rpfc

Good point. But some posters have taken the silence as inertia - the club isn't doing anything! We must act! I guess we will find out in a few weeks what Jackson is cooking. I want someone that the players cannot hide behind and that they want to play for.

A poster was talkling about 'objective facts' in another thread a few days ago. Well, Misson was the guy in charge of fitness as the Swans won a flag in 2005 and St Kilda dominated the League in the late noughties. He doen't need to prove anything by getting this group up and going - he is obviously a stellar fitness co-ordinator. Misson, the Darwin trip, Craig's second half of the season... I think we are looking for excuses.

If nothing else the club can condemned for hiring the Dr... I don't know the extent of Dank's involvement with the players but the club obviously was not aware either and that is pretty damnable...

Yes, a good point. Let's say collingwood wants Sylvia and had just lost Thomas to Carlton - they will want to trade with us so that they don't lose the bonus 1st round pick just after their pick that they will get for him. They may offer something for him, but it will not be near the pick we would get for him if he left as a FA. Look, I am all for the club to explore trading of UFAs if Sylvia decides to leave - but don't hold your breath.

Bad teams become bad because of decisions THAT club makes. Everyone in a position to get draft assistance has put themselves in that position. I am not about to let other clubs shame me into thinking that we shouldn't get draft assistance because we have 'brought this on ourselves.' And I am certainly not going to allow the 'pride' of MFC supporters to let the club shoot itself in the foot by not receiving what the League has placed in its by-laws as important to the integirty of the game to even the competition. We have had Blease and Scully as draft assistance. That was five and four years ago. We have gone 22-63-2 with % of 75 in the years since our last 'hand-out.' Carlton had 4 PPs (three pre-draft) over 5 years from 2003 to 2007. Hawthorn had two pre-draft PPs over 2004 and 2005. Our competitors would like us to stay down as long as possible and not get the kind of help we require and the League needs us to have. I would prefer them having a whinge than us struggling in front of their smug faces.

Monfries was not an UFA. And it hasn't been tested yet. The AFL did not think through this and made up rules 'on the fly.' Clubs may test it but the AFL has yet to rule on it.

RFA can be traded - Monfries is the precedent for that. Trading a UFA is another matter entirely and I really don't know if the AFL will allow it. The players association will have issues with it as they do not like how the compensation model is stifling movement of players as it is (the idea that you get the 'balance' in comp between FAs into your club and out of your club - clubs are not signing players if they lose a good player). If we lose Sylvia - we will not sign any FA and hope that we get Band 3 compensation (Pick 20). Band 4 will be Pick 35ish. Band 5 will be Pick 38ish.

Based on precedence: Pearce and Chaplin EACH got Band 3 Comp for PA.

This comes from a text between Bates and Dank where the Dr seems to think that Craig will employ Dank if a meeting with the two goes well. It obviously didn't because Dank was never on staff.

Byrnes is the only crumbling forward on the list or 2014.

If we are so bloody confident that we didn't do anything wrong than it might save us, or the club had little idea of what Bates and Dank were doing...and those records are not what the players actually received...

I was never very comfortable with Wilson's reporting on the Essendon scandal because I knew from our ordeal who is drip feeding her information. It is quite obvious she has The Bloated One giving her all she wants and I have no idea how to feel about this. It promotes transparency (in a grotesque way) and allows the AFL to effectively control the one person in the football media who seemingly only writes about 'Who's Getting Fired Now?' But the fact that he or she is not up front with the relationship is a little disconcerting and probably very frustrating for people who are fighting a ruling in private and in public...

I am standing by my 'Band 3 Compensation (ND21) for Sylvia if we don't sign any other FAs' belief.

Well, I am glad you can see that his heart was in the right place.

Er, because our club screwed up and after yesterday we might need a QC or two...again.

Port did the same thing. They seem to be travelling ok. I think that our utter lack of confidence and lack of good midfielders is holding us back - not humidity.

Aren't opinions by definition subjective? My subjective opinion is that Dunn is not a very good footballer and he plays the easiest position in the whole world ever - HBF. He makes far too many mistakes, and has far too many brain fades not to have his position under review going into 2014.

This just tells me the kind of bloke we used Pick 20 on. When you want to trade for a player in the position we are in, you want him to be exactly the kind of leader Dawes is. That deal is looking better and better and if he can contribute to creating a good culture at the club - one focussed on selflessness and performance - then it will be remembered for quite a while. More than happy to give him 5% of the cap...

We do, but this is a little different because we can get done for not doing anything wrong. Essendon are pying for their governance issues and their failure to live up to the duty of care they have to the players and the AFL Drug Code (they have no idea who got what when). We apparently didn't know (I really hope we did) Bates was using Dank or his pharmacy. That constitutes a governance issue right there and I hope that long list of supplements we revealed in a press release were kept by the Dr so that they are the gospel truth. Otherwise, we also don't know who got what when... We obviously didn't set up the kind of regime that the Bombers did but we did allow the players to be exposed to someone like Dank. It's really less worrying if Craig and Misson knew what was going on, but if that were the case why didn't we come forward and put our hand up when the Bombers were exposed? (As Jackson said when he first came on board "the club was naive" to not notify the AFL, I hope it was, because it is better to know facts and be naive than to not know who is injecting your players with substances.) The story has yet to play out...

It doesn't have to be terrible. But Neeld pushed defensive running as a priority when he should have toned it down with a young team. Uncontested possessions make up 60% of disposals these days (and I harp on them a great deal) but Neeld's desire for a player to be defensive firat and foremost stifle your run and break from contests and that is what has hurt us. And Terlich, Clisby, M Jones, and N Jones need some help when it comes to getting into space and finding some footy. If you can get that confidence to run up then we can get to AFL average very quickly I believe. We need hard running, experienced mids ready to take on a high workload. Viney, Toumpas, and ND2 should not be asked to do the things we are having a go at them for not being able to do.

For all your aggressive posturing on any and every issue that comes up on this site, you always have to glaze your ego with some form of dismissive insult. I would be more insulted it were more deserved (slow?) or if it wasn't emblematic of your own issues - not the person you have insulted. So how about you take a deep breath and try not to take The Internet personally.

I will moralise because we didn't put the health of players at risk nor 'dabble' with prohibited substances. It's a little more grievous to say the least... And the Bombers broke a few rules, RR... I cannot believe I had to write that.

My ears pricked up at that too... I was expecting some form of investigation. I am curious myself what the hell we were doing, or whether we just let Bates do his own thing. Fine and another admonishment probably...

According to Caroline...