Redleg

Still think he is on the table as Watters doesn't see him in the 22.

I would not keep both Magner and Couch and for mine Couch would go.

But the question remains why do they get two second rounders and not 1? It is clearly a handout to a struggling club.

Don't think $350K per year for each, as has been stated in the press is peanuts. We surely are not playing a guy who played 2 games this year $350K.

Fair enough. So what would stop the scenario where club A pays over the odds this year for a FA and pays all of his salary and the favour is returned for club B the next year. Also, while we are at it, just saw WJ and he asked why are Port and Essendon not being investigated for Draft Tampering over Monfries? They have clearly manipulated the Draft.

What is to stop a club doing a deal with another to take a player on a long contract at big money, with the first club paying a part of it and maybe giving another player in the deal, to obtain a high pick. You would get the FA to the club of his choice on better money on a longer contract and get a high pick as compo. This system is so open to rorts it is not funny. Fits in well with the running of the AFL.

Pity Barry Prendergast didn't.

Port given two priority picks just when AFL said no more. Clearly their two picks are not compo.

And is Chaplin or Pearce worth more than Rivers and Moloney less Byrnes? Give me a break. Port received a handout from the AFL. The system is a joke and as with most things from the AFL totally open to manipulation.

After the compo picks announced they will.

Hawthorn and MFC have been absolutley screwed IMO by this result. There is no way in the world that if Young and Rivers were traded, that you would get anywhere as bad as the clubs received. I understand that it was not meant to be true value, but the Saints got that for Goddard and Port have been given a handout with 2 second round picks for 2 very average players. In our case it seems that a B & F winner of one year ago, who still played most of the games this year is equal to a bloke who played 6 games in the same period . That is an unmitigated joke. Then Rivers is pick 49. As a result we seem to have shot ourselves in the foot, by not trading for Byrnes with our final pick. That at least would have got us another pick about 49. Anyway what is done is done and we need to learn from it. I wonder if it is a message from the AFL to clubs to not worry about losing picks and just pick up FA's.

We appear to be the only club interested and North want him out. Our last pick might be the one on the table.

Doesn't sound great, but that is why we can get him cheap or pass.

He played two games this year. Apparently they want him out of the club badly. If Terry Wallace is right they would take anything, even pick 68 would get the deal done.

This was my post yesterday on the Gysberts thread " I would put it on him to work his arse off to improve his size and fitness and help him gain a yard in speed. We have the people to do it so it is up to him. I would also pair him with another player with the right attitude like Grimes or Trengove or Jones for the whole pre season. " Looks like the Footy Department read Demonland.

So would I. We also have Clark and soon Pederson.

Gee, can you arrange it?

You don't ask you demand like the Pies did. You want Martin, pick 23 is the price.

And a little timid fella at 26.

See thread on AFL FA Compo Manipulation.

Agree. Maybe not really good but at least good.

We now have 6 ruckmen, someone at least has to be traded. We are going to be in an awful dilemna if Grundy is left and Toumpas and Wines are gone at our pick. I would be talking to GWS about trades and at the same time getting the info on who they want so we can trade accordingly. Martin has been mentioned as of interest to GWS.

Pies quoted today's in Herald Sun as not being interested and now a Pie. Who told porkies yesterday?

They have.

Sad to see Riv go. He was a loyal Dee and a good player for us. Wish him the best.