Lord Nev

That's strange coming from King given he said Lever and May could completely change the way we play this year and said Petracca could go to a new level.

I didn't suggest we should negotiate the same contract for Kent and AVB.

It was irrelevant as I'm trying to deal in facts not hypotheticals and opinions about players 'upsides'. I've stated numerous times the point I'm making isn't about player v player, it's about the different handlings of similar circumstances and how, IMO, we made a blunder by giving an injury plagued player a long contract. He could have easily been put on a 'triggered' contract where he gets an extension based on availability to play, but now we potentially could be looking at paying/paying out a player who doesn't play. I hope he gets right. I like him a lot, and tbh I wouldn't have blamed him moving to Sydney if we offered a triggered contract given his injury and even more so, given his family situation at the time.

Not sure the video editing team are the same ones who do the medical assessments mate.

This has been addressed a fair few times in this thread already.

"The NBA recently informed all 30 teams it may become necessary to play games in arenas without fans as a means of preventing the virus’ spread, and there’s a growing concern around the league that the plan will actually be enacted." NBA schedules meeting on coronavirus

I know we all love him as a bloke and the attitude he brings on field, but giving someone 3 years because you think you can get 1 year out of them seems pretty poor management to me.

Neither was vB, that's my point.

Don't think anyone has said that have they? (Might have missed it if so)

If they really do regard him as more than depth, then that's a whole separate problem IMO.

Yep, fair comments. I still maintain that 3 years was over the top, no matter what offield qualities are there. We'd still have Trengove on our list if that was the key criteria.

Again, it's not a comparison of them as players, I've stated that a few times already. It's the point that both were at a similar stage from a reliability point of view yet we for some reason gave vB 3 years and Kent 0. Giving any depth player 3 years is generous at the best of times, let alone one with a massive injury cloud hanging over him. Pretty clearly it was a poor decision. Staggered that people can argue otherwise (if they don't have their vB goggles on).

You surely don't base a 3 year contract for a role player on a couple of games at the end of a season? In 2018 Kent played 5 games, had extremely bad luck with collision injuries, vandenBerg played 7. Not much of a difference I would have thought. And tbh, I'm not sure I would call his finals series "brilliant", but it was good. Don't get me wrong, I really like vB, I would have kept him for sure, it's the contract length I find baffling, particularly in contrast to Kent. It's not about saying one is better than the other etc, I just thought their situations were fairly similar.

Missing the point mate. Signed vB for 3 years. Ditched Kent who simply wanted more than 1 year. It's at best, inconsistent. I'm not saying Kent is a gun, I'm talking about the contract decisions based on both players outputs.

Played 13 more games than vandenBerg managed last year, but sure... And covered by whom exactly? And we don't have inside mids like vB covered?

We've not made a lot of big list blunders in the last few years, but IMO signing vB for 3 years while simultaneously ditching Dean Kent (who simply wanted more than 1 year) has been one of them.

It's an AFL-made ad FFS. Geez the glow of the preseason wears off quick here hey.

100% flinged him. He clearly uses his strength and body weight to change the trajectory of Stratton. https://www.theroar.com.au/afl/video/hawks-players-object-after-jack-vineys-risky-tackle-on-their-skipper-1066528/ And please understand the point that it's the complete action. It's not just the pinning the arms obviously, which is why I made it clear it was the pinning the arms and flinging them head first into the ground that is problematic, not just pinning the arms.

It's not 'the tackle' that is in danger. There's a pretty big difference between a normal tackle and pinning someone's arms and flinging them head first into the ground.

I didn't see him, but I was literally just driving past so didn't have much time to get a good look. He very well could have been there.

Small, possibly 'unofficial' rehab group doing some light work on Gosch's this morning. I was driving past, so didn't get much of a look, but noticed Preuss was doing some running and had relatively minimal knee strapping.

But they collected heads? Unless this is a new tactic we'll see develop, I don't think it was deliberate by any stretch.

The Melksham one is the baffling one for me. Two blokes run head first into each other and one of them gets plucked out for a 2k fine... Bizarre.

Never said they were going to win the flag, but there's lots of comments here implying they're finished before a ball has even been bounced. They have the best coach in the league, have deliberately recruited and have changed their game plan this year. Staggers me that supporters of a club like ours would start bagging them out after a meaningless preseason game. I think they're a brilliantly coached team who have won a premiership on average every 3 years over the last dozen, something we could only dream of and should remember before labeling them the Bradbury's of the AFL.