Golgothan

Ha, i only just noticed this. So you think the best part of Dale Thomas is his "homosexual aura"? Everybody is entitled to their own opinion i guess

Great info mate. Obviously my source was on the money with O'Sullivan. He's definitely not a KP player, plays off a wing and he's 186cm & 80kg. I don't know much about White. But your TAC facts are a little off on O'Sullivan, he played 6 TAC cup matches with averages of 10 kicks & 9 handballs a game and he was in the best twice, one of those BOG. Those stats you got are from his 2 '07 games

Not sure about that, but from the AFL website this is what they get. Round One 1 GC17 2 GC17 3 GC17 4 Club 16 on 2010 ladder 5 GC17 6 Club 15 on 2010 ladder 7 GC17 8 Club 14 on 2010 ladder 9 GC17 10 Club 13 on 2010 ladder 11 GC17 12 Club 12 on 2010 ladder 13 GC17 14 Club 11 on 2010 ladder 15 GC17 16 Club 10 on 2010 ladder 17 Club 9 on 2010 ladder 18 Club 8 on 2010 ladder 19 Club 7 on 2010 ladder 20 Club 6 on 2010 ladder 21 Club 5 on 2010 ladder 22 Club 4 on 2010 ladder 23 Club 3 on 2010 ladder 24 Club 2 on 2010 ladder 25 Club 1 on 2010 ladder Round Two 26 GC17 27 Club 16 on 2010 ladder 28 Club 15 on 2010 ladder 29 Club 14 on 2010 ladder 30 Club 13 on 2010 ladder 31 Club 12 on 2010 ladder 32 Club 11 on 2010 ladder 33 Club 10 on 2010 ladder 34 Club 9 on 2010 ladder 35 Club 8 on 2010 ladder 36 Club 7 on 2010 ladder 37 Club 6 on 2010 ladder 38 Club 5 on 2010 ladder 39 Club 4 on 2010 ladder 40 Club 3 on 2010 ladder 41 Club 2 on 2010 ladder 42 Club 1 on 2010 ladder And from the 3rd round onwards in just copies the 2nd round. It is a lot to give them, but without actually forcing them to do so i believe the AFL expect them to trade about 1/2 of the picks. So instead of 9 top 15 picks, they have 4 or 5 & a few older players. From that you can't expect all of there players to make it, but of there top 3, they could get cooney, walker & Sylvia or they could get hodge, ball & judd. No one knows, but there's no point crying about it, just be glad that we should be improving then instead of a club that's bottoming out and not getting the picks to replenish there list.

Yes it was, there is also a full team lists available on the AFL website. You might notice on the team lists that some teams are allowed more rookies then others, this is due to not having veterans, zonal rookies for sydney & brisbane, etc. Rhodes Scholar's will struggle to find reasoning with these lists. Team Lists here I've also heard that we've got Sam O'Sullivan from Oakleigh Chargers/Xavier College training with us. He mainly has played on a wing, has above average skills and some pace, does very well at clearances. Didn't play much TAC this year due to commitments with Xavier, but got in the best twice from 6 games. Wouldn't be first on my list, but he's one who hasn't been sighted much unless you get down to watch school footy, they might see something in him as a rookie pick.

You don't know much, but you don't mind giving an opinion? Butcher wouldn't be No.1 in everyone's eyes if it was held right now, i'd say it is quite similar to 12 months ago with Rich & Naitanui when many people favoured Rich. I'd personally have Scully at No.1 I wouldn't look too much into it though, Naitanui, Rich & Hurley were a lock for top 3 12 months ago and look how that went. And a young blonde kid from Sandringham barely even rated a mention.

They are different players, but Jetta is not limited to playing off half back. He played back, forward & midfield in the u18