Machsy

Sounds more like Hannabal.

One and the same?

Did anyone else purchase anything through New Balance's 55% off offer for Melbourne members?

Their management is disgraceful. 3-5 business days delivery they say. Ordered my shoes nearly a month ago (May 27), after inquiring over the phone when they were late, it turns out they run their operations from America and have had trouble managing orders. I get an email a week ago to review my product that I didn't get, then a few days ago am sent an email about a refund.

After ringing up again apparently my shoes are (and were always) in stock and are NOW on their way, they're still having issues, the [censored] factory where they're held is barely 10km from my house and I'm still waiting for runners (that I need) I ordered a month ago.

Some great offer this was. Our club should be ashamed for sending it out to its members. 55% off to wait 10000% more time than it takes a normal company to send a package

I'd say you're one of the very unlucky ones.

This is the reality of e-commerce sometimes.

I ordered shoes this year and last.

Very happy with my purchases both times, and a 3 or 4 day wait both times.

Nothing remotely for me to complain about, especially considering the hefty discount.

My solution to draft picks. This is every year no priority picks.

Finish 1 round 2nd round 3rd

18 1 & 9 37 55

17 2 & 11 38 56

16 3 & 13 39 57

15 4 & 15 40 58

14 5 23 41

13 6 24 42

12 7 25 43

11 8 26 44

10 10 27 45

9 12 28 46

8 14 29 47

7 16 30 48

6 17 31 49

5 18 32 50

4 19 33 51

3 20 34 52

2 21 35 53

1 22 36 54

The change to the top 7 teams is that they are pushed back 4 positions in the first round.

Finish 8th drop 3 positions - 9th drop 2 positions - 10th drop 1 position.

This will help the bottom 4 sides get back up more quickly without too much pain to other sides.

Edit: No huge advantage to encourage tanking.

If you're sitting in 14th there is a fairly obvious and beneficial incentive to tank.

Seems a bit bizzare for a player to be re-signed only to be traded a few months later. Even though he's not playing at the moment, I would think he's a part of the Swans plans going forward next year and beyond.

With the AFL actively creating policy on the run, the goalposts are shifting and the swans will benefit from moving some pieces.

Question is, what of ours would they want? That we'd be willing to give up?

And they won't picks.

My understanding is that the club has given Jack till the end of next year to get his body right. If not he will be delisted.

Hilarious!

Yep, that's it.

They signed him up, and straight before said "Now listen here! You better get that damn body of yours right, because otherwise you won't get another contract after this!"

FFS some people dribble some absolute shite.

Surely it goes without saying anyway, but to suggest it was explicitly put forward to Trengove that if he doesn't get back on the field, he won't be gifted more years... It's beyond laughable.

There's also a reason why Richmond were willing to give up pick 12 to get him despite his already long lay-off.

In a side with plenty of pace elsewhere, I think he will flourish.

Also bearing in mind the last few seasons we saw him play weren't indicative of his true pace, imo.

Those highlights alone don't do JT's ability justice.

I think it stands as a warning to all others, that posts of rampant stupidity will be remembered for a long long time.

It's a difficult one.

With a shallow draft, is it better to keep your early picks as you are much less likely to get value with late picks?

Or as a result are they worth a premium on the trade table as a result?

I think it's all key to what you're able to get for the pick at the time, and a bit about list balance in terms of age.

We're also head in towards an unprecedented age of player movement, with lowered free agency criteria, the potential for player-trade-veto being removed, and trading of future picks.

I think for us, like last year, see what we can get, but be very happy going to the draft keeping the picks.

We're not desperate for that one piece to push us over the edge, we have many holes to fill.

It's still about getting quality onto our list first & foremost, not paying overs to fill needs.

I'd be looking at Parish or Mathieson myself, out of those that I expect to be left.

Weideman also.

I think Parish will be a fantastic creator at AFL level, but will take time to adjust like Toumpas.

Also depends on the team the player would be coming from, and whether we can satisfy them within reason.

Bullhorn. 3 hoots for a minute, 2 hoots for 30 seconds. If we're losing badly no one gives a hoot.

Or laser pens. Green for 1 minute, red for 30 seconds.

Ravens?

