Wiseblood

Well you'll just have to learn to deal with it. That's up to you. I'm okay with it because he didn't go and do it himself. He's not someone like Lance Armstrong. I agree in that he should have queried it more, asked questions, done a little research etc, but I also believe the 34 players were misled and they put their trust in who they believed were the experts. They got burnt big time and they'll live with that stigma for the rest of their lives. But they didn't do it of their own volition and that makes it a different proposition... for me anyway. I can handle it.

You take yourself too seriously. He's at the club, either deal with it or support another club. Easy.

We've had this discussion. Move on.

You're not going to change their view on it Stuie, so I don't know why you're bothering after the discussion that went on in the other thread. They want to shake fists, others want to be reasonable. That's life.

Melksham, every day of the week.

And that's what we did for years - talk up the kids to give us hope. We have barely done that at all this year, and it's telling. I see it as a real positive.

That's true dazzle, but he has a point and we know our history. We haven't reached a stage where we can confidently say we'll knock a team off... well, I haven't anyway. The Bombers will be a shell of a team but we haven't exactly knocked teams over when we should.

Fair enough mate. We will have to agree to disagree. Cheers.

There's so much more to it than this simplistic view and you know it. Personally, and I can speak for others as well, I'm not okay with anyone cheating, and Melksham was part of that and he will serve his suspension. Then he will get a second chance at turning his career around in the red and blue and I'm more than happy to give him an opportunity to do so. If anything I hope sitting out this year really spurs him on and he becomes a really integral player for us off the half back line. Sitting out for a year is punishment enough.

Quality as always.

He'll be back in a year. He has the stigma of cheating around him but, to quote you, you're better than that. You know it's not just down to him and there is far more at play here than that. There might be a difference, but he will come back without any injury history and be ready to go. If he can play a good role for us over the coming years then the trade is a win, it's as simple as that. You know more than us do you, big mouth?

They wouldn't have known it would happen, but that would have considered all the options and outcomes, and this was one of them. They would have known there was a possibility of this outcome and planned accordingly.

I'm not sure why people are missing this point in amongst everything else. We've had a variety of players over the last few decades miss huge chunks of game time, yet we've stuck with them and they've come out well on the other side. Stephen Tingay is a prime example. Missed a few years and then came back with a vengeance in '98. There is no reason why Melksham can't do the very same thing. Missing the year isn't ideal, of course, but it's hardly the end of the world.

Would they be able to offer them much though with everything else going on?

That's if they actually want to play for Essendon. I'm sure there will be some untried VFL players or undrafted rookies who'll be keen but I don't see what those guys listed above will get out of it.

Big chunk? Turn it up. The contract the Dogs gave Boyd is what people would describe as a 'big chunk' out of the salary cap. Melksham's hardly compares to that. If he doesn't miss a year of footy then nobody would be in here calling this a terrible trade. He will only be 25 next year and moving in to the prime years of his career. He'll be right.

Wouldn't I? I'm impressed you know me so well that you can make such grandiose assumptions Curry. No bias from me, mate. Just common sense.

Yeah, no worries. No one in life deserves to be given a second chance, eh? The bloke was told by the club what he was taking was fine - maybe he should have taken a closer look, asked more questions, done a little research etc. but to lay the blame solely at their feet is wrong. I look forward to see Jake come back in November and become an integral part of our team when all of this is well and truly behind him.

Really? You've said plenty of dumb stuff over the years but this is up there with your best work. Well done.

Some people just think their views are more important than others, and therefore they need to start a new thread. There's always a few. Well said. This is the slowest football month of the year though so people will pull anything out of their back pocket to get 'discussion' going.

Garland averaged roughly 3 rebound 50s a game and 1.5 Inside 50s a game as well for 2015. That's better than someone like Salem, who averages slightly less rebounds outside 50 and the same inside 50s. McDonald and Dunn average over 4 in terms of rebound 50s but, apart from those two and Jack Grimes, Garland averages more than anyone else. He may not provide as much but basic stats show that he provides some drive out of defence each game while also being able to get the ball further up the ground as well. I know stats don't tell everything, they never do, but in it's basic form it shows that Garland can, and does, provide some offence for the team.

I understand that, but his role would be to lockdown his opponent and peel off as a third man up for 80-90% of the time. That's not a tough assumption to make if you watch our games. Salem, for example, had a higher focus on the offensive drive off half back than someone like Garland. Even McDonald is given more freedom. Garland, on the other hand, generally stays pretty close to home on a dangerous forward while providing support to others as well.

Neither have you. Welcome back, champ.

Offensive drive is not his role. Being a lockdown defender, something he does very well, is his role. I agree, even as a Garland fan, that he is still prone to the odd brainfade but we have plenty of players who are prone to those as well. We all love Tom McDonald but how often do we have our hearts in our mouths when he looks to switch play? Garland has a role in our side and one he plays well. I disagree that he doesn't make the effort to drive and educate our young players. How would you know that he isn't doing that? I know you've focused on his on-field deeds, but from all reports he is a highly committed trainer who has put plenty of extra hours to get around and work with the younger players on our list. That's a darn good effort in my book.

I remember that one well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xujU9yx6HEo