titan_uranus

Well then, you're back. Yes, you've confirmed exactly what I already said. Thanks. Tell me, as a Collingwood supporter, do you want Ball?

Each club must delist a minimum of 3 players. I'll give you 3 who were already on the list and who are already in contention to be delisted next year: PJ, Bell, Dunn. If we're keeping players for the sole purpose of having options for the following year's list culling, then that's horrible list management. I'd say they like Bartram enough to give him another year to develop into a tagger or whatever they have in mind for him. And you're right about Newton and Meesen. Rookie delistings don't count to that minimum of 3.

Polls need a timer on them. After a certain period (I don't know, a fortnight?) they should close. That way when we get horrible bumps like this one, we don't get some 4 month old poll hanging around for another week.

No, he hasn't yet. But I'm not convinced that Hauritz is any good at Test level. Krejza turns the ball a lot more (or at least seemed to). At the moment Hauritz is the best we've got, but IMO he's not a long term solution and we still need to find someone else. Might be Krejza, might be Holland, might be someone else.

I don't really want Ball at 18. I don't believe he wants to play for us. According to Jon Ralph's article in today's HUN, if he doesn't like the club he gets picked by, he can apparently walk away from football for a year. "Ball, 25, could refuse to play for the club that selects him and step out of football for a year until a trade to Collingwood is done. But in reality that is not a viable option, even though it was raised by those close to Ball yesterday." I didn't think that was possible. As Tim Harrington said last night, a draft's a draft. When you enter it you are at the mercy of the system. You go where you get picked.

Cheney and McNamara both deserved new contracts, so I'm very happy that they've got them. Personally if one (or both) got 2 years I wouldn't be upset, but 1 year would be the smarter thing to do at this point. As for Bartram, I'm nowhere near as excited, but this is a better outcome than keeping Newton and losing Bartram. Overall, this is a great outcome.

Bolded bit I agree with. Bell should consider himself lucky to still be on this list. As should PJ. But the unbolded bit I disagree with. Newton's had his chance. Evidently the FD's seen enough.

Good move. Newton doesn't deserve a spot on the senior list. Meesen might, but considering his injuries this makes things easier for the club. This opens up the opportunity to use PSD1, 34 and 50 I believe.

You do realise that they were going to play Krejza in Adelaide, but had to use Hauritz because Krejza rolled his ankle a couple of days before the match? Hauritz was picked from the wilderness, and has done well, but he might not be where he is right now if Krejza had not have rolled his ankle that day. Krejza got one more Test in Perth, in which he did poorly, and hasn't been seen since. But his Sheffield Shield form has been OK. The big thing I've noticed is his economy rate is down. You also do realise that the Test we're talking about was the 4th and final Test in India in 2008. If Ponting had been suspended, he would have missed the Brisbane Test.

I fail to see how Ball choosing the ND over the PSD is tantamount to him saying he'd be happy if he ended up here. He has chosen the ND because it provides him with a better option than the PSD. Therefore he doesn't like what the PSD offers. Therefore he doesn't want to play for Melbourne. Ignore him please. Agree. He is not worth Pick 18. I'd be very unhappy if we took him at 18.

Not if they were told to bowl spinners to ensure enough overs were bowled. Ponting had no choice. I'd be happy to bet that he would have prefered to bowl the quicks, but he had no choice but to use White and Krejza to get through the overs.

Agree with both points. Reebok's jumper has those stupid 'flaps' at the front and back, which seemt to me to do nothing but provide opposition players with easy spots to grab on to when tackling. Adidas' jumpers seem to fit the body much tighter and are even at the bottom. Yeah I'd like to know too. I think the sponsor makes and provides all the gear, and there is a financial deal involved too, but I don't really understand it.

Brilliant Jaded! This must be a real fillip for you. Good on you.

I'd be surprised if both Newton and Meesen get 'demoted' to the rookie list. That would mean we'd be picking in the draft down to 50. Not sure if that's what the FD wants. Might be.

I believe he was under orders to speed up the over rate. Regardless, as RR said, the two aren't mutually exclusive. White and Krejza were taken to India as designated spinners. The selectors put the burden on their shoulders to take wickets, especially 4th innings wickets. The fact that they didn't should have reflected more on them than Ponting, but it didn't. It was not the best way to go about winning the match, but that's not to say Ponting lost us the Test.

Well, I'm a bit surprised they made it to 170, but we should still make it OK. The pitch isn't as bad as India's top order made it look. One decent partnership should be enough.

I would have thought that, provided we get his demeanour/attitude/headspace fixed up, he'd be the obvious choice. Of course, there's no certainty he'll fix himself up, but if he does I'd consider him before Ball anyway.

Johnson and Bollinger! Beauties! 3/23 after 7 overs, Tendulkar's gone. Edit: 4/24! And Dhoni was actually out, but wasn't given due to a lack of an appeal. What a start! Edit 2: Now 5/27!!! This is fantastic!

If we do this with someone (Newton, Bell, maybe even McNamara), we could then refrain from fully letting someone go, and could still make use of PSD1 and Pick 34. If it's as easy as it seems, we should do it.

Interesting article in the HUN today. Mark Stevens says that players with a year left to run on their contract could be delisted with the promise of being picked up in the rookie draft. They then get paid their full wage, the difference being they've been demoted to the rookie list. Newton and Bell come to mind.

Yeah that was some match. I got a score at about the 30 over mark, when Hussey and Hodge had gone, and I didn't think we had a chance. I'd never even heard of Aaron Finch. 7 first choice players unavailable. Victorian cricket is so strong at the moment.

I'm happy with this. We get the chance to see if he's mature enough to become a team player, drop the attitude, and work his ass off. If we're happy with what we see we can easily get him through the PSD. If not, we don't bother. Certainly better than not having anyone down at the club, and I kinda hope this works out.

That's tough for Meesen. But great for Garland. Hopefully McNamara's high spirits are a result of him getting a new contract. I wanna see more of him.

I don't like Jones in the starting 18, especially when Garland, Petterd and Aussie all miss out. So I'd have McDonald starting in Jones' spot, with Petterd or Aussie getting McDonald's bench spot. And I'd have Jetta as an emergency before Maric. It's so hard picking a team for Round 1. Hopefully that's a good sign.

Talked a bit about Watts, said we eased him into the season not because he was the number 1 pick, but because he wasn't strong enough (but we already knew that). Went from 82kg to 89kg before he played. Also said that the two most important things to consider when drafting are whether the player can kick, and whether the player can get his own ball. He doesn't want to draft players who have to rely on others to get the footy. He wants to have players who can get their own footy.