sue

I'd guess that a number of banned players will get together to train and even hire a few support staff (with money coming from unidentifiable sources). I'm sure that will happen for the blokes at EFC and maybe they'll welcome an old mate Melksam to join them. Those at Port may have to form a smaller group.

On the contrary, if a player is on another team he risks meeting Viney maybe twice a year. Watts has to face the prospect of being tackled at training several times a week.

Before the draft many posters were saying the club must have had a player in mind when manoeuvering to get the #3. Has the club said that CO was part of the plan, or did we just #3 regardless?

I've now watched most of the Vic metro v country and I still didn't see that Parish was much good. Didn't seem to get into the game. If we do pick him someone please tell me that that match was unusual.

I've no idea if Parish is the bee's knees and am happy to assume he is from the enthusiasm displayed here. But after viewing some of that match I'm convinced of one thing - take no notice of highlight reels. I watched most of the last quarter and got the impression Parish was nothing special. While he got the ball a bit, almost every time he got the ball he kicked it forward wildly and some of his handpasses were B-grade. Did I miss something? Fortunately the recruiters, and I presume even posters here, do more than look at the odd quarter.

Ture, sensible postings were difficult to find amongs the volume of complaints that the club wasn't being tough enough. But they were there - they just didn't use jargon labels (copyrighted by Harvard) to attach to the concepts.

O good grief. Just the pedantry I was referring to. BTW, it you buy 100 tickets in a lottery, is it not a lottery to you because your odds are better than the bloke who has only bought one ticket.

Can't even say that. After all, we all know the draft is a lottery (even if we pedantically argue about the obvious point that the probabilities in the lottery are weighted in favour of early picks.)

Good to see they teach the bleeding obvious at Harvard. Presumably they teach some other stuff to justify the large fees.

My point was that EFC blabbed it, not MFC. My reference to scraps was not to that statement which as you say was categoric. It was to the other speculative stuff we've been drowned in for the last 2 weeks.

And its our fault he said that? Still building castles on scraps of information and the mis-information that is dribbled out by partiesas it suits their cause.

Still amazed how many posters are privy to so much inside information to form these black and white judgements.

Amusing to reflect on how much positivity is expressed when we nominate 18 year-old "Johnny Hasn't-Played-an-AFL-game" as an early pick in the lottery of the draft, yet how much negativity is being expressed about this bloke. Let's wait and see.

never saw a game more in need of clash jumpers

agree - too many kicks to oppo's advantage and handballs that didn't quite hit the target - there must be other reasons why Petracca is rated so highly. I'm always suspicious of these clips but you'd expect them to make a player look better than he really is usually.

The argument has no real merit. Under your reasoning the only club which would ever 'deserve' a PP is one where half the players were killed in a airplane accident. (Even then someone would argue the club's at fault - they should have gone by bus.) In all other cases, if you are crap, it is because you had some form of bad management. Therefore it would be argued they don't deserve a PP. There is a whiff of the Victorian-era attitude about only helping what they saw as the deserving poor.

How predictable. You and another poster or two miss my point. I don't like threads about drafting Cloke, so I don't read them. But I know what they are about because they (usually) have a meaningful title. What about starting a thread entitled "Not the Not Tom $cully Thread" - we could put all sorts of meaningful stuff in there. Ah well, back to ignoring this thread for me. I guess I'll just have to die wondering if there was something interesting in here to read. Bye.

I expect those who read and post in this thread enjoy it, but perhaps there are many like me who don't read it because it no longer has a clear purpose and title. As a result many of us will be missing out on whatever pearls of wisdom are posted. The thread was created as a reaction to the endless discussion of $cully on other threads. That has dwindled to a trickle calculating how many thousands of dollars he is getting per kick (snigger). So at he risk of having my head kicked in, and hear the obvious responses of "ignore it if you don't like it" etc., can I suggest perhaps it is time to close the thread?