The announcer could "accidentally" cough over the loud speaker at home games or hit the AC/DC tolling bells with a minute left.

I got ideas for days. Hit me up MFC if you wanna pay me for innovations.

They need some of what you've got.

Apparently Roos doesn't have the ability to innovate.

Will also be there, rubbing shoulders with past players... of the enemy variety unfortunately.

Not sure if I'm looking forward to it, actually.

Uncharacteristically this week I'm full of trepidation.

Roos brought a tall Canadian rugby player onto the list & turned him into what became a premiership ruckman.

But he does not innovate?

Taylor isn't overrated at all, he's a gun.

He is. He cheats too much.

He's been very lucky over his journey.

Anyway, he's not a stopper.

Lonergan will take Hogan.

I also like the way he doesnt overly celebrate his goals and run around like an idiot, jumper over his head type stuff......just a few low 5s and back pats and gets right on with it.....cool Jesse.

It's his competitiveness.

He's all about going again and getting the win.

I think one of Daniel Cross' greatest strengths for us is his movement without the footy, when in a position to receive.

Some of our players really need to learn to read a situation and position themselves decisively, to force the opposition to commit, or to free their teammate up with a block.

Far too often I see players hesitate, wide eyed watching to see what their teammate is going to do.

Of course this comes with playing games together and learning your teammates' tendencies, but sometimes they need to make a decisive movement without the footy without a prompt, making the decision for the player with the ball in hand easier to make.

I think Garland would have been one to switch on and tell blokes to get back.

I truly think the players were unaware of the situation they were in, but even if they had, many would have struggled with knowing what to do.

It's worth remembering how much relative inexperience was in that 22.

Hogan, Brayshaw, ANB, Stretch, Toumpas, Michie, Riley.

As mentioned directly above, Watts could have been directing traffic, but this is sadly very unfamiliar territory for many of our players.

Kudos to Roos for not using it as an excuse, but we saw the eventual result of reducing the no. of runners, discussed in preseason.

The teams with better experience, a better ability to recognise game situations and better communication have a greater advantage without the 2nd runner. Without having it conclusively confirmed, I believe this was a reason why Geelong had Nigel Lappin conspicuously in close around stoppages far too often - they are one of the teams to benefit the most from such a rule change.

We were caught unaware of the time left on the clock, and with the runner caught out on the field still delivering an old message.

Taylor is overrated, Lonergan is their stopper.

I made a post one time about liking King... so I'll pretend like I knew this was coming and tell all you idiots I told you so.

But seriously, great to hear the kid has a few bags under his belt and a bag in the senior 2's. He moves like a nice footballer, I really hope he makes it.

Thanks everyone for the reports.

Listen buddy, I sorta thought I liked him first, and might have posted about it at one stage, so you need to defer to me and my expertise before you comment on King.

I see a lot of Wayne Carey in this kid...

Nup, he didn't. I'm confusing him for Petracca.

Getting old, I think.

Oh yeah, with you now.

I did the same thing, thinking "that's wrong, but somehow familiar"

It's all blue sky mining anyway.

I think it's just a more useful point of reference. If I said "this guy is a dead ringer for Nathan Wright", I don't think people are going to be much the wiser. The best players in the game are the ones everyone knows, so it's only natural that that is where the comparisons gravitate to.

Anyway, ANB compared himself to Robbie Gray, so I doubt he's going to be that bothered by who he gets compared to.

Did he?

Not sure I see a lot of Robbie Gray in him.

I'm still confident he'll be a great value player for pick 40ish, like a Rory Sloane.

Nothing wrong with a bit of hyperbole.

We can offer pick 4 and Howe for Dylan Shiel. Thoughts???

Now that Shiel has signed, surely Treloar or Coniglio would be the target?

Happily give up either pick 4 (about correct weight) or Howe (a steal) for Coniglio.

I don't think Treloar would be realistic.

Mods Close this thread, Dylan Shiel is now persona "Non Gratis"

Why let pain continue!!?

You're unintentionally hilarious.

People don't seem to realise that Swan has excellent pace. ANB doesn't.

Probably more Sidebottom.

No one ever said he was a Swan clone.

I just get reminded of Swan a bit when I see him play.

Not sure why.

Hayes or Cross might be better comparisons, but I don't think his pace is that limited.