old55

The reason they don't have finals is the probable ignominy of a 6 month season of 400 games being decided in a penalty shoot-out.

How come this is going to start happening after 6 years of it not happening?

Take the role players later if you've already picked 3 midfielders. You don't know at the start of the draft what you're exactly going to end up with so take best available early and assess the options later - it's not that complex. Occam's Razor

I struggle to see how PJ is a better forward option than Spencer or Newton and what's more I know that PJ is not going to get any better.

Brendan Goddard

"Games together" to me implies "games together in the preferred structure" that's why I'm big on the fwd-ruck. The FD tipped their hand dropping PJ and promoting Newton at the end of the season and then chasing Hale. It's the way they believe it needs to work and anything less is half treading water.

Indeed. Debating the 21st position may well be futile - I have Dunn and you have Wonna. I think there's a role for a specialist defensive forward and Dunn may have found his niche there because he has height and he is a real scoring threat. It's a straightforward role for him. I don't like Dunn as fwd-ruck because we would be relying on him as a marking target in that role (although Petterd could fill the defensive forward role as some posters have suggested). One tiny consideration is with Fitzy and Dunn if something happens to Jamar early in the game they can then share the rucking as safety net. It's going to get very ugly very fast against say Freo or Collingwood if Jamar gets injured and it's all up to Fitzy (it would still not be pretty I admit).

As posted in the "Hale alternative" thread: I reckon we're gonna have 4 ND picks - we should delist PJ and Tommy Mac - and 5 rookie picks even if we retain Newton. That means we can put 9 new players on our list. If we reckon that PJ and TMac are the best available option at any of those 9 positions then we can pick them up. Retaining Newton deprives us of a 6th rookie pick - 10th player overall, retaining PJ and TMac deprives us of ND picks 49 and 52 - 3rd and 4th player overall, there's a big difference.

The problems with Michael Newton are mostly in his psychology. He can mark, he is actually a good kick and he has shown he can compete in the ruck at VFL level. I didn't see much of Casey this year but the good judges I trust saw him make progress in 2010. I definitely saw him make good progress in 2009 in his attack on the ball and defensive efforts. He can perform the required skills - he needs to be able to do it under AFL pressure. Jamar was quite similar. Retaining Newton on the rookie list and drafting Sinclair (or similar) onto the main list are not mutually exclusive and if he's any good I'm all for it. I reckon we're gonna have 4 ND picks - we should delist PJ and Tommy Mac - and 5 rookie picks even if we retain Newton. That means we can put 9 new players on our list. If we reckon that PJ and TMac are the best available option at any of those 9 positions then we can pick them up. Retaining Newton deprives us of a 6th rookie pick - 10th player overall, retaining PJ and TMac deprives us of ND picks 49 and 52 - 3rd and 4th player overall, there's a big difference.

GNF and TOR - you do yourselves no credit with your descriptions of Newton or any MFC player for that matter. I would be keen to read your description of Mark Jamar at the end of 2008. You should be preparing to be disappointed. I reckon we should and will retain Michael Newton as a rookie - it's a low cost, he has attributes we need and he's been making progress. If we had secured David Hale it might have been a different story.

There's a big difference between trade and draft.

Sensational news! We're getting serious now. The press angle is being driven by Adelaide whinging. I have some sympathy for them re F-S they were clearly dudded on Bryce Gibbs whose father played something like 250 SANFL games but still didn't qualify on some dubious time-based technicality. Carlton scooped up Gibbs and Marc Murphy. There's evidence at Brisbane, Collingwood and Geelong that F-S can make a big impact on a flag.

I think we've still got deficiencies in all areas of our list. Sure I've been banging on about the need for a forward-ruck but the problem there is maturity not that we haven't got any prospects - Fitzpatrick and Gawn were drafted last year. Prioritising getting another 18yo on our list is not particularly helpful - we need everything - defensive small backs, attacking small backs, tall backs, inside mids, outside mids, tall forwards, small forwards - one of the areas we're probably best served in the hopper for is ruck with Spencer, Gawn and Fitzpatrick in development. That's why if I favour continuing with "best available" (whatever that exactly means) with our early picks. Trade for a specific role.

