grazman

No worries. To quote Blackadder. "The greatest work of fiction since Vows of Fidelity were incorporated into the French marriage service."

In case your interested. There is actually a media code of ethics.... http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp of course it's not worth the cyber ink that it's printed on because it's 'voluntary' and states that journalists 'should' rather than 'will'. They're vultures... my one and only consolation is that bye and large most of what is 'reported' on nowadays is nothing more than entertainment. Nothing newsworthy ever gets reported and when you have local ABC radio getting people to ring in with their dumbarse opinions - well who gives a stuff about what's really newsworthy anyway. Lets hear what the next vacuous bimbo has to say about her new movie or the latest reality TV program or David Letterman's sexual adventures. If society gets the government they deserve, they also get the media they deserve. People are stupid.

Daniel Harris

Good, I was beginning to think I was the only one that thought that way. I also agree there'll be some massive blowback from Hawks supporters. They can join the Fev supporters at Princess Park

I agree. While the Woewodin deal could be perceived as a win for the club purely in terms of the trade and the Ryan Ferguson non-trade with Brad Sewell a loss; what isn't factored in is the residual effect on the rest of the playing group and it's cost when they have to re-sign with the club. A player's respect/influence within the playing group is an important consideration. ATEOTD (at the end of the day) the Brock McLean trade was a win win because ignoring the benefits of pick 9 vs Brock, it was about a player who wasn't committed to the club finding a new home. It was handled in a dignified and professional manner. It reflects well on the clubs management and approach. Jamar has been offered a new two year deal by the club. Port are desperate for an established ruckman and will probably offer more money and more years, but the decision will be his. He'll either commit to Melbourne (a win) or he'll go home and that depends entirely what's put on the table. (BTW pick 9 was the rumoured offer for Hampson, it's not necessarily a logical progression that it will be the case with Jamar - especially seeing as Port haven't even got the pick yet from the Hawks)

Geez how's he going to get there? Especially if they have to use Pick 14 for Jolly. Can't see this happening.

Anyone else catch this bit of Einsteinien logic from Tony Shaw on Fev in the Hun this morning: So let me see if I've got this right... Tony is telling the Collingwood captain to shut up because he's got an opinion on Fev and his effect on club culture. Tony thinks that Fev would help Collingwood, but admits that he doesn't know whether they can sack him or not if he impacts on club culture? hmmm

The rules were changed this year. Rookie upgrades now count as part of the mandatory three additions. I'm not sure there's a minimum number you have to draft anymore.

Three bean salad, he's on the table, but no ones interested.

... but pick 11 would be. He's contracted so it'd have to be a trade. Maybe a player as a sweetner.

He was going to be traded 2 years ago, and then last year and now this year... I think he will go, at some stage somethings just gotta give. Sydney will be the only team that can afford his massive pay packet and his ego... Carlton would surely be looking at a Ryan O'Keefe and Picks in exchange. If Warnock get's on the park they can play Kruezer forward with Waite. I don't think their forward line is as bad as some are making out... wish it weren't so. The Bulldogs are going to have a tough time recontracting a lot of their players, and it's looking unlikely they'll have enough space in the TPP for Lake, so they certainly can't afford Fev who will be at least twice as expensive as Barry Hall.

Spot on. Only plays the game on his terms.

Wheatley was definately injured and so was McKenzie from memory.

I think you mean moot and I don't think it is. Reading the Hun this morning it was clear that Carlton tried to exchange Walker for McLean. The club chose pick 11 - good choice. We don't need to recruit another injury prone player who has not been able to establish himself in a position. He was obviously trade bait - but no one bought it - so he was re-signed. His manager was 'ecstatic' that he'd been offered a new two year deal... and according to Carlton he now has two years to become the player they'd hoped he'd be.... hmmm.

Everitt signed a new two year contract during the season. The Dogs don't have to trade him if they don't want to.

thanks dee-man, will be worth a look.

I say again Frogshit.... show me where you posted that in your argument. Have I berated you for having an opinion - You don't like the decision, and resent it, and that's the crux of the matter. Don't dress up your opinions as facts and expect others to swallow them. Your analogy with Richmond and your criticisms of pushing success further away are pure hysteria.

Geez people, Brock donated money to the club we all appreciate the gesture, but let's keep it in perspective. He was paid well for his services, he was offered less money by the club, he has gone somewhere else, the insinuation being that he felf slighted after he gave his own money to the club that he was asked to take a cut. It doesn't mean that the club was wrong in what it offered Brock. He's done the right thing by himself in going to Carlton, and anyone who doesn't believe he'll be getting paid a lot more than what he would at Melbourne is just living in la la land. At the end of the day it's not always about money, but it's pretty damn persuasive.

Frogshit. How about you ask Hawthorn instead. Your solution is that we shouldn't adopt the best course of action for a riskier one, that we shouldn't trust the judgement of those given the responsibility for managing the list - you're carrying on like a kid that's dropped their ice cream on a summers day... suck it in and move on.

It's a good result for us. Hawthorn have to do a deal otherwise they'll risk losing him in the PSD. In light of the Brock McLean story I'm guessing that Pick 2 is definately off the table now.

PJ is contracted to 2010, the rest are out of contract. I've heard Zomer has already been cut. (he wasn't eligible to be re-rookied anyway)

That's if he goes to the draft camp.... how many clubs need to nominate a player before they can attend. I doubt that any other club wants to look at Scully knowing there isn't a hope in hell he will play for anyone except us.

Exactly ... as my boss would say... "he just doesn't get it."

Your answer is no answer. Even if opposition supporters may sometimes know nothing of our players, opposition clubs do, packaging up a liability in sheep's clothing isn't going to work.

I agree we should try to trade him, but there's only one good reason why you'd pay out his contract and four very good reasons why he'll stay. Pro's to paying out Newton: 1. He is no longer on the list. Cons to paying out Newton: 1. It's dead money - or more to the point a complete waste of money. 2. It's either added on to the TPP for this year or next which may mean one less senior vacancy while we pay out his contract. 3. The AFL and wider Footy Community ask serious questions about why we should receive funding when we can't even manage something as simple as player contracts (once again appearing to be the biggest amateurs in a professional competition). 4. Players and their managers become concerned that a contract with Melbourne is not really worth anything. (You want these people to be confident in how you approach business not rolling their eyes and taking a deep breath)