mauriesy

No. Bruce is actually a very hard worker.

Demonland Code of Conduct: "While we expect to have some constructive criticism of The Board, Coaches, Players, and Staff, we will not tolerate blatant attacks towards these individuals. The Board, Coaches, Players, and Staff, should be accorded the same respect that the posters on the forum are accorded - nothing more, but nothing less."

Funny how the supporters who cry out about accepting mediocrity are really quite happy to accept mediocrity.

TJ had a year left on his contract. He didn't have to agree to go. Woewoedin put in two ordinary years at the Pies then got delisted. We got a good 10-year player for him from the draft pick. Why are we afraid of doing a similar deal again?

You really expect Craig Cameron to come out and say TJ was a "bad egg"?

I'm sick of the last 43 years of crap.

It also frees up a large wad of the salary cap, which will be useful in 2009 when we need to retain a few of our rising young players.

Hardly a valid comparison. Weetra and Neville were both speculative picks in the 60s (and we don't even know what Weetra will do yet). Not quite the same as pick 14 for Johnstone, which is much less speculative. You have to realise that the success rate of all draft picks probably averages about 50%, much higher for earlier ones and much less for later ones. While a 50% failure rate might bring you a Neville, Molan or Smith, a 50% success rate can bring you a Bate, Bell, Dunn or Jones. Assuming the TJ trade goes through, we will have two good chances this year of getting quality players with first round picks. And it's stupid to bring up a list of previous picks of any particular number and show how bad they were. Maybe you should all believe in numerology rather than demonology if you think certain picks are jinxed. Recruiting is physiological and psychological assessment combined with educated guessing. It is compounded later by a whole range of factors, from how a player settles in to a new environment, to injury, to homesickness, to players simply deciding that the grind of AFL is not their future. About half of each year's VCE students enter university not knowing in the slightest what they really want to do ... what makes you think a few aspirant footballers won't also come to realise they've made a mistake and "drop out"eventually? As for TJ, personally I have very much liked watching him play over the years. But I also reckon he's been missing a few targets this year and his skills might be on the decline. I also realise that successful teams (look no further than every premier this decade) have a work ethic that accepts no passengers. As someone said, Johnstone would probably be happier playing an Xbox than lifting weights. And if we're talking of keeping mature players for some experience and work ethic, I don't think Johnstone fills the bill at all. He's basically a 27-year-old kid. We need "ruthlessness", not "comfort". The time is right to move him on, in my opinion.

Should fit in well with West Coast then.

Reporter to Saints: "What type of player are you after?" Saints: "Someone who can kick goals, like a Steve Johnson" Reporter jots in notebook ... "Saints interested in Chris Johnson".

Who? I think I remember him. By the way, worst pun headline ever. About as bad as the "Great Scott" headlines when Adam wins at golf.

Couldn't they get Gunns sponsorship? They know how to get an unpopular project through. Perhaps the Hawks could even change their name to the Tassie Gunns.

Never let the truth stop the beginning of a good draft rumour.

Reporter to MFC: "Any interest in Kepler Bradley?" MFC: "We'll look at anyone who can improve our list" Reporter jots in notebook ... "MFC interested in Kepler Bradley".

I'm more interested in why he needs a "short break" in Thailand. A break from what? Travelling?

There was an interesting article in the Herald Sun last week on how Hawthorn assessed their list. It mentioned their selection criteria for draft picks. They were: 1. character (intelligence/leadership/team-first attitude); 2. kicking (must be rated good or better); 3. competitiveness (must have a high level of determination). Seems to me that Green has all of those, especially a high rating for criterion 2, which is a valuable commodity. Why would we want to trade him at all? If we did, why shouldn't we expect a reasonably early pick?

Nope, just an extremely fertile and imaginative mind. There has never been a trade of that proportion, and there never will be. We saw in the Judd scenario how the internet is just a vehicle for loony speculation masquerading as rumour, then taken as possible. Did we have anything like it before discussion boards were invented? 99.9% of it is just plain wrong. Think I'll ignore all media, especially the internet, until post 2pm Friday. B)

No Bell? No Bate? No Frawley? No Sylvia? Hhhmm. How do we get Sherman? And Whelan and Moloney are injured crocks.

Does it matter that much? The difference between a team with 9 AAs and one with no AAs is 5 points!

Well, what about this article from Mike Sheahan? Roos shatter shinbone when it's crunch time

BWell, We Are Melbourne, Tiger of Old ... is that you?

Approaching midday: Carlton 2.00 Collingwood 3.00 Melbourne 3.00 Essendon 7.00 There must be some weight of money for the Dees. Carlton drifting out noticeably.

Shinboner Spirit in the lives of the Kangaroos is just like God in the lives of the religious.

What's the problem with Collingwood's list? They have a few deficiencies like any team, but I wouldn't underestimate the quality of their list generally. Their young players are excellent. Cloke is everything Miller isn't. Pendlebury, Swan, Shaw, Rusling and Thomas are terrific. Clarke is going to be as good as Kennelly. Even Maxwell is developing well as a tough backman.

Hutchison always qualifies his predictions with an introduction like "the word is ...". He bends and sways as time progresses, more rumours and information comes to hand, and public opinion alters. Early on in the Melbourne coaching appointment he was all over Chris Connolly, then he was all over Kevin Sheedy, and he only nominated Bailey the night before when a source or two probably made it clearer to him. So he saves face and claims he was "right" about the appointment. He is only accurate when it comes to a leaky ship. When faced with one that doesn't leak, he's no more accurate than anyone else and resorts to making stories that appear to have some basis in fact purely from opinions. The Judd betting (like all betting) is just a reflection of where the money is going, and nothing to do with the likelihood of Judd's real choice. It's the bookies adjusting their odds so they don't lose. All Collingwood firming into $3.50 means is that heaps of people are putting money on Collingwood (they could all deluded or even acting on Hutchison's rumour). But Hutchison will then sound authoritative by saying "the betting is that ...". Then people believe it because "Hutchison says it". It's just what journalists like him thrive on ... he's just football papparazzi. And sources are not always impeccable. Hutchison and Caroline Wilson on Footy Classified were all over the idea that we wouldn't get Chris Connolly as Football Operations Manager because he lost the Melbourne coaching job, and that he was a certainty to sign in the same role with Carlton for more money than we could afford. It was egg on their face when he took the Melbourne job the very next morning. Garry Lyon must have been having a quiet smirk.