The AFL hate the MFC because Bailey told the world we tanked thanks DEAN. But if GWS after taking scully do this then them rats should be told by the AFL to F$$$OFF as they are the one's draft tampering and have F$$$ the MFC allready

Everybody except KB already knew what was going on BJ. If we had managed our own affairs better then Bailey would never have needed to say a word.

The entire tanking strategy was a huge risk.

For it to work it had to be 100% right.

It backfired quite badly. Thus we are in the current sh!t position.

A little off topic but I cannot wait for the day we are actually competitive and do not need to focus on events such as these. 5 years of great draft picks have brought us little so I am not losing sleep over one less high pick this year.

A little off topic but I cannot wait for the day we are actually competitive and do not need to focus on events such as these. 5 years of great draft picks have brought us little so I am not losing sleep over one less high pick this year.

My thoughts exactly. Think like the Swans. Work f$$&@kin' hard and climb.

Do not plan for charity handouts.

The last 5 years have shown them to be a dubious form of success

WYL, here's challenge. Just say one positive thing about Melbourne. One tiny little thing. It can't be that hard.

Been reading this topic a bit and i dont often feel compelled to post, but did so today.

I dont have any concerns at all that the action taken by the club will be anything other than making the best of the situation they possibly can. Provided we finish as low as people are speculating (which personally i dont agree with) the possibility of having to use a very low pick (3 or 4 etc) was always going to be likely, much like the bulldogs using pick 14, from memory, on Ayce Cordy which may have been slightly overs, with more than one club with a lower pick bidding for him. If a player (father/son) is rated to be around a certain bracket than clubs have already shown they are more than happy to make a bid knowing full well that a club will be highly inclined to pick that player up anyway. So the concept of getting Jack as a second round pick if he is rated only slightly below our first pick is flawed IMO even if we hadnt taken the oppurtunity to get this extra development time into him.

Secondly there may be an opportunity to benefit from the scenario being played out so far, even without using methods the AFL may deem draft tampering. Obviously trades cant happen before the trade period but they can be agreed upon in principle. So what if Melbourne, assuming a 3rd last finish as many are, organise a trade to be completed with GWS and GC in the trade period, involving ou pick 3. Surely GWS and GC would then not bid pick 1 or 2 which proceeds to tie up the our pick that was to be used in the agreed upon trade. It would only be harming their own clubs, after all the benefit for us using a higher pick on Viney isnt to GWS and GC.

Perhaps as an example something like this.

Melbourne trades Pick 3 to GC

GC trades Josh Caddy to Melb

GWS trades U'17 mini draft pick 1 to GC

GC trades pick 3 to GWS

All speculation until years end but I feel people are drawing overly pessimistic conclusions, probably based on our current bleak feeling as the team struggles a bit, and that no matter the circumstances there is benefit to be had for the MFC.

End Rant, Cheers

WYL, here's challenge. Just say one positive thing about Melbourne. One tiny little thing. It can't be that hard.

It is hard right now. Bad mistakes have been made since 2008. I refuse to sugar coat our situation. I want to be positive about the Mighty Demons but they keep tripping over themselves.

FFS why did Viney play in the VFL???

Show your hand Melbourne. We already knew he was good. Know we are wide open.

Every other club is watching us. Circling.

This talk of 'overs', 'unders' and the true worth of Viney is all rubbish, fuelled just for the purpose of speculative argument and by a small media contingent.

I've seen nothing rational or factual that says we'd be wasting any pick in the top 5 on Viney. And, of course, it definitely won't be pick #1.

It is hard right now. Bad mistakes have been made since 2008. I refuse to sugar coat our situation. I want to be positive about the Mighty Demons but they keep tripping over themselves.

FFS why did Viney play in the VFL???

Show your hand Melbourne. We already knew he was good. Know we are wide open.

Every other club is watching us. Circling.

See, you just can't. 13,469 posts and 99% of them negative.

See, you just can't. 13,469 posts and 99% of them negative.

What would you like me to say Maurie?

Our track record is not good.

Just another case of the AFL having their cake and eating it to.

Wouldn't GWS nominating Viney with Pick 1 when he isn't considered the no. 1 kid in the country also draft tampering??? And what about the alleged Victorian clubs lobbying GWS and GC to nominate Viney, surely that's draft tampering also?

So either all are cases of draft tampering or none are. Absolute rubbish if we can;t arrange a deal like that!

