rpfc

The club went down this path as a PR exercise - delisting two contracted players but paying them their full contract on the RL is much more appealing to everyone then a straight-out payment of the contract and deletion. It doesn't look good when you don't honour contracts to solid AFL citizens, and their apparent troubles with development, form, or injuries are beside the point. That's football; players don't come on for various reasons but unless a breach of the contract has been made (Carroll) then it is difficult to pay-out players without displeasing AFL heavies (for wasted $$), player managers (for burning players), and the players themselves (who would lose faith in a contract from the MFC). You can delist them though. But there will be repercussions...

Frawley is an inch too short. Oh, just our luck hey... It's amazing how big an inch can get...

Oh, Theodore... There is a saying - 'It's the economy, stupid.' I retro-fitted that saying to make a similar point in footy, rather than in politics. Basically, good midfields make good defences. Ugh.

We pick them up with a relevant picks or we reneg on our promise, pay them out (or at least one of them), and get the 6th best player left.

Index - myself 3rd - 45HG16 Pinky - AoB Anyone want to claim the thumb?

Exactly. Let him be a traditional wingman. Not a link in midfield but someone who kicks goals and stops goals and who is a kick ahead of the play.

Show a bit of self restraint. When a rabid dog comes across your path and barks at you, do you go up to the thing and hand feed it? Stop replying.

And Jarka is right - you want your defence to look better? Look up the field. It's the midfield, stupid.

This should make all of us sleep soundly. Liam Pickering is an idiot.

No, if the Tigers lost to us we would be on 20 points and they on 18. They would have taken Scully at Number 1.

He's 25. Will Aaron Davey be there? He is a year older.

Why are there so many who refuse to acknowledge Frawley as the Gorilla-tamer? We all say, to a man (or woman), that he is our best defender, but when it comes to taking the opposition's focal point we look past the quickest, strongest, tightest defender - why? Because you want him to be more offensive with the ball? That seems an odd expectation for your best defender. Scarlett is an offensive beast but he still beats the best forwards before he gets the ball. Other reasons? Tell me why Frawley can't beat Fevola, Anthony, Johnson, Ottens, Koschitzke, Roughhead etc.

Nothing has been said on this thread that makes me change my mind - the club will pick up Meesen and Newton as rookies. We are done. (After JMac of course)

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.

Now for something you'll really like...

Yeah, but a bearing on what? On our fortunes as a club? What if our fortunes as a club were enhanced by allowing Garland to get on with his rehab without giving out constant updates? Would that change anything? Or is it all about knowing everything that is going on? I know of something that went on down at the Cattery 3 years ago that being revealed at the time would certainly aide transparency, but certainly wouldn't have helped their attempts to win a flag, indeed 2 in 3 years. Do the fans still want to know? Or do they deserve to know whether or not they want to know? Here is a metaphysical question - does anyone deserve to know something they are not sure they want to know?

I mentioned this in a pinned thread, and as no-one will see it I will ask again: Is Gawn our Tippett? Everyone wanted Talia (shorter than Watts, slower than Jurrah, not an out-and-out forward) but Gawn is different in that he is 5 inches taller and plays a role not unlike Tippett (Good presence, uses body in marking contests). He would be the release player for a mid under pressure - kick it to the top of the square where Gawn is towering over a 'ruckman trying to play defender.' This mitigates one of my concerns - that any player introduced into our forward line would have to compete for a midfielder's attention with Watts and Jurrah. A competition that Watts and Jurrah would win. However, if Gawn has a role (in 3 to 5 years time, and let's be honest, that's all we care about) as a part-time ruckman/part-time forward he would attract ball through his sheer size, and from the 'release kick' when players are under pressure outside the 50. This is how I would develop him at Casey for the next couple of years. Jamar can play this role with Martin while Gawn is developing.

No-one is going to see this thread now that it has been pinned. The mods are always one step ahead...

I think you are asking for too much. Transparency is fine, but some things don't need to be yelled at the world. If I was Garland I would want my employers to respect a certain amount of my privacy and let me get on with my footy and my life. I wouldn't need my employers telling all and sundry the extent of my injuries.

It looks fantastic and you know it. You're ashamed to be attracted to a bald man with a porno moustache and you're acting out. Keep it going, Bails.

I understand they have been delisted, but it would not look good if we didn't do what we promised we would do. Therefore, I will wait for confirmation of this before believing your, possibly misintepreted, conversation. Personally, I would prefer to add a couple of rookies but I don't like coaxing young blokes into agreeing to be delisted with a promise of a RL spot and then pulling the carpet from under them.

No they weren't. I could name on one hand the posters that said that we should go for BA over 'the best tall forward at 11.' It was like a bloody mantra, if you go and look at the 'The Third Draft' thread it's OP by Demonland was devoted to tall players as if there was some compulsive obsession, rather than a need, for a tall at 11. Sound reasoning. That's what I asked for - if a mid was rated higher than a KPP, don't overlook him because of his height. I was going with the talent. If the talent means a 3rd tall so be it, if the talent means an extra mid in the rotation so be it. It ended up as the latter option, as it usually does. A majority of the best talls don't reveal their talent until they are in their 20s. At least you're on the same page with regard to people wanting Pick 11 or Pick 18 to be spent on talls to relegate Jurrah to a third tall. It's ridiculous to think that there would be an identified talent at 11 that could relegate Jurrah and not be picked in the top 10 ( or even at 1 or 2 by us). I will, at this point in time, stand by my statement that Talia or Black would have been third talls, and not worthy of Pick 11. Gysberts is a mid and, as we are all well aware, you need a multitude of bodies to run through your midfield in the modern game. We have made our value bets at 34 and 50 with talls that would provide a different option to Talia and Black (and by extension Watts, Jurrah, and Bate), and I think they have made the right decision not to gamble earlier in the draft.

I can relate, but game theory requires rational actors and common sense decisions.

But re-rookied? I don't think some of you are right to assume this conversation means we can pick up Jack's brother in December. I think it means we got Gawn and Fitzpatrick because Newton and Meesen agreed to go onto the RL. I think they'll be down at Casey next year.

Is Gawn our Tippett? Very similar... Cough...Post 51...cough. I'm overdoing it, aren't I? Well, Tippett and Gawn. Same cloth?