MikeyJ

Err, the Swans have (had) two Boltons - Craig, who retired on Thursday and Jude, who is most certainly playing on Sunday.

This is true but it must be remembered that O'Keefe was completely crocked with OP and hernia issues by this stage in 2010. Couldn't get above a jog for the rest of the season and unable to kick more than 30m on his preferred foot.

Early tip: the Swans midfield is going to absolutely spiflicate ours. We have one genuine clearance midfielder in Jones. The Swans have four A-grade inside men - Bolton, Kennedy, Jack and Hannebery. Our defence needs to have its very best game if we're to be any sort of chance.

In order of their importance to the team: 1 Frawley 2 Jamar 3 Scully 4 Sylvia 5 Jones 6 McKenzie 7 Green 8 Davey 9 Jurrah 10 Grimes It's something that a couple of earlier posters have identified but most have neglected - if we don't win the clearances, we're not going to win games of footy. Hence the appearance of Scully, Jones and McKenzie so high in the list. The latter two might not have the natural talent of others on the list but their role is paramount to our fortunes in 2011 with Bruce and Junior now departed. Those who don't have a handful of centre-square midfielders in the top five have misunderstood the reasons for success in today's game. If we don't win at least our share of clearances, the likes of Jurrah, Watts and Green will be peripheral players at best. Finally, Frawley's up top because a key stopper is vital regardless of the state of your midfield. A team will always concede a certain number of inside 50s; a gun KPD can greatly influence what happens when the ball goes in there. Edit: Yokozuna gets it, as do a few others.

If you can't discern between a comment piece about a football issue, and an official media release or statement by an AFL executive, I suggest that's your issue rather than the AFL's.

Sorry, I don't mean to suggest that you were. My comments were directed to the hysterical posters who opened up the debate in this thread.

I agree wholeheartedly that the concession that allows GWS to swoop for a No.1 pick two years after he was drafted was ill thought out. But to suggest that an opinion piece on the AFL site - a site which has been running op-ed pieces of various colour for years - is proof positive that the league is out to ensure Scully moves to GWS is downright ridiculous and paranoid.

Whether or not you agree with the content of the article, it's worthwhile noting that the AFL site has been running op-ed pieces for years. Leigh Matthews, Mark Williams, Wayne Schwass have all written opinion and comment pieces. In the past couple of years, the writers on the site have been putting together their own opinion pieces too. If you cared to trawl back through the archives, you'd see piles of them. It's just that many Melbourne supporters won't agree with this one, so all of a sudden IT'S AN AFL CONSPIRACY! Guess what? It's not. Some of us need to get a grip on reality and take the tinfoil hats off.

A little bit of hyperbole, I concede, but the general gist of my argument still stands. I don't mind overpaying for JV with a father-son selection if it means the story stays alive. And there are ways to manage the list to ensure we still have access to significant talent at the top end of the draft.

I haven't backflipped in the slightest and I'm unsure why you're so worked up about an unlikely hypothetical. I am happy to go on record saying that I am certain if Jack Viney suffered serious misfortune that rendered him an unlikely AFL prospect, none of the 17 other clubs would bid their first-round pick for him in the 2012 national draft. However, you seem to adore hypotheticals, so here goes: If that DID in fact eventuate and we followed through on the commitment that we appear to have made today, it would render untold damage to the offending club's brand and their standing within the AFL community. And if it DID happen, we would still have the (very unlikely) option of reneging on our apparent commitment and the offending club would be saddled with a player they did not want and could not use. And we'd still come off looking better than the offending club. All that said, how likely do you think it is that Jack will not become an AFL-quality prospect in the next two years? I believe it would take a catastrophic injury to prevent that happening. And for the record, if Jack's development does stagnate, I don't care if we end up spending a first-round pick on a player who is a third-round prospect come 2012. Heritage, history and the club are key pillars of the club and they're worth upholding.

I don't know that's possible, Bub. The only club that is able to prelist players of Jack's age is GWS and they can't get him back through any means in 2012.

If you want an iron-clad guarantee that won't happen, then I can't give that to you. No one can. But I've spent enough time among people involved with AFL clubs to know that goodwill and good character is as highly valued for club staff as it is for players. As I said earlier, you're desperate to find the negatives in this situation. Good for you. But one of us in this thread is looking increasingly delusional and it's not me.

To further spell it out, Viney is not highly rated because he is bigger than the other kids or because he is more athletic. His success has been derived largely from his attack on the football, his excellent decision making and his good hands. None of these things will get any worse as he gets older - unlike the early-developing youngster who finds the rest have caught up to him by the time they reach under-18 level. He'll grow, he'll get fitter and stronger and he will gain more experience. None of these will hinder his development and there is no doubt he will be a highly draftable commodity by the time the 2012 draft comes around. By that stage, one would expect Melbourne to be looking at a pick around the No.12 mark and that should prove a bargain when selecting Jack Viney.