Spot on TD. One rule for the new clubs, the interstate teams and big boys....another for the also rans. Pretty hard to get up off the bottom if you can't do a few sweetheart deals along the way and you get your No.1 pick stolen from under you after 2 years. It's a pitty the free agency arrangement is so restrictive.

Everybody except KB already knew what was going on BJ. If we had managed our own affairs better then Bailey would never have needed to say a word.

The entire tanking strategy was a huge risk.

For it to work it had to be 100% right.

It backfired quite badly. Thus we are in the current sh!t position.

FMD - Henny Penny!

I could not disagree more - we are in a very beneficial position resulting from tanking with compo picks (maybe something like 4 and 13) in this year's draft directly flowing from it - how is that "[censored]"?

This whole Viney discussion is about maximising our regular 1st and 2nd round picks.

No-one is tampering with the draft.

The much maligned 'Veale Deal' that allowed WB to pick up Rawlings in the draft to keep a deal between NM and Hawthorn occuring is in a similar vein to the trade I am envisioning.

If the AFL want to tell us we cannot convince clubs to overlook Viney for reward then we just do it surreptitiously with GWS and GC - let the AFL prove it and hold all the clubs accountable...

Until Demetriou comes out and explains the lengths to which they will go to stop us - we do it.

I like this RPFC. What precedent is there previously for a penalty for draft tampering anyway? Let's do it at take whatever rap comes you're saying. Everyone knows that GWS etc would be tampering/and f&^@ing with us and the system anyhow if they select Jack. We'd be just doing a little of the same. Go to court and attempt to get whatever penalty's placed on us overturned if needed if it comes to that. I'd happily contribute to a fund raiser towards the cost if needed.

Edited May 9, 201213 yr by Rusty Nails

FMD - Henny Penny!

I could not disagree more - we are in a very beneficial position resulting from tanking with compo picks (maybe something like 4 and 13) in this year's draft directly flowing from it - how is that "[censored]"?

This whole Viney discussion is about maximising our regular 1st and 2nd round picks.

Just like it helped us out so much in 2008-09.

Once you get into the charity cycle it is hard rise above it.

Winning Games is the answer.

that is beside the point......we are discussing if the current system is fair and if it can be improved on

there was always supposed to be a bonus element to it

i.e. you pay your next higher pick to "what he is worth" decided by other clubs bidding

problem here as we know is that other clubs don't really have to bid on "what he is worth"

i.e. other clubs can play ducks and drakes to force a club's hand and pay overs (i.e. no bonus element)

I would call this manipulating the draft which is just another fancy name for tampering, esp if as reported other higher up clubs have been lobbying GWS/GCS (never would be admitted though)

It's a bit like a game of poker at the moment; GWS will put in a bid on a player they have no intention of taking and we can either call their bluff and they will miss out on the best player in the draft, at the moment, or we can cop it and select him, so what do we do?

We take Viney because we said we would.

It is tampering with the draft but we can't prove it and if we try to counteract it we will get shafted, again, by the AFL; they will think up some retrospective rule to punish us.

il b dissapointed if MFC do not take the best available player to suit there needs with there first pick. Whether it be Viney or not.

I thought you were suggesting reverting to the old system because I thought that you could not possibly be suggesting regulation because that idea is absurd - but it seems that you were. An "independant" assessment of a player's worth is, as I said in my previous post, asking for trouble. This system, while imperfect, makes some allowance for clubs to make its own judgement about a player's worth. Under your proposal, I think you'd see the worst of both worlds because the assessment is going to be imperfect - you'd get players whose values are over-valued and it would discourage clubs from taking this option, and you'd get players who were under-valued and you're back where you started with Ablett Jr, Scarlett and Hawkins going to Geelong basically for free.

That we might "overpay" (I use this term very generously - really we're not overpaying, just not getting him cheap like some want) for Viney is byproduct of us being crap on the field. It's not because GWS are "tampering".

That is the system they used to decide the value of the players & therefore compensation for the out of contract players GC & GWS picked up.

il b dissapointed if MFC do not take the best available player to suit there needs with there first pick. Whether it be Viney or not.

Yes. In 16 weekstime we take the best player we can. If it is JV cool, if it is someone even better than Jack...Fantastic.

Yes it is poker, and each year it gets tougher.

il b dissapointed if MFC do not take the best available player to suit there needs with there first pick. Whether it be Viney or not.

If it's pick #1, it'll be someone like Whitfield (then #2 for the next best). Then Viney with #23 because that'll be all we need.

