old55

a yellow line?

It slid by because everyone knows it's a token effort. I'm glad he said it because we're playing the game, but it means nothing. It helps set us to do the a deal with GWS and GC and get away with it because why would we need to tamper when we said weren't necessarily going to take him anayway.

FMD - Henny Penny! I could not disagree more - we are in a very beneficial position resulting from tanking with compo picks (maybe something like 4 and 13) in this year's draft directly flowing from it - how is that "[censored]"? This whole Viney discussion is about maximising our regular 1st and 2nd round picks.

maybe we can borrow Dermie's line in the sand

No it would be causing us to pay over fair value as far as the rule is written. The rule is deliberately skewed in favour of the F/S club where they have to use their next pick, not their pick in the same round. Fair value is our pick after the pick a club will genuinely use on the player. Take out shafting us and it may be that say the Lions who finish 14th with pick 7 would legitimately take hiim with that pick to succeed Simon Black - then we'd have to use our second rounder - which would be a win for us within the spirit of the rule. I could easily be persuaded that our compo picks should be in play too and that we should have to use our mid round compo at 13 in this scenario.

I don't agree - they would be bidding for Viney not because they want him at #1 but because we're committed to him - it may not be "tampering" but it's certainly not within the spirit of the rule which is to cause us to pay fair value.

The only way GWS or GC would be running to the AFL saying "those naughty Demons made us an offer on the Viney deal" is if we offered them an insulting deal.

Exactly. I don't think any one here who has proposed striking a deal with GWS and GC was suggesting we first go to the AFL for approval. If it's a win-win-win deal no-one tells. The trades with GWS and GC have to look reasonable. Something like olisik's U17 draft deal would be hard to definitively call draft ta,mpering - it could just be a good deal.

I think that's good - it's on the table. We can now start discussing a deal with them to do otherwise.

What next ???

OK ...

The Sydney Swans believe otherwise.

Merging player threads from the main board when they run out of steam there.

Jamie Bennell went back and according to reliable reports is making progress working on his game, particularly last week. He's been rewarded with 1st emergency this week. That's how it works IMO.

Morton has shown signs of progress in this area this year, including last saturday night - there was a fair contrast between Cale's and Jack's intensity.

Who do you have in mind and which matches? I would have bitterly disappointed if Watts wasn't dropped this week because it would mock everything Neeld has said about what he expects.

Can't see Geelong's vaunted depth and smooth transition to replace their veterans in that group, but it's true that I'm not very familiar with them. Sure they've got plenty of their youth into their 1sts but they've still got plenty of veterans in the twilight of their careers. Our side looks much stronger - result will be fascinating.

Maybe we should saw one of Jack's legs off - that might create enough doubt in club's minds whether we'd take him at 3.

Correct decision

Passed it through the google Swahili converter but nup ...

It's definitely an improvent over the current system - I'd leave ladder positions based on win-loss not conference standings even though this favours weaker conference teams it's less complex. I'd also go for permanent conferences to retain derbies and blockbusters: East: Brisbane, GC, Sydney, GWS, Collingwood, Carlton (having the Pies and Blues fixtured twice would accelerate game development up north) West: WC, Freo, Adelaide, Port, Geelong, Western Bulldogs South: Essendon, Hawthorn, St.Kilda, North, Richmond, Melbourne Each team plays their conference teams twice H&A, teams outside their conference alternate H&A each season, that way for example we play Freo away/WC at home, Adelaide away/Port at home, Sydney away/GWS at home, Brisbane away/GC at home one year and vice versa the next. It's a bit more travel for the Victorian teams in the East and West conference but they could live with that - alternatively split the WA and SA teams across conferences with 4 Victorian teams in each. East: Brisbane, GC, Sydney, GWS, Collingwood, Carlton West: WC, Freo, Geelong, Western Bulldogs, Richmond, Melbourne South: Adelaide, Port, Essendon, Hawthorn, St.Kilda, North Anzac day, QB, Dreamtime etc could be retained with this plan.

They want to trade him for Ferg?

Do tell the tune you hear?

Watts efforts last Saturday night were a significant move in the wrong direction, highlighted by the efforts of his team-mates in the right direction. Any progress he may have shown in the first four weeks was completely negated for me.