Craig T

Yes this is interesting. I would assume that the highly rated girls who know they are going to be drafted would be in a position to nominate the state in which they want to play, knowing they will be selected. But for the girls who aren't so confident of being picked up going national definitely improves their chances. For example the Eagles and Dockers only have seven picks between them, so if you nominate WA you'd need to be in at least the top seven selections for the entire state or you're going to miss out. There is always the Supplemental Selection Period after the draft, but I'm sure they don't want to be left hanging and hoping.

I'm assuming they'd tart up Glen Huntly Park which is beside the track. Otherwise the idea of an oval that could be used for matches would probably not be possible.

From the AFLW website; "The Demons have been adamant throughout that pick No.13 must be included in any trade talks, but it's understood the Bombers had initially put forward their pick No.53 in an attempt to secure the deal." #53 for Maddie Gay. Yep, nothing's changed at Bomberland! 🤣

No probs, just my take on how it might effect the women's program and my day long expeditions to Casey.

If it goes ahead I'm sure they will. But I doubt they'll be playing any games for premiership points/finals there should a ground be built. But the women might. 😁

The beginning of the end for Casey? Melbourne commences Caulfield feasibility study https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/1477323/melbourne-commences-caulfield-feasibility-study It's about a quarter of the distance from my abode so I'm all for it. 😁

No news so far on Charlotte Wilson and Gold Coast. Maybe WE are being unreasonable and insisting on Charlie Rowbottom in exchange. 😆 Seriously, I wonder if we are trying to talk her into staying. We need big defenders and could do a hell of a lot worse than her.

A few interesting comments from Todd Patterson in his farewell thank you to Birch.... “Libby has been one of the most highly regarded defenders in the competition...." - not is, but has been. "This deal gives her a tremendous opportunity to extend her career, which we respect...." - not continue her career, but extend, which suggests she had no future at Melbourne. Maybe I'm reading too much into those words, but no such interpretation could be taken in the farewells to West or Sherriff.

If I'm right that's now two third places and twice runner-up to Lauren Pearce. 😍😔

I think I know the day you are talking about. And yes, most irritating. 🥴

Given what Todd has said, I wonder if some of those that are leaving might have had a less than positive end of season interview with the coaching/list staff. At the end of the 2020 season Elise O'Dea, Maddy Guerin, Harriet Cordner, Bianca Jakobsson and Alisha Newman (and one other I can't recall just now) all headed off to other clubs, and the talk was how we obviously had problems if such a list of departures was occurring. But my understanding was that most, if not all, of those losses were club initiated, with the players not fitting in with our future plans and them being informed it would be best for them to look elsewhere. Our three seasons after that we went 25-4 in H&A, and prelim, runners up, premiers. Maybe we are looking at a repeat in 2023. But perhaps not three seasons till the next flag. 🙂

I am wondering if the increasing salaries, which is a wonderful and deserved thing, might be a factor here. Originally there wasn't much difference between say, Tier II and Tier III salaries, just a couple of thousand dollars. But now it is creeping towards 10K (and soon will be and then more), so the difference is significant. We would have a number of good players who would be on Tier III, so it is naturally becoming harder to turn down offers from clubs that don't have as much talent and can offer a Tier II contract.

Allelujah! I've been saying this for ages! There are some tweaks that are needed with the rules, but so much of the "inconsistency" would be eliminated if the umps just umpired by the rules as they are written. You aren't permitted to hold a player who isn't in possession - so penalise it every time it happens. As soon as you start "interpreting" you run into trouble. The "Oh that was tiggy touchwood, she/he/they were hardly held and it shouldn't have been a free" opens up the situation to every ump's individual interpretation of just how much you can hold before you play a free kick. And if you payed it every time players would stop doing it, except in those relatively rare situations where giving a way a professional free is a better option than not. I know the general consensus is the less free kicks the better, you don't want a game dominated by frees, but if you started paying them players would stop giving as many away. What you want is a game with less frees due to less rule infringements, not a game with less frees because umpires are "interpreting" the rules to keep the number of frees down. In the second AFLW season I was at a match between the Dees and Bris out at Casey, and at a ball up 30 metres out from our goal a Bris player was holding on to Daisy. One of the non-officiating umpires spotted it, and what did they do - gave the Bris player a warning. Is that what it says in the rules? Give a warning? But that's not the worst of it. Twenty seconds later there was another ball up in the same spot, and I assume because she been drilled to do it the Bris player instinctively held Daisy again. Suddenly she froze, and turned to the same umpire, and written all over her face was "Oh s@#t!". The ump looked directly at her for a couple of seconds, and then just looked away.

Until this year I was always a bit down on Casey, but I warmed to her this season as I felt she really started to make more of a contribution and would prefer if we could hold her, but it looks as if she's off to Hawthorn. I still have time for West, she did go backwards this year but played a good game after coming back from being dropped. That shows some character which is admirable. Birch. Hmm. I don't really want to be too negative, but when you are being out paced and out maneuvered by Jackie Parry who has the mobility of a semi-trailer it's a worry. She seems to have really lost a yard and is getting regularly beaten in one on one marking contests, which used to be a strength. I guess it largely depends on what we would get for her. I'd prefer a useful ready to go player than a kid from the draft that will need a couple of years as we are still definitely in the "premiership window" (as much as I dislike that term!). While a bigger bodied 175cm (5'9" in the old money) midfielder would be ideal, I understand that Alyce Parker is looking to leave GWS. If we could parley any of these prospective losses into securing her that would make me very happy. 😁

Top spot! 😁