titan_uranus

Makes you wonder, what are we going to do with these players, given that some are contracted for 2010. Bailey's plan seems to clearly not involve them. But they're going to be there.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tab...39/default.aspx Talks about our youngsters, our improving players, the list, the pre-season, Jurrah, and other stuff. Doesn't give much away about possible list changes. Talks a bit about getting our group to start playing games together, says that's important.

We aren't making any changes to our list until after trade week (October 5-9): http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tab...45/default.aspx

Sure would. So we'll probably get Freo (away), North Melbourne and Geelong. And he has launched an appeal: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tab...57/default.aspx This is its basis: The Blues have appealed on the basis that the decision was so unreasonable that no Tribunal acting reasonably could have come to that decision having regard to the evidence before it, the classification of the offence was manifestly excessive and the sanction imposed was manifestly excessive. Hey Appeals Board: Look at Jaded's post above. That looks like evidence enough to me.

Correct. Collingwood cannot cry foul about the draw (as unfair as it may seem, giving the 5th team 2 more days than the 4th team) when they had their fate in their own hands. I just hope it's a deciding factor in the result of the match.

Hard to know what will happen next year until the drafting/delisting process is over. But this year Hawthorn's list was younger than our's.

Interesting, Deanox. Very interesting. Still think nothing will happen, though. Rischitelli will probably say nothing happened to clear him.

Whilst I think Collingwood will beat Adelaide, it won't be easy, especially given that the Crows have 2 extra days rest in preparation. Plus their first final was physically less demanding than Collingwood's. Oh how I pray for Adelaide to beat them.

Good point. From the footage I've seen, there's no proof of eye-contact. Nonetheless, he's put his hand there for a reason, and that reason is most likely to poke/gouge his eye. I'm pretty confident he did it, but I'm pretty confident he won't be punished for it.

Of course he had no need. But from the footage I've seen, there's no proof that he gouges Rischitelli's eyes. So I reckon he'll get off (undeservedly). Was Maher on the radio? He wasn't on the TV coverage (it was Mark Howard and Bill McDonald).

It's a bit like last year. People all talking about Hawthorn 'ending their premiership drought with their first flag in 16 years'. Well, there are 16 teams. So on average, you'd hope that each team would win one every 16 years. Journalists seem to forget about Melbourne, St Kilda and the Bulldogs when making these comments. Damn well hope so. But I think the footage is inconclusive. I mean, how lucky is he that another Carlton player's legs obstruct the vision just as he sticks his hand in Rischitelli's face?

Jetta and Bennell had good first years, but Jurrah's was better. Cheney and Grimes would also be in contention if they were actually first-year players.

I saw the Jurrah piece from the Rising Star ceremony last night as well. Poor guy has been inundated with media. Hopefully that's the end of that now. I don't like Mark Howard much.

If Green played forward all year (which might happen if we can get some of our younger guys to rotate through the midfield/half back), he could kick 40 goals. He has the capability to play KP forward. I also think Morton could kick 20+ goals over the course of a year if he drifted forward more often. Prefer him forward to back. Sylvia also could kick 20+, but I'd prefer him playing more midfield. Maric, Jetta and Wonaeamirri probably need to be kicking 30 goals per year if we are to get close to a premiership. Otherwise we'll be relying on Watts, Bate and Jurrah to do it all every week.

I should have said that they're better right now. Over time I expect Vickery to improve and end up better than Spencer. But I think that next year our rucks will be better than theirs. Graham I don't rate.

It doesn't matter who they've beaten this year. What matters is how they're going right now. And they're going great. A massively potent forward line (53 goals in 2 weeks is ridiculous, it doesn't matter how bad the opposition defence is), a strong midfield, and a defence that has held up well even without Nathan Bock. They aren't certainties to beat Collingwood/St Kilda next week (will probably go in as underdogs anyway), but the match will be a close one, and Adelaide stands every chance of beating them. Which is why I am focusing all my energies into praying for St Kilda to beat Collingwood today.

.... How could you... Truth be told, I'm not much of a St Kilda fan either. Their supporters aren't much better than Collingwood's or Richmond's. But we can't have Collingwood succeed in any way shape or form. And I wouldn't mind seeing one of St Kilda or Dogs end their drought.

Ha, yeah maybe. Well I rate our backline well above their's, our midfield, whilst it doesn't have the stars that they do (Deledio, Cousins, Cotchin, Foley), could easily compete with their's, and we have a better forward line. And Spencer and Jamar are better than Vickery and whoever their other ruckman is. Good point. Richmond really did look awful for the majority of the year, and that was a team that wanted wins. We didn't look any worse than they did.

Also, I heard Demetriou say today that he and the AFL are in support of the idea, and that they will provide some funding (as they do for any club with a building project like this) if it goes ahead.

Saints and Dogs: that's the dream GF. Must not be Collingwood or Carlton. Anyone else is fine.

I just pulled out some quotes from the statement that answered some of the questions people had (like what about Casey and the bubbledome). I did happen to quote the same thing twice, though. Good on me. Well this is what is going to happen if the Docklands project does go ahead, isn't it? I mean, since there is nothing there atm, we'd obviously be moving into the bubbledome in the interim. Yes.

You should be fine. I really think our list is well in front of Richmond's. We should be aiming for the 8-10 win mark next year, whereas I'd think Richmond won't do much better than their 5 and a half wins this year. Richmond's list has so many holes in it. Threadbare forward line, some good midfielders surrounded by rubbish, and one or two decent KP defenders alongside more rubbish. No ruckmen either.

Rivers is a must-keep for mine. You can't buy footy smarts, which he has in spades. We won't get a high enough pick to compensate for his loss anyway.

In the print edition of the HUN, this article has a little graphic with it that says that we are committed to taking the best available players with picks 1 and 2, regardless of position/size. Also says we are prepared to make a 'significant financial commitment' if a high-quality player is a chance to slip to the PSD. Also says we won't be naming our choice of pick 1 until Draft day to preserve the event.

Important quotes from this article: "The Club is committed to moving to the new MOPT stadium, and the 30 year deal that has been struck with the City of Casey stands regardless of any other moves." "The Club’s home is, and always will be, the MCG. The potential Docklands facility is planned as an elite training facility only, not a stadium." "The Club is committed to moving to the new MOPT stadium"