Bonkers

I will answer your original post & leave it at that. Cam Schwab has stated that he wants to match the jumper to the old woollen jumpers. Said that it was about brand & bringing back the traditional colours ie. darker almost black blue & a darker red, less orange or pink than what we have had over the years. I have seen the jumper he is talking about using as a template with my own eyes & the current red is nowhere near it. Now the red is darker your correct, but it is not the colour of a traditional Melbourne jumper. Before you go hurling insults & telling people they don't know what they're talking about, maybe you should get all your facts right & learn what the purpose in changing the red is all about. That purpose was to bring back the old red, if the current red stays it's not the traditional red. Whether you think darker, lighter or more intense is irrelevant.

Were you at the game last night?

Lmao personal insults aside, bad time of month maybe for you? Traditionally the red is nowhere near the current colour on the jumper. All they had to do was reduce the amount of yellow from last years to make it darker/less orange. The current colour looks more like the old fitzroy maroon, which is not blood red.

Since when did Melbourne play in a red close to maroon? Fair enuf make the red a blood red, but the current red is nowhere near it. Why don't the club just show new balance a jumper from 1964 & colour match it. It really isn't that hard!! Pretty amateurish really...

They looked shite IMO. Watching the game at the ground the red looked closer to burgundy or maroon. Dunno who is to blame but the socks were also too dark. I never recall seeing a mfc side ever play in that type of red before. Massive balls up, sort it out MFC / new balance. multi million dollar company/business & can't even sort a colour out.

Strauss may not have had a broken leg as Blease did however he has been hampered with injuries. I believe this was his first full pre-season after having shoulder and knee problems repeatedly since being drafted. I'd give the guy a bit more time & slack before saying he's not up to it.

Value is very different to price. What value is Hale to North Melbourne? Ask yourself that question & then ask yourself can they realistically demand the price that they are supposedly demanding. Hale can't get a game at North, he is taking up a fair portion of their salary cap & they don't need him on their list yet are supposedly demanding a pick at the end of the first round. If Hawthorn want to pay that price let them go ahead, we would be stupid to pay the price that is being reported or to compete with what Hawthorn are reportedly prepared to pay.

The true value of Hale is what he is worth(IMO pick 45 or there abouts), don't get that mixed up with what price the market will pay.

I can't speak for others on this forum but the issue is not whether I'd be willing to give to get. The issue is what price compared to the true value of David Hale do we have to pay. For me he isn't worth any more than pick 45. I'd be willing to give a second rounder because we need a role player. However giving any more than that is just allowing north to bend us over a barrel. Sydney gave up pick 28 from memory for Mumford last year who is a first ruck, St.kilda gave up pick 99 for King who was a role player. I just don't see the value in hutchy's rumored trade, it is almost ridiculous to think that the FD proposed that trade.

You can have whoever you want after pick 17 the argument still remains that you are risking attaining a quality player for a questionable one. The point is Hale isn't worth giving up a player who is potentially going to be all Australian when he can't even get a game at his current club. How can I question the judgement of the recruiting team if the decision hasn't even been made & we are talking about a questionable rumour from Hutchie?

Just have a look through previous drafts & take note of the difference 5 selections difference can make. You will only ever know what the difference is when you look back on the decision in a few years time. You might think that 5 picks isn't a lot but at that pick you have five more choices to make to get the right choice and possibly recruit an A grade player. I'll give u some examples: 2005: 12 Nathan Jones Dandenong Stingrays Melbourne 13 Shannon Hurn Central District West Coast 14 Grant Birchall Tassie Mariners Hawthorn 15 Travis Varcoe Central District Geelong 16 Richard Douglas Calder Cannons Adelaide 17 Darren Pfeiffer Norwood Adelaide 2006: 12 James Frawley North Ballarat Rebels Melbourne 13 Jack Riewoldt Tassie Mariners Richmond 14 James Sellar Glenelg Football Club Adelaide 15 Daniel O'Keefe Geelong Falcons Sydney 16 Mitchell Brown North Ballarat Rebels West Coast 17 Shaun Hampson Mount Gravatt Football Club Carlton 2007: 12 Cyril Rioli St Marys/Scotch College Hawthorn 13 Brad Ebert Port Adelaide Magpies West Coast 14 Jack Grimes Northern Knights Melbourne 15 Robbie Tarrant Bendigo Pioneers Kangaroos 16 Matthew Lobbe Eastern Ranges Port Adelaide 17 Harry Taylor East Fremantle Geelong So just from that list you would be happy to pass up Cyril Rioli, Nathan Jones & James Frawley. Just a bit of a gamble so you can trade in a bloke who can barely get a game at a club that isn't even in the top 8.

