Nasher

It'd be poor form to steal someone else's idea, I'd have thought.

I'm sure he lays awake at night thinking about it.

I'm really struggling with relevance of all this. At least, any relevance that can't just be counteracted with "West Coast and Adelaide seem to managing OK".

Precisely what I thought too, Jack.

His main argument was that he wanted a reserves side because the leading clubs do. When challenged with the West Coast example, he said he didn't care what other clubs did. That is a complete and utter contradiction of himself. Even if you did give him the benefit of the doubt that way, consider this. In the last 10 years we've seen premierships from clubs that have stand-alone VFL sides (Collingwood, Geelong), clubs that have an alignment (Hawthorn), clubs that stand-alone reserves sides in outrageously weak competitions (Sydney, Brisbane), and clubs whose players are scattered amongst clubs in the second tier leagues (West Coast, Port Adelaide). Without a scientific study, that's pretty strong evidence that it doesn't make that much difference how the "second tier" competitions are set up.

World first: WYL contradicts himself. I've never known a person who forgets his own argument so much. It's pretty comical.

One year, though. It'd be nice to have a midfielder that was "a gun", rather than "a gun once".

Look up the threads, and have a look at whose side of the fence Nasher (to use rpfc's trick of self-referral in third person), nutbean and others were on. I want my credit for being part of the sucker club! Though I wouldn't say I "believed" him per se, more like giving him the benefit of the considerable doubt, which may or may not amount to the same thing.

And since then, absolutely nothing else whatsoever has changed of course other than Royal becoming the midfield coach.

Gah. Read the thread and was going to post exactly this. Thunder stealer! A million times Like.

Are Casey going broke?

He means he'll be shown the door. It sounds like awareness of where he is at, rather than a threat.

I agree drdrake. In the absense of a proper reserves competition this is the best we're going to get. There's no other viable solutions that actually address the issues that exist.

I'm not against the idea of alignment in general, but it's a pain when the VFL side isn't playing when it's crucial to get miles in legs for whatever reason. But what's the answer? I don't see how having a standalone VFL side makes any difference to that; we're still going to be subject to the same draws, byes, weeks off and so forth. And we can forget the idea of there ever being an AFL reserves competition, with a national competition and lists that are too small to field two teams, you'd need to have amateur "supplimentary" players, and it's too much to ask of them to travel interstate to play footy every few weeks. It wouldn't work. The idea of a reserves side is romantic but I expect that the reason we haven't got one is because it doesn't actually really help that much. It'd just be extra money down the drain for nothing.

Spot on I reckon Mark. I was a teenager during the merger years and wasn't a member so I had no involvement, and expect that if it were happening now I'd vote "no", but I can fully appreciate why people would vote "yes" if they felt that death was the only alternative. It was a very extreme situation and it's completely understandable that it polarises people, but slamming the "yes" voters is absolutely not on IMO. I can't imagine that any of the members who voted on either side had anything but what they believed was the club's best interest at heart. Those who were administering propanga is another story, but I have no qualification to comment on that. I'm only talking of the "rank and file" members.

All three promoted players will be eligible all year, i.e. Magner, Couch and Nicholson. One on the "everyone can nominate one rookie regardless of anything" rule, one on the "clubs can nominate one rookie for each vacancy they have on the veterans list" rule (we only have one vet [Green] out of two = 1 promoted rookie), and one on the long term injury of Max Gawn who won't be back this year.

I guess the test didn't go well, then.

Threads like these show a complete lack of understanding about how trading in the AFL works.

Season over?

I tend to agree, which is probably part of the reason why I was never a fan of the mega-thread nature of the LR. I've seen how this looks on Punt Road End when it goes on for years and it's awful. Once the topic goes stale and people stop posting in I'm okay with that topic being done and dusted. I only object when people start a new thread when there's a recent and obvious one they could use, and that's when they get "moderated".

I was only half-serious about that. I wasn't a fan of the LR but canning it wasn't my idea and it was the general consensus of the admin group, not just the opinion of one person. I did think it was an idea worth trying.

The fortunate thing about running a site is that you get to act on your own personal bias at times

What's better, 5 threads discussing it, or one thread discussing it 5 times over?

Hi, After a trial of the "locker room" forum, we've decided it didn't work as well as we thought and have decided to abandon it. Player talk can go back in the "main" forum as before. Please note that if you start new threads when there are clearly existing threads (especially on the first page!) that you could use, you'll still find your topics being merged with existing ones. Cheers

Unbelievable as it may be to you, there are many around here who do seek intelligent footy discussion and not lame attempts at humour. Personally I like both, but there has to be balance. When the low brow stuff takes over it just becomes seriously tedious.