....

Our FD are 'so hot right now....'

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,294]

We can trust the FD on this one.

We can be sure if the rumour is true it will be bye bye....

But if it is a red herring the draft could be pick 50 M. Thorpe.....

Our FD are 'so hot right now....'

I wouldn`t mind picking him up. However, I have my doubts that we`d be throwing a `` Red Herring`` to draft him. Could this be considered draft tampering if the AFL decide to investigate and it turns out there is no such injury. Then again, how do you determine who starts a rumour??I agree though if the rumour is true, I doubt we`d take the risk. We`ve had enough of these injuries which can prove to be very long term.

[Demon_Tingles 211]

FWIW I dont think its true was talking to Mitch the other day and he didnt say anything about being injured. The reason he wasn't at training is because he was in Tassie I believe.