Jump to content

Featured Replies

13 minutes ago, mdemon said:

If Jack Martin doesnt get to Carlton, can we get him in the PSD ?

Martin (like Keith) can go into the national draft, as opposed to PSD, with terms set for price and years. Any club with a pick willing to meet those terms can take him. Luke Ball did that, Saints got 0.

Edited by Moonshadow

 
3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I saw that.  Martin is already a GCS player so couldn't see why they need to re-draft him at all.  They just give him a new contract.

I guess that's down to Martin himself, if he speaks to GC and they say they will 100% redraft him then he might just say "well fine let's just do the contract now then".

 
3 minutes ago, Pates said:

I guess that's down to Martin himself, if he speaks to GC and they say they will 100% redraft him then he might just say "well fine let's just do the contract now then".

He would have to get GCS to delist him first and can't see why they would do that nor why Martin would want to be delisted.  I reckon the journo didn't think it through before going to print.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero

42 minutes ago, chookrat said:

No such thing anymore OD, minimum is like $4.50 these days. 

Funny after I posted I thought $5 was probably closer.


1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

He would have to get GCS to delist him first and can't see why they would do that nor why Martin would want to be delisted.  I reckon the journo didn't think it through before going to print.

I think it's a quote from GC themselves to say they are playing hardball.

2 minutes ago, old dee said:

Funny after I posted I thought $5 was probably closer.

There's a fella currently moving around town finding out. Lets us know what the minimum cost is and how much you get for that. Pretty sure the answer is a lot for not that much

https://www.broadsheet.com.au/melbourne/food-and-drink/article/defining-minimum-chips-maximum-mission-melbourne-enthusiast

 

I might be a bit slow on the uptake, but if Green is in the draft, and we have pick 3, how can GWS prevent us selecting him if he’s not taken with picks 1 or 2?

 
35 minutes ago, jimbo1982 said:

Taranto was GWS best on ground in the GF. 

Hardly a surprise given the Tigers game plan lets inside mids without great skills rack up the ball. And McCluggage was good in both of Brisbane’s finals and maybe best on against the Cats in round 22 that set them up with home finals. 

The point is I don’t mind giving up a Taranto if we get a McCluggage and Berry and ideally a 3rd piece.

6 minutes ago, jimbo1982 said:

I might be a bit slow on the uptake, but if Green is in the draft, and we have pick 3, how can GWS prevent us selecting him if he’s not taken with picks 1 or 2?

His part of their academy so they can match our pick with the 20% discount


7 minutes ago, jimbo1982 said:

I might be a bit slow on the uptake, but if Green is in the draft, and we have pick 3, how can GWS prevent us selecting him if he’s not taken with picks 1 or 2?

Same thing that happened with Heeney. We select him and then they have to match the pick with enough points from their remaining picks.

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

Same thing that happened with Heeney. We select him and then they have to match the pick with enough points from their remaining picks.

Only difference is now they have to use up points from their next picks (as opposed to a whole bunch of late picks).

21 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

He would have to get GCS to delist him first and can't see why they would do that nor why Martin would want to be delisted.  I reckon the journo didn't think it through before going to print.

They don't have to delist him do they? If they can't get him to sign a new contract he has to go to the PSD as an uncontracted player (not a delisted free agent) where Gold Coast can simply draft him again as they have first pick in the PSD.

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

They don't have to delist him do they? If they can't get him to sign a new contract he has to go to the PSD as an uncontracted player (not a delisted free agent) where Gold Coast can simply draft him again as they have first pick in the PSD.

Don't know the technicalities but if a player is still on a list how does he go into the PSD? 

Either way he ends up at GCS so it doesn't make sense to do the 'dancing'.

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Don't know the technicalities but if a player is still on a list how does he go into the PSD? 

Either way he ends up at GCS so it doesn't make sense to do the 'dancing'.

His contract expires October 31 so he would be an uncontracted player as of November 1 and can go to the draft.


1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

His contract expires October 31 so he would be an uncontracted player as of November 1 and can go to the draft.

I think we are saying the same thing in that uncontracted = delisted.

1 minute ago, Demon Disciple said:

Come in @Yokozuna

So his 15 pages of fame is over!??

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

Only difference is now they have to use up points from their next picks (as opposed to a whole bunch of late picks).

Does this mean we can match Gold Coast when they make their 1st pick by using “points” from our 3rd pick?

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I saw that.  Martin is already a GCS player so couldn't see why they need to re-draft him at all.  He hasn't been delisted so they just give him a new contract and keep the PSD pick.

Only if he signs the contract


2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I think we are saying the same thing in that uncontracted = delisted.

Not necessarily, allowing your contract run out is slightly different. If he is delisted before his contract runs out (as is quite normal) it allows a player to make his way to a club without any fuss, if his contact runs out then I believe (I could be wrong) that date is past the point of allowing a player free movement to the club of his choice. Meaning that player must nominate for either draft.

Edited by Pates

50 minutes ago, jimbo1982 said:

Does this mean we can match Gold Coast when they make their 1st pick by using “points” from our 3rd pick?

given that Rowell and Anderson aren't in any academy (let alone ours), no. Hypothetically, if GC selected a player at pick 1 who was in our NGA, then we would have the right to match that bid.

Edited by Demon Disciple

 
2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I think we are saying the same thing in that uncontracted = delisted.

They're two different things though. A club delisting a player means they no longer want him, have actively delisted him and he becomes a free agent. An uncontracted player means club and player were unable to come to terms and his contract lapsed following the trade period. He is not delisted at that stage just uncontracted. So he is not a free agent but he can go back into the national or preseason draft.

Otherwise every uncontracted player would just let their contracts lapse and become delisted free agents.

Edited by Dr. Gonzo

My understanding was that they need to enter national draft before they can enter pre season draft. What’s stopping Hawks using a pick in the 80s of national draft to take him? We sure as hell arnt gonna use 3 or 8 on him.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 25 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
      • 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? 

      • Thanks
    • 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?

      • Thanks
    • 232 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
    • 47 replies