North baulked at that offer??? I find it hard to believe that North wouldn't accept that deal & even harder to believe that our FD would be stupid enough to put that kind of a deal on the table. He is barely worth a 2nd round pick let alone pick 32 & a first round pick swap.

It helped them to concede fewer goals, relieve pressure on their now exposed defense & allowed them to build structured attacks from kick ins. Pretty big part of their game plan I would have thought.

The rushed behind rule stopped them from resetting their play in defense. The amount of times Hawthorn rushed behinds especially in the 2008 gf was a pretty big part of their game plan.

Only problem is that he will take time to develop. A 4 year project similar to Watts.

Bartram is a tagger essentially, his spot is the side is not solid & he is not a HBF. We don't even know if Strauss will develop so we can hardly say he is going to take Grimes place. We have 2-3 players in depth to cover every other position/role in the team apart from the HBF and KPF. In todays football the HBF at times is the most important in the team, they have the ability to create play, break defensive zones & lines, create the spare man in defence or midfield & join in the midfield rotations. If we draft players with more ability in this part of the team hypothetically it will free up players like Grimes & Davey to influence the game in the forward half more, we will become a better scoring side & make us a harder team to shut down.

Blease was recruited as a dashing wingman, I don't think he has played on the half back flank? The only players on our list who who can play half back flank & have elite kicking skills is Grimes & Strauss... Strauss has played 2 games. Whilst we have depth in tall to medium size defenders who can hold their own in a marking contest, we don't have any real depth in regards to backmen with pace & elite disposal. We still rely on Davey to distribute the ball far too much out of our backline.

Yeah I agree that the playing ability we have down back is a large part of being successful, however Wellman was the man that developed Frawley & Garland especially into the players they are. Without being in the inner sanctum of the club we really can't estimate how important a catalyst Wellman was to the performance of the team. However as an observer looking in I think that a lot of the structures, techniques & knowledge that he gave to the backline group was instrumental in our improvement in that area of the teams play whether we have the talent or not. Sometimes replacing staff who have first class experience & knowledge is extremely hard to do.

Pretty disappointing considering our backline has been the strongest part of our game for the past 2-3 years. I don't see how losing him is a positive unless we can gain a coach who has equal or greater ability which I think will be hard to do.

I was just making the point that Geelong have drafted for KP's in the last 4-5 years.

I haven't seen too much of Hale but the fact that he can't get a game at the Kangaroos and from all reports on here that his quality is that of a VFL player I'de only be willing to give a pick after Rnd 3 of the draft or pick him up in the pre-season. In a couple of years Gawn & Fitzpatrick will be pushing for a spot in the side and probably take his spot anyway. A second round pick is still a pretty good pick and with that pick the club could gain a good U18 player. I think if the club are going to be serious about picking up a quality 0-25m from goal KPF they should go hard at offering a trade with high picks & or a player swap to acquire proven quality or take no risk at all and try the rookie draft the same as Geelong has with J Pod. The only way to improve the list now is to bring in quality players, risk nothing at all and go through the rookie draft or develop what we have. Speculative picks on a player like Hale could end up bringing in more of what we already have with experiments like P.Johnson, Meesen & Martin.

Geelong recruited Ottens & J Pod, that's hardly working with what they had. Also Tom Hawkwins was drafted only a couple of years ago to play key position.

The deal all depends on what goes on in the back ground between Adelaide & GWS. We have no idea what Adelaide is prepared to give up to get Viney. For all we know the two clubs could do an under the table deal for this to happen. This is why the AFL needs to clearly state what the rules are in regards to recruiting 17 year olds instead of making up rules on the run. This should have all been sorted when the two new clubs had been given approval by the AFL to be introduced.

A great servant of the club. The time was right. All the best Junior.

There is no venom in my remarks, whether he gives 100% or not is irrelevant. He is not good enough at AFL level and won't be good enough when we are having a tilt at the big prize. When it comes to making a decision on whether a player is good enough to play for your club I don't really think empathy has anything to do with it.