Redleg

No he probably won't. Did you see what he did in his first game back last week? Did you see his first AFL game last year? We need talent and he has it.

OK. Lets trade Clark and Jones, because they are our best players.

Welcome to the masochists club.

Agree.

Incorrect.

I hope Port and Dogs put me out of my misery and win next week. That means I can go to the footy from then and hope to win, as it won't change our ladder position and affect our draft picks.

Can't he be both of ours. I nominated him at the start of the season as a kid I thought could kick on and then next thing he was injured.

If GWS has taken a player from a club already under the uncontracted player rule, can they take another who also happens to be a free agent or restricted free agent? As the GWS rules were done before the free agency rules logic would say they cannot. Anyone know the definitive answer?

Hard to argue with that. Imagine if he had stayed and we were paying him $600k a year, we would have a mutiny on our hands. The 2 compo picks are starting to look really attractive now.

Add Jamie Bennell.

My boy Evans gets 2 goals and 19 possies in limited time in his first game back.

Agree.

Certainly a strange rule that allows a non activated compensation pick to be traded and then activated by the new owner, after the deadline. Then again it is an "AFL" rule. How about this one as a hypothetical? Owner of compo pick doesn't activate this year by deadline, then has a poor year and finishes near bottom. Wants to use pick this year. Trades pick to another club. Club then trades pick back. Assisting club gets a player or improved position in a later round. Original club then activates the pick. What rule stops that?

Our VFL partner is being belted again. Probably no MFC players left by finals time.

Could this happen? GWS lose all remaining games and get GC pick 2 for an under 17 player plus some other part to the deal and then put the pressure on us for pick 3, for us to get JV second round, with us getting the second under 17 pick and maybe another part to the deal. GWS then get Whitfield, Grundy and Toumpas. You could write a book on the permutations.

What about my Dogs scenario? We win 3 and they lose all, some badly and we are above them.

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.