Redleg

I actually heard it on channel 7.

You threw me with the new avatar or haven't I noticed it . Not sure but I think Port will have a serious go without the Burgoynes. Sydney also at 14 I think won't pass on him if he is there and if they get really nervous maybe even the Dons at 10 to help out Jobe.

Tomorrow.

I don't think he will get to our 4th pick 18.

Leaving aside the first two selections, I like your two drafts as they both contain a good key forward, a ruckman and some magic or x-factor ( a lot in the second one ). I would sleep very soundly draft night if we got one of those lists.

Agree. He may go much higher than many expect.

That's because they are all 175cms.

You are aware he is 185cms.

But we have Pia. We win.

I am glad we can use 50 and would have been furious if we did not use 34. Plenty of the names thrown around on here will be there at 34 and some at 50.

Agree. Not sure we need a 25 year old back flanker with questionable disposal.

Maurie different sons react differently. I have a son 27 and I am sure while he may not do exactly what I would want, he would be influenced by my opinion. I am not blaming Ball's father or Ball for that matter. As I have said repeatedly , he is allowed to do what he wants.

At least I got something right. Post 144.

I would come out and declare we will take Ball with pick 11. That could entice Port to use pick 8 or 9 to get him as a replacement for the Burgoynes. Alternatively if Essendon want him they would have to use pick 10 to get him. That way our chances of getting a better player improve possibly down to 18. It could even help us to land Butcher if that is who we are after.

I was wrong.

You have posted this on a couple of threads. Methinks you might know something. PS. It makes sense to me as it would give us 6 picks in the ND and PSD 1. Meesen is the last choice of our ruckmen and is still injured. Newton will struggle even more if we take Thorp, Watts comes on and we draft a couple of KPP's.

I predicted during the practice games that he would be a big improver this year. I was wrong.

Not that I care, but if he nominates for the ND, the interesting thing could be which team is prepared to take him despite his preferences and at what pick. Some have suggested that Essendon would use 26, just ahead of Collingwood. Are there clubs that would use a higher pick such as Port with 16 who would see him as some compensation for Burgoyne leaving. Ball and his Manager will have to play a game of Russian Roulette if he goes into the ND. I still think this will be resolved by friday when the next list lodgement is due.

Friday the 13th, how apt, this should all be over. St.Kilda will do their next list lodgement and I suspect Ball will be contracted and confirmed.

And some pretty good decisions as well like selling Hay, Thompson and Rawlings for well over the odds and drafting Buddy, Roughy and Lewis and others with the proceeds. Lets not forget the flag last year either.

This has been explained a dozen times by various posters. We have 5 picks at the moment. If we want to use more say 50 and PSD 1 we need to move two off the list. Bruce replaces Robbo's spot. As stated in the papers today you can now delist also from main list to Rookie list.

Good luck to WJ and all of the players/officials from ex coach Redleg. PS. Well done to Rollo for all of the hard work he continues to do in organizing these games. His efforts are often unheralded. Go Dees.

The key word you have used is "wont". I was referring to players stating their preference. To tell a club you "wont' play for them if selected would have to be a form of draft tampering and would carry a sanction of some kind. What if that was said and then the player was selected by that club and agreed to play. There are different forms of this problem ranging from " I would not like to play with your club" to " if you select me I won't come" and ultimately " refusing to play for the club that selected you".

Further informative comment. Thanks.

Good post. Very informative.