Commentator described Valenti as having leather poisoning just before half time. He could be a very unlucky footballer given there seems no place for him on the list at the moment.

Commentator described Valenti as having leather poisoning just before half time. He could be a very unlucky footballer given there seems no place for him on the list at the moment.

Maybe Yze should be encouraged to retire, so this guy can be elevated?

Commentator described Valenti as having leather poisoning just before half time. He could be a very unlucky footballer given there seems no place for him on the list at the moment.

Pardon my ignorance here, but is 'leather poisoning' a positive thing?

Pardon my ignorance here, but is 'leather poisoning' a positive thing?

Yep.

Something 90% of our seniors would not experience this year.

Pardon my ignorance here, but is 'leather poisoning' a positive thing?

Not always. Both Moloney and Buckley have been dropped after having mild doses of it.

I know many have doubts as to the viability of Valenti due to his lack of foot speed, but if our current situation continues I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world to give him a go for a few games. It's unlikely that all of Jones, McLean, Junior and Valenti could run through the middle at the same time, but if he can replicate his preseason form in the season proper, then we should look at other options like playing Brock off a HBF, where his field kicking could be better used.

I know many have doubts as to the viability of Valenti due to his lack of foot speed, but if our current situation continues I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world to give him a go for a few games. It's unlikely that all of Jones, McLean, Junior and Valenti could run through the middle at the same time, but if he can replicate his preseason form in the season proper, then we should look at other options like playing Brock off a HBF, where his field kicking could be better used.

Not a bad suggestion grazman.

McLean off a HBF?

What a waste...

If he is there, then he is in trouble. He should be in the guts with any other bloke we can find that wins his own ball: Jones, Batram, and....?

Keep McLean where he is needed.

I'm sceptical about mclean off halfback, but is could teach him how to man up and run-off without being tagged (if he ever is - he surely couldn't deal with this least year).

I'm all for bringing in Valenti.

I don't see him as being all that slow.

He gets the ball a lot and has decent skills.

Even if he isn't played in the middle as such but rather on a wing or even HFF?

yeah why not, he gets his own ball and does the team thing while working harder than most

i have a feeling we're going to see a little surprise in round 7

Mclean cant play if he got pick up by any other club he would be delisted, the last time the deed had a two top picks in the top 5 and they wasted it on two similar player's in McLean and colin,you dont pick two identical players in one drift in the top 5 cac should have pick one hard midfielder and one skillful one, but they thought we where too soft so they went for the same player, Richmond can have the worst list manger in cac they already had a even worse list manger before but still cac is no improvement.

Mclean cant play if he got pick up by any other club he would be delisted, the last time the deed had a two top picks in the top 5 and they wasted it on two similar player's in McLean and colin,you dont pick two identical players in one drift in the top 5 cac should have pick one hard midfielder and one skillful one, but they thought we where too soft so they went for the same player, Richmond can have the worst list manger in cac they already had a even worse list manger before but still cac is no improvement.

Good point - we should have gone for one of the next 5 players drafted after Mclean: Bradley, Tenace, Raphael Clarke, Trotter, and Riley Dunn

Good point - we should have gone for one of the next 5 players drafted after Mclean: Bradley, Tenace, Raphael Clarke, Trotter, and Riley Dunn

Those players didn't have to be chosen at those numbers.

Good point - we should have gone for one of the next 5 players drafted after Mclean: Bradley, Tenace, Raphael Clarke, Trotter, and Riley Dunn

Boy that 2003 draft was a stinker! When you consider Walker, Ray and Sylvia were all early in that draft as well. Nobody did well with early picks in that draft if you exclude Cooney.

I'm sceptical about mclean off halfback, but is could teach him how to man up and run-off without being tagged (if he ever is - he surely couldn't deal with this least year).

In the past caoches have doen this to try and throw off a tag, so it may be worth a thought

I would have thought Jake King was a good example of why Valenti could be useful at senior level; Shane showed that he was excellent around stoppages in the pre-season and he must be more useful than some of the guys on the list atm.

Those players didn't have to be chosen at those numbers.

True - we'll never know exactly who we would have chosen, the best we do is go by speculation and expert opinions at the time

But if i remember correctly:

Cooney was guaranteed to be the number 1 pick, and in hindsight, rightly so

Sylvia was tipped to go number 2, but Carlton chose Walker instead (would take Sylvia over Walker any day)

We were tipped to take either Mclean, Ray, Bradley, Tenace, or Riley Dunn.

The only players drafted after Mclean that I would love to have in a Melbourne team from that draft (excluding Heath Shaw, Mark Blake as father son selections) are:

Brent Stanton (13)

Jed Adcock (33)

Amon Buchanan (45)

Sam Fisher (55)

Ben Hudson (58)

Andrew Raines (76)

I'd still choose McLean over any of them (although had to think about adcock)

2003 National Draft

Agree with Jerry .... definitely a stinker of a draft

then we should look at other options like playing Brock off a HBF, where his field kicking could be better used.

A slow half back flanker ?

No thanks.