Redleg

Looks like you were right. " For the selection to be activated for any of the years 2012-2015 in the NAB AFL Draft of that particular year, Melbourne will be required to notify the AFL of its intention to use the selection by the last Tuesday of that particular year, prior to the start of the Toyota AFL Premiership Season. The club has the right to on-trade its compensation selection to another club. If the club on-trades its compensation selection to another club, the selection may be used in that year's NAB AFL Draft Selection meeting, or in any other year up to the 2015 NAB AFL Draft."

And me.

Not necessarily. If the dogs cop a few beltings and we beat GC and GWS by handy margins the 14 % between us and the dogs will go. Another win to us and we are above them. Therefore the only certainty is no more than 2 more wins to us and losing the Port clash.

That's not right. For a compo pick to be used in a draft, it must have been activated by a certain date. That date has now passed. You can't trade it and then the new owner activates it after the deadline. "Clubs will be required to nominate the year in which they plan to use the compensation pick before the first round of the Toyota AFL season in that particular year."

We need Port and Dogs to win another game each if we are to keep our current drafting position. Port play depleted Bombers at home and news this morning is that Ryder has done a calf. Hopefully Port can win this one and then a loss in Darwin by us makes it a certainty as long as Dogs win one more or we don't win 4 more. I am sorry to talk like this but I just want us to have the best chance at a quick rebuild. Like WC and Bombers we could turn it around quickly next year with some new midfield talent.

Can't see any reason why a guy like Grundy if drafted by us can't be another big key forward, as well as rucking some of the time. He appears similar to Clark and he has been successful up forward. I don't think however that he will be there at our pick, as I believe he is the boy GWS want and need. If we maintain our current ladder position I would let it be known we are interested. GWS would then have something to think about before trying to derail us with JV. That said, we clearly need mids. Anyway I think we will do a deal with GWS for an Under 17 player and the JV issue will be moot as far as GWS is concerned. I don't think that GC are a vindictive club. The main issue is that we maintain our current ladder position.

When Anderson came out and basically said he would stop us trying to keep him, in a similar manner to the way Carlton got Judd, I thought that was absolutely disgusting by the AFL.

He is a kid with a bit of ability and I would hate to lose him, before he has a real chance to show us whether he can become a regular senior player. His first game last year was pretty good and most would have been excited by him.

Agree with you WJ, but I think the next hearing is a Committtal and if he is committed for a trial, then it will go on to next year most likely. His best bet is a finding at the committal of insufficient evidence to go forward.

I would give him the 3 games he needs for 250 even if one or two as sub. He has given us plenty. He deserves his place this week with 6 goals and BOG for Casey anyway.

I am a fan of Evans and believe he is a good footballer. I hope he gets the chance next year to show us.

Just like Sydney Swans.

Apparently Michael Evans is on the way back and may have a run with Casey soon. I thought he could be a real chance and I hope we keep him next year, to give him that chance.

Cloke will be announced soon as staying. Boak is a chance.

Their assistant recruiting officer was absent.

He was pretty impressive and is a big strong mobile unit, who can ruck and kick goals. Remind you of anyone in blue and yellow. He is the player I think GWS really want.

It depends what you call a good player. Is a player who can flash into a game and kick a few quick goals a good player? Is a player who can kick at least two goals a game a good player? Is a player who commands the oppositon best backman a good player? Is a player who can do the foregoing and who hasn't got a great engine or a lot of defensive game a good player? I think he is.

Sad but true.

Interesting to see the Blues supporters saying Wellingham got off lightly and the Pies fans saying he was crucified. When Sylvia got his jaw broken off the ball and the perpetrator, Josh Kennedy wasn't even cited, no one said a thing.

He can still be traded with his consent.

For what it's worth, he was a Dees supporter and family are very strong Dees people. It will be interesting to see which way we go at trade and draft time. We need to and have said, we will be aggressive. We will see. Personally I would like to see us do a deal for both under 17's. We would get a brilliant goal kicking mid and a strong key forward. That would also ensure JV as a second rounder. I think pick 3 or 4 plus a player would get the deal done. While many on here have lost the love for Beamer, he would have appeal to the 2 new teams as a hard bodied, experienced mid, who won a B & F in 2010.

Won't happen. We are a chance to go up not down. We are 3 wins behind Port including percentage. 1 more win behind the dogs. If we lose to Port we are probably going to stay where we are. Awful to talk like this and I hope it is the last year that I do. However we need every draft position advantage possible to resurrect our sh-t midfield and small forward situation.

I hate to admit this publicly, but I have gone into drafting mode and want us to finish no higher on the ladder at all costs.

So you thought Spencer's 8 possies 11 hitouts and no goals were better than Martin's 18 possies 20 hitouts and 2 goals?

The way we dispose of the ball, you would think we are slipping on banana skins.