Jump to content

Melbourne asks for draft assistance

Featured Replies

 

Thanks AFL. Wonder what the excuse is this year? Change Clark's name to Hogan?

The reason why it took them so long to make it official was that they were trying to find a good excuse.

At least we know now that there won't be any draft assistance to St. Kilda if they are unfortunate enough to win the next few wooden spoons or to Essendon if they lose players due to ASADA infractions.

Meanwhile the stronger clubs continue to get massive assistance via plum fixtures and scholarship schemes made available to clubs like Sydney which provide them with top five draft picks for selection 20.

So we move on ...

 

AFL has told Dees the club is in better shape today than last year ...

Although that's true, the 2 reasons they explicitly stated we would not get one last year were Clark and Hogan. Neither played all year.

On that basis alone we should have been given an end of first rounder.

Becuase Frawley is leaving and Melbourne is likely to get pick 3, Melbourne won't get a PP.

I would have thought gaining the pick 3 and losing Frawley cancel each other out?

I don't care either way to be honest, I just find that excuse very weak.


The reason why it took them so long to make it official was that they were trying to find a good excuse.

At least we know now that there won't be any draft assistance to St. Kilda if they are unfortunate enough to win the next few wooden spoons or to Essendon if they lose players due to ASADA infractions.

Meanwhile the stronger clubs continue to get massive assistance via plum fixtures and scholarship schemes made available to clubs like Sydney which provide them with top five draft picks for selection 20.

So we move on ...

Sorry WJ we don't know that. We might reasonably expect that, but this being the AFL anything may happen.

I can take the excuse that they simply don't want to spoil the drafts unless a club is on it's last dying legs.

But don't feed us crap about Hogan and Clark, or the list being in better shape or any other platitude.

AFL has told Dees the club is in better shape today than last year ...

As of right now, we are in a worse position list wise than we were last year. We are losing our best forward and best back for the sum total of one first round pick (at best). We're not even allowed to keep pace with "inflation"

 

Time to move on.

We should call for the scrapping of all draft interference effective immediately.

The end to COLA for interstate clubs.

The end to Academy selections.

An equitable fixture, giving all clubs the chance to maximise revenues.

The end to any extra draft and list benefits to GC and GWS.

An end to the PP rule.

The more I think about this, the more I think it's just because of the Frawley comp. Although the two have nothing to do with each other, the AFL is all about looking good, and they probably think it would be a bad look if we had 3 picks in the first round.

Even if the cost of those 3 picks was:

Pick 2 - Being the second worst team in 2014

Pick 3 - Loosing the most sought after free agent in 2014

PP - Loosing 35 games in 8 seasons or whatever that stat was.

I bet if you asked any other team to pay that price for that reward, they wouldn't.


Then we now go as hard as possible on Clark.

As well we refuse to play most games in anything but our traditional jumper until Richmond, Essendon and Collingwood come up with geniune clash jumpers.

No more Mr. nice guys go for the jugular wherever possible.

And when the tide turns it will be time for revenge.

Remember it is dish best served cold

AFL has told Dees the club is in better shape today than last year ...

Didn't know a subjective look at the list by an unnamed person was one of the criteria.

Frawley aint worth pick 3.

That is assistance in my book.

No that is an AFL rule, just like the rule that allows the rich clubs to steal the best players from the weaker clubs without payment.


Didn't know a subjective look at the list by an unnamed person was one of the criteria.

said unnamed person obviously did not go to many MFC games this year

Frawley aint worth pick 3.

That is assistance in my book.

Nope. He's worth an "after first pick FA compensation pick" or "tier 1" I think they call it.

Which for us, because we are horrible, is pick 3. If it was St Kilda, he'd be worth pick 2. If it was Sydney, he'd be worth Pick 19. The after first pick is supposed to be the equalising factor in compensation so bad teams get compensated more than good ones.

The offers we've read about would put him in the tier 1 category.

The more I think about this, the more I think it's just because of the Frawley comp. Although the two have nothing to do with each other, the AFL is all about looking good, and they probably think it would be a bad look if we had 3 picks in the first round.

Even if the cost of those 3 picks was:

Pick 2 - Being the second worst team in 2014

Pick 3 - Loosing the most sought after free agent in 2014

PP - Loosing 35 games in 8 seasons or whatever that stat was.

I bet if you asked any other team to pay that price for that reward, they wouldn't.

What if the pick was first pick in the second round or the pick after our second round pick?

What if the pick was first pick in the second round or the pick after our second round pick?

Doesn't matter. Either way, the price we paid is too high. Not sure If I'm coming across right.

I'm trying to say we're grossly under compensated for what we've endured. Pick 4 or Pick 20, it doesn't matter. Either way, losing this much for 8 years isn't worth it.

BUT getting a PP, any PP, is better than nothing.

If it was a value proposition, no one would even consider paying the losses we have for a PP, even pick 1. I'm saying even pick 1 is under compensating for our extreme badness, and we don't even get that.

The only time the rules don't matter if is the AFLs image is in jeopardy. How can any organisation rule like that? Are they even allowe to?


Now watch them throw pick 10 at us for frawley.

The only time the rules don't matter if is the AFLs image is in jeopardy. How can any organisation rule like that? Are they even allowe to?

The AFL are influenced 2 much by backlash other clubs wouldn't like it. They don't have any balls.
 

Time to move on.

We should call for the scrapping of all draft interference effective immediately.

The end to COLA for interstate clubs.

The end to Academy selections.

An equitable fixture, giving all clubs the chance to maximise revenues.

The end to any extra draft and list benefits to GC and GWS.

An end to the PP rule.

I agree we should but our admin is too weak and/or spineless to push these agendas.

Why though can we have what is rightfully ours denied because of hypotheticals? Are rules legally binding, or is that just laws?

Ahh MFC pushed over again. Another little bruise to add to the collection.


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 0 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 134 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Like
    • 421 replies