Tony Tea

Thanks, D. Some good numbers there. Colin is lucky that his career is maturing just as Melbourne is starting to come good. He has a very real chance to be a high profile leader in a good side. He finally gets the chance to discover if he can personally drag Melbourne over the line in big games.

Colin has certainly played some good games against rubbish opposition, but I cannot recall many (any?) good games against good sides. FTB?

A warning?

Power's a gun. But, no.

What was it Mark Stevens said on MMM a few weeks ago? Something about Tom being ready to take the heat that will come his way for ratting on Melbourne? Now today the Hun publishes a list of so-called gripes. I would prefer Tom's "people" did the noble thing and flat out said he was leaving for the money. Instead they slither to the media with a slip-shod concoction of past gripes (no doubt Norm Smith's sacking is the key reason Tom wants to go to GWS) in a transparent attempt to blame Melbourne for his defection. With so many things wrong at Melbourne it's a wonder any player wants to stay.

Touch wood.

The only Green to win All Australian honours was Russell Greene in 1985.

Brisbane in Brisbane 2002.

Eagles in Perth 1998.

EVERY draft gets labelled "superdraft" at one time or another; even the bad drafts. The proof of the pudding is in the retrospecting.

The trouble is the options have been narrowed. About the time our contact to sell game to Brisbane ran out the AFL ruled that Victorian clubs would no longer be able to sell games to Brisbane, Sydney, Perth or Adelaide. That pretty much leaves only Canberra, Darwin, Cairns, Hobart & Launceston. The last two are out courtesy of North & Hawthorn, Darwin & Cairns are much of a muchness taxing-wise, that leaves Manuka. Wonder if it would be feasible to sell games to the likes of Ballarat & Bendigo.

We were lucky Port was so dreadful. We will lose them all.

Not this year, Mort. 2012 & 2013. I plan ahead.

Thanks, DA. Perhaps you, or anyone, could also tell me about priority. Who goes first when there are multiple compensation picks to be used over the next few years? For instance, if both Melbourne & Geelong choose to use their "end of first round" pick in 2013, who gets first pick?

The AFL wants to expand the game, so the AFL and the Northern Territory guarantee (or is it underwrite?) the dosh up front regardless of the crowd. The AFL considers it an investment in future development & expansion. Not sure what drives the NT's participation.

Here's a novel idea: we should tank. Say we lose Scully and get one first round pick, with that pick slated to come after our normal pick. We use the pick in 2012. We tank and come last and we get picks 1 & 2 in 2012. ----------- Say we lose Scully and get two first round picks, with those two picks slated to come after our normal pick. We use the first pick in 2012 and the second in 2013. We tank and come last in both years we get picks 1 & 2 in both 2012 and 2013. ----------- Having said that, can I just say (or rather, ask) this: how would the two picks be allocated? How did it work for Geelong & Ablett? I assume one pick came straight after Geelong's regulation pick. When is their other pick scheduled to kick in?

I see Collingwood assistant coach Mark Neeld has been installed as $4 favourite to coach Melbourne next year. $4.50 Bailey, $7 Brenton Sanderson, $7.50 Roos, $8.00 Viney, $9.00 Malthouse & Clarkson, $10.00 Goodwin, $11.00 Garry Lyon. Of course, the headline? Lyon $11 to coach Dees.

That is possible, too. But it could also be coincidental, rather than causal.

Do the AFL understand cause & effect or do they prefer to sell their rule changes with spurious statistics? Don't answer that. There is every chance the press and changed tactics have contributed to those stats.

What happens when the clubs get properly used to the new subs rule and can comfortably run out whole games? 2-2... then 1-3...

Cam Schwab has done 10 tweets today; a significant increase on his recent sparse activity. This is a clear sign he has more time on his hands after Tom finally signed with GWS (or Melbourne).

Dunno who Stevens might be acting for, but he is on the record saying Melbourne should receive fair compensation: Has he been backing away from that opinion?

Velocity advised Melbourne in writing in August 2010 they were going to put off Scully's contract negotiations until after the 2011 season. I'll give you London to a brick GWS first approached Velocity in or before August last year.

If you are optimistic about Tom staying, you better not read this tweet stream.

Any chance the media will stop referring to the GWS "multi million dollar" offer, while completely ignoring Melbourne's own multi million dollar offer.