I would have imagined the club would have waited until back from China to finalise it's list prior the draft.

Is there a known timetable for this?

List lodgement 1 is in 8 days.

That is rookie upgrades and delistings.

Further dates here.

what about gold coast player trade?

Trading's done, isn't it..?

isnt 1 uncontracted player per club going to gold coast?

isnt 1 uncontracted player per club going to gold coast?

Im going to just pretend you are joking...

isnt 1 uncontracted player per club going to gold coast?

Gold Coast have taken their 8 uncontracted players. they could have as much as 16 , but they elected to take only 8./ it is done. they were allowed one from each club. perhaps two if they sought approval or permission.

Edited October 21, 201015 yr by Grimes to Watts

how many deletions do we need

cheney bell miller junior , guessing healey,meeson, hughes

isnt 1 uncontracted player per club going to gold coast?

No.

how many deletions do we need

cheney bell miller junior , guessing healey,meeson, hughes

The latter three are on the rookie list so they should be separated.

The former group are all gone. If we want to use picks in the 50s/PSD pick then we need to delist more.

My guess is that 2 more players (maybe Johnson and McNamara) will be delisted, but picked up in our rookie list if they are not selected by anyone in the drafts,

similar to what occured with Newton and Meeson last year. Is this possible? Is there a limit to the number of senior rookies on the list?

This would free up our picks at 83 and 100 in the draft to promote McKenzie and Spencer, and leave us with picks 12, 32, 49 and 52 for new blood.

I also see a thinning out of the rookie list - moving on Hughes, Healey, Meeson and maybe Newton.

My guess is that 2 more players (maybe Johnson and McNamara) will be delisted, but picked up in our rookie list if they are not selected by anyone in the drafts,

similar to what occured with Newton and Meeson last year. Is this possible? Is there a limit to the number of senior rookies on the list?

This would free up our picks at 83 and 100 in the draft to promote McKenzie and Spencer, and leave us with picks 12, 32, 49 and 52 for new blood.

I also see a thinning out of the rookie list - moving on Hughes, Healey, Meeson and maybe Newton.

The difference is that Newton and Meesen were contracted and agreed to be rookied if not taken by another club first.

Hughes and Healey should probably be delisted, I can't see Hughes playing again. Not sure about Newton, and come on lets give Meesen another go, Newton is looking more likely to stay after playing quite well (I think) in Shanghai

Edited October 22, 201015 yr by steveheals

The difference is that Newton and Meesen were contracted and agreed to be rookied if not taken by another club first.

good point. But i think we still have to find 2 extra points on our list, instead of using picks 49 and 52 for McKenzie and Spencer.

come on lets give Meesen another go

Meesen has retired.

Hughes and Healey should probably be delisted, I can't see Hughes playing again. Not sure about Newton, and come on lets give Meesen another go, Newton is looking more likely to stay after playing quite well (I think) in Shanghai

The FD don't make decisions on players after one exhibition game.

I cannot believe I have been put in a position where I have posted that about 5 times this week...

For shame, Demonland!

I have a feeling the FD would be comfortable about retaining Newton one more year on the rookie list if that's at all possible.

Other than that, two players would need to go in order to allow us to use 49 & 52, the last of which we might optional at the ND and could be left for the PSD.

How many are still out of contract. They're the problematic ones at this point in time.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/104744/default.aspx