Everything posted by No10
-
The Pick 1 Thread
I believe if WC trade to 2 the idea is theyâd take Curtain. Leaves both Duursma and McKercher.
-
The Pick 1 Thread
This would effectively be North giving 2 and 3 for 1. Donât think they can do that. Weâd have to give 6+11. Imagine weâd ask for 15 back as well. Which they wonât do. So if we get to draft night, what are the chances of WC accepting our offer? What compels us to deal with North before their pick 3?
-
The Pick 1 Thread
This is maybe a brilliant strategy. Weâve put our best offer. North are low balling. Why our position is so smart imv, is that WC are naturally holding out for the best offer from North. The question is: whatâs Northâs best offer without us trading with them? Iâd say itâs 2+15+17 for P1 Is that better than 6, 11, 42 and F1? Perhaps slightly but also depends on what players WC want and where they think theyâll fall. And I doubt North would give that up, given their huge delisting numbers. Itâs a brilliant play because weâve given WC our best offer. But we will have undoubtedly simultaneously made an offer for 3. This one however a low ball. Iâd guess 6 + 11 for 3 + 15. North need our 6 and 11 to make the deal they want with WC. Which youâd assume is what everyone has floated here many times. But weâve made the squeeze play. WC have our best offer, eventually North will stop low-balling and give them theirs. But we can squeeze, we can hold out on facilitating the 3 club swap. We can even hold until after WC make their No 1 selection before we budge on our swaps with North. If we want 3, wait to then. Itâs smart.
-
The Pick 1 Thread
In that order? Youâd take Duursma over McKersher? I have no idea, but they seem the likely two weâd choose from. I also donât mind holding 6 and 11. It seems a fairly even trade going to 3 and 18.
-
The Pick 1 Thread
Wasnât my suggestion. However, I think it highly likely this will happen, but with p17 or 18 also included from North. But the question is if McKercher or Duursma are worth it?
-
The Pick 1 Thread
Agree Old. The hardball from us should be asking for North pick 17 or 18 as well. Which I think is possible, though I might be wearing my red and blues.
-
The Pick 1 Thread
Except North will take our 6 & 11 for 3. Then trade 2 & 11 for 1.
- The GCS Pick 4 Thread
-
Trade Rumours 2023
Heâs a product of our culture. Heâs been 4x b&f and one year ago signed a massive seven year deal. Was he a problem before all of this?? If heâs lost his way thatâs the on our âgreat cultureâ to correct. This is where it matters, itâs where the coaches matter. Where captains lead (Max is rumoured to be doing so). Make no mistake, this is a huge moment. You canât name a single other player and club where this happens. Maybe G.Ablett Jr, but that was a very different set of circumstances. Dusty is a much better example, what happened there? What will happen here?
-
North Melbourne Assistance Package
This seems like a poor analysis. Still canât buy McKay compensation p3. Will not happen. But also donât understand Gold Coast taking NM picks for p4. Theyâre not short on points. What they want, Iâd assume, is a high F1. Trade Grundy +p24 for Syd F1. Then 13 + Syd F1 (plus some later picks) to GC for p4. That Bartel analysis is too basic. Itâs always more complicated.
-
North Melbourne Assistance Package
Youâll be walking. Frawley is the only vague comparison and the situation at that stage was insane. In no way comparable. Yes, we both lost a n1 draft recruit. But we then went through years of drafts that were extremely compromised. Theyâve had top selections that are making an impact already. Frawley was a high draft selection (12) and was AA, etc⊠Then add to all this, he went to a powerhouse premiership team. That was the BIG PR problem. AFL House desperately needed to rebalance. And even then, it was all a stretch. Chris Scott is doing the good work at speaking out. Canât stand him usually but suddenly heâs a genius. No chance of p3 for McKay. No way.
-
Trade Rumours 2023
It seems the done deal is Grundy to Swans. Must be relatively simple if as agreed upon as it appears. Do we not even know what that trade is? Demonland intel is broken. Iâll pretend I know something⊠Grundy +p24 for p11 Oh. And no chance Nth get p3 for McKay, sets unworkable precedent.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
Youâre living on a different planet. Re. Adelaide, given that was your first example : "It's inexplicable they didn't call for a review" said Crows Chairman, John Olsen. "The field umpire then also didn't call for a review of the decision". Olsen told Nikolai & Stacey, "A lot's got to be played out here yet".
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
The Adelaide goal that was misjudged a point by the goal umpire? Nothing to do with ARC. The goal umpire who was stood down? The AFL who apologised and confirmed the error, Gil made statements about fixing the system? The Adelaide goal that was written about in every major and minor press? Yeah⊠No.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
The Carlton player does signal, not immediately, only after he looks to see the ball is going through. As every player does now. The ARC footage is shown as the broadcast footage, thatâs the point of the script: âlooking at this angleâŠâ There isnât some other magical angle where you can see this non-existent touch. Itâs clear there isnât sufficient evidence and likely it wasnât touched at all. The problem is that we roll over, other clubs do not.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
@Turnerthat sounded sarcastic about your ARC friend, wasnât meant to be. But I mean⊠if you have a friend in the ARC, maybe thereâs something we can offer so these 50/50 calls fall in our favour next year? Demonland membership perhaps?
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
This is a nice defence of your friend in the ARC. But at the end of the day, youâre looking at the same footage as everyone else and I donât see the finger bending or the deviation. Honestly, I can be impartial and if the field umpire called touched I wouldâve accepted that. But this isnât even close to a standard for overturning.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
I know, I uploaded the video. The middle finger is possible. But unlikely. If there was a touch it wouldâve bent backwards and separated from the other fingers. All the fingers continue into the same motion blur direction as the ball passes and the hand moves down. This isnât proof. Thatâs why itâs a problem.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
Iâve watched it, scrubbed and zoomed. Not there. Not touched. Who at the club do you expect to hear from? The president? I donât hear much from her at all. Whereas Collingwood or Hawthorn in their window, I know you would. This is precisely the problem, a winning culture. Can not accept less so easily.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
Great analysis. That left hand footage might be where some on here have been convinced. Smoke and mirrors absolutely. Because the footage below, which was what ARC used, doesnât show a touch. Inconclusive, at best.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
Iâm not sure the ARC call saved the game for Carlton, we proved an impressive capacity for capitulating under pressure. But to say this was adjudicated correctly and definitively touched is wrong. The ARC footage is locked to the broadcast and when they say âlooking at this angleâ the footage is in context. I donât see any touch on the ball. Extreme to callback a goal, the uproar should be now. But it wasnât in Q4. And it was Melbourne.
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
Frame by frame, zoomed in, Iâd have to say not touched. Doesnât matter to me in regards to the result, we lost for many other reasons. But I do care there isnât the kind of aggressive pushback that would happen if this was a different club. Thatâs twice in a month (against the same team) that weâve lost by less than a goal and ARC has made a critical decision against, with questionable evidence. Zero discussion in the media. Would this happen to Carlton or to Collingwood?
-
The Neal-Bullen non goal
ARC said this angle determined the overturning FullSizeRender.MOV
-
POSTGAME: SF vs Carlton
Oh no. I completely agree. The sub selection was bizarre. But it didnât lose the game. The team lacked composure. Goodwin is to blame for these finals losses. That was a mess and he needs to improve more than any player. Iâm not saying he canât. But that coaching booklet talking point rubbish has to stop.
- POSTGAME: SF vs Carlton