If it's pick #2 upwards it'll be Viney. Because we said we would and he's worth it.

il b dissapointed if MFC do not take the best available player to suit there needs with there first pick. Whether it be Viney or not.

Well, that's what we will say.

If we take him with Pick 3 because we are forced to - we will say he is worth that pick.

They are not going to say anything different.

If it's pick #1, it'll be someone like Whitfield (then #2 for the next best). Then Viney with #23 because that'll be all we need.

If it's pick #2 upwards it'll be Viney. Because we said we would and he's worth it.

Viney was best on ground, as an underage player, in the TAC Grand Final and I think people forget that, he will be worth what we pay for him, whether that is 2, 3 or 23 remains to be seen but he will be playing for Melbourne next year and that's that.

Mark Neeld said it exactly right:

"If we've got pick No.3 and Jack is rated in the top three, then that is an easy one. If we've got pick No.3 and Jack is rated in the top 10, then we'll need to have a discussion about that.

"I'm learning very quickly that there is absolutely no guarantees in this industry."

http://www.melbourne...81/default.aspx

If he turns out that he is worth pick 3, then by all means pick him. If we finish 3rd last (or should I say when) and GWS or Gold Coast try to be pricks and force us into taking him with pick 3 when he isn't worth it, then let them waste pick 1 or 2 on him, and we can use pick 3 to get what is essentially pick 2. I see no problem with that at all.

I can't believe that this post has slid by with barely a snifter of reaction!!

This is the first "official" notice from the club (that I have seen) in regards to what they might do if the situation we are all taking about happens. And what does it say/imply? That the club would consider not picking JV if we had pick 3 and he was only rated top-10!

OK, you and I know that they have every intention of getting JV if possible, but Neeld is very clearly here starting the media game of creating doubt in the mind of GWS and GC. This is exactly what Olisik and myself, and some other posters, have said the club would do, and lays to waste the ridiculous posts that some have been putting forward where they claim to have inside knowledge that the club rates him as near enough to a number 1 pick and will be happy to pay anything for him.

Again, all the club has to do is create enough doubt in the minds of GWS and GC that they might potentially lose their top 2 pick and have to use a just top-10 pick instead. And, now, the club is starting to do that. Thank you, Neeld.

Viney was best on ground, as an underage player, in the TAC Grand Final and I think people forget that, he will be worth what we pay for him, whether that is 2, 3 or 23 remains to be seen but he will be playing for Melbourne next year and that's that.

That is how i see it. Viney is a top draft pick. No use trying to deny. Moment we enticed him from Adelaide that was a given.

Top draft picks are to entice the best. Use it.

Tom $cully not with standing, who was clearly not the best footballer in the country iin 2009.

He was the best con artist by far. I wait for Jack Viney to smack Tom $cully in coming years.

The draft is a lottery in any year. I would be astounded if we did not take Viney(at least we know what he is like) to gamble on another kid for the sake of a draft pick.

I can't believe that this post has slid by with barely a snifter of reaction!! This is the first "official" notice from the club (that I have seen) in regards to what they might do if the situation we are all taking about happens. And what does it say/imply? That the club would consider not picking JV if we had pick 3 and he was only rated top-10! OK, you and I know that they have every intention of getting JV if possible, but Neeld is very clearly here starting the media game of creating doubt in the mind of GWS and GC. This is exactly what Olisik and myself, and some other posters, have said the club would do, and lays to waste the ridiculous posts that some have been putting forward where they claim to have inside knowledge that the club rates him as near enough to a number 1 pick and will be happy to pay anything for him. Again, all the club has to do is create enough doubt in the minds of GWS and GC that they might potentially lose their top 2 pick and have to use a just top-10 pick instead. And, now, the club is starting to do that. Thank you, Neeld.

So everyone here knows we are going to take him but we are capable of fooling GWS and GC?

They know we are going to take him - if we mention anything about where Viney should go, it is to give GWS and GC some wriggle room when/if they complete this deal with us and don't call out Jack's name at the bidding meeting.

The draft is a lottery in any year. I would be astounded if we did not take Viney(at least we know what he is like) to gamble on another kid for the sake of a draft pick.

Exactly, how many lower picks over the last few years have turned out to be the better/best players in the draft? We are talking knows and unknowns here, we know Jack and how good he is and how he can handle senior competition but we have no idea how the other kids will handle the step up.

If you wanted to select the best players in the 2009 draft now you probably would take Martin as number 1 and Scully would probably drop down to between 5 and 10.