It's really difficult to find the negatives in an announcement like today but well done - you've managed it. Rest assured that if serious misfortune befell Jack Viney in the next two years, no other club would be so callous as to force us to use a first-round pick on a player that was seriously crocked. AFL clubs are cutthroat environments, no doubt, but they are still in the 'people' business and a tactic such as that would be beyond the pale. Further, Emma Quayle is right. Jack cannot be taken by GWS as one of its priority 17-year-olds as he is a year too young. He is eligible to be pre-listed by GC as one of four 17-year-olds born between Jan-April '94 on the condition that he is traded to one of the other 17 clubs. That's even less certainty than what is provided in the AFL draft. Understand this: Jack Viney is probably the best under-16 footballer in the country. He is certainly among the top three. That sort of talent rarely goes wasted, and even more rarely when surrounded by a stable, supportive environment. Daniel Rich might not have been a No.1 pick but he's still an outstanding footballer. If it makes you feel better to hunt for every possible negative in a situation like that, go ahead. But don't expect to emerge unscathed by criticism.

Dion Prestia was drafted to Gold Coast at No.9. He's currently 175cm. Talent pays no heed to height, and it seems AFL clubs are increasingly doing the same.

With all this talk about TAC Cup and VFL, keep in mind that he'll probably be required to play a fair bit of footy with his school - which I'm guessing will be Carey Grammar, given he's already been a student there. Presuming that's on the money, he'll be zoned to the Oakleigh Chargers and will play the remainder of the games with them. In the TAC Cup, he will likely be playing against opponents with greater relative talent than he would in the VFL seconds. Best he develops his game among his peers at the moment. And if his progress continues at the same rate, he'll be in the top two per cent of player in that comp. Confidence can go a very long way when you're 16. No doubt Melbourne will be keeping an eye on his development but he's also got to be afforded the chance to be a regular kid, too.

And JT looks like he's added some considerable height and weight since last pre-season. He should become quite an imposing unit on the field.

Ever heard of a little thing called dry wit? Or sarcasm, perhaps? FWIW, I agree with some others that Newton's been told to chuck on some weight in the pre-season in preparation for a pinch-hitting role in the ruck. There's plenty of time to trim down and get definition but I'd wager under that healthy layer of insulation that there would be some significant muscle bulk.

Here's a quick breakdown of our draw at a glance. It's not the greatest financially but it's fantastic from a competitive point of view and let's be honest, that's what really matters. PLAY TWICE Hawthorn, Gold Coast, West Coast, Carlton, Richmond, Port Adelaide 2010 finalists - 2 TIMES Thu night - 1 Fri night - 3 Sat arvo - 5 Sat night - 1 Sun early - 3 Sun mid - 5 Sun twilight - 2 Mon - 1 TBC - 1 VENUES MCG - 13 ES - 4 Gabba - 1 AAMI - 1 Subiaco - 1 TIO - 1 SS - 1 Vic - 18 Interstate - 4 TV COVERAGE Seven - 8 Ten - 6 Fox - 7 TBC - 1 FTA - 14 Fox - 7 TBC - 1

It's actually on Fox. And FWIW, I like the new format of the competition and I suspect the clubs will, too. They have undoubtedly had considerable input into this decision and the new structure allows them much more flexibility in how much game time each individual player has in the pre-season.

Dennis-Lane is too old to win the Rising Star - turns 22 later this month. McKenzie will surely be considered, as will Lewis Jetta and Luke Shuey. It's this time of year that the AFL starts looking to hand out nominations over the course of the season, so there might be a couple of surprises.

Sort of, except I rate Veszpremi a far greater talent than Maric. Four goals and two Brownlow votes in his fourth game against the Lions was a fair display. Veszpremi's issue is whether he can 1) get fit enough to fit into the Swans' system or 2) find a club - probably in Melbourne - that better suits the way he wants to play. On the surface, that doesn't sound promising but I am far more certain that Veszpremi will enjoy a substantial AFL career than I am about Maric's prospects.

I have a little, and I think E25 is on the money with this one. A wonderfully talented player who hasn't settled all that well in Sydney. Not sure that he's 100 per cent compatible with the Swans' non-negotiables, but he could thrive in a more flexible system. If we could get him, we'd be doing well as I don't think we have a player of his skill set. That said, I don't know that his type is a glaring weakness on our list. We've got plenty of goalkicking half-forwards - Green, Dunn, Petterd, Wonaeamirri, Bennell.

Great to see some optimism. I watched the Hawks last weekend and they were insipid for three quarters. They've not been any good since they drew with St Kilda three weeks ago and on current form, we are more than a good chance of matching them.

Don't get me wrong, I like Bail very much. As others have said, his blind turn and pass to Watts was exquisite. His running is outstanding, and I like the way he thinks when he has the ball. But I just reckon he wasn't that great yesterday, apart from the final term. As I said earlier, it was a good thing he was productive in the final quarter because he was coming from a long way back after his first three. You know, it IS possible to simultaneously admire a player and be critical of them.