Agree with E25, early draft picks are on the best player regardless of need, later on you can pick more for need, those players will all have some issues and that's why they are still there. If you're worried about picking 5 midfielders pick the best midfielders first not last. Alternatively it might have been because BP thought that Gysberts was the best player?

Fair comment - I've delisted PJ and Newton is a rookie so it's between Fitzy and Martin. I've gone for Fitzy but I reckon he wont be able to play there for 22 games next year ... B: Bartram Frawley Garland Bruce Rivers Grimes M: Jamar McKenzie Scully Sylvia Moloney Davey F: Green Watts Dunn Bennell Jurrah Fitzpatrick I: Trengove Morton Jones S: Bail My selection of 3 players in the fwd/ruck position wasn't beacuse I couldn't split them and want them all in - it's really because for one reason or another none of them are a good solution but we need to have one. The best long-term solution is most likley Fitzy so I've gone for him.

I expect they've taken Ian Aitken's raw-meat-eating promotions off the agenda these days?

Thompson did say that he tried to change the Geelong game-plan but couldn't get player "buy-in". Gary was petulant at qtr time huddles. Putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5 I'm guessing the main player who wouldn't buy-in was Gary and that may be a part of Thompson's attitude towards him during the year. Also saw Balme saying they couldn't make contigency plans because they didn't know if Gary was leaving - incredible - Plan A he stays, Plan B he goes. I guess the other complicating factor was whether they won the flag and Bomber leaving was another curve ball for them. They've tried to load up a bit on draft picks, I don't think they can win the 2011 flag and then I think they'll be on the slide, they might need to consider trading out a flag star at the end of next year to accelerate their re-build.

I think the vast majority of selections are ignoring the fact that someone has to ruck when Jamar is resting. I don't think it should be Dunn - he's playing the defensive-forward role very well and he's a scoring threat - if he has to ruck and rest then that role is missing. We've got a problem there and that's why we were chasing Hale. I wouldn't play Jamar and Spencer together, and PJ has had his chances. IMO it has to be Fitzpatrick, Newton or Martin unless we can draft a mature age player like say Sinclair. B: Bartram Frawley Garland Bruce Rivers Grimes M: Jamar McKenzie Scully Sylvia Moloney Davey F: Green Watts Dunn Bennell Jurrah Fitzy/Newton/Martin I: Trengove Morton Jones S: Bail If Bruce doesn't sign I'd replace him with Macdonald.

IMO one of the spots in the best 21+1 has to be Fitzy/Newton/Martin/mature-draftee. I'd delist PJ, he can't do it and Spencer is Jamar's depth. I don't like rucking Dunn because his role is defensive forward and that is a specific role that he has been doing really well - while he's rucking or resting their half-back is running free. I think it's a cop-out not to make the hard call when naminng the 21+1 and not include a forward-ruck.

Forward-Ruck is clearly the big issue the FD wants to solve. We started 2010 R1 with Jake Spencer forward and we ended it with Michael Newton. In between we tried Dunn, Sylvia! and PJ. Finally a failed attempt to get David Hale. I'm hoping there's a further plan because none of those alternatives or Martin thrill me. Maybe Fitzy can come on hard and fast.

Stef Martin good in theory - in practice ??? Freo use Michael Johnson.

Presumably Dunn is going to ruck in these line-ups - personally I don't like it.

If we cut PJ who is going to relieve Jamar in the ruck in R1 2011? FWIW with the new 21 + 1 there's no way I'd go in with Jamar and Spencer, they're alternatives. Is Fitzy ready? If Newton is on the rookie list and we retain Bruce, can we elevate him somehow or do we need a LTI?

Go your hardest ...

I'm reading the tea-leaves that way too - two extra players to be delisted to bring that pick into play. Good luck to Kyle - gives his very best and gets a better opportunity with the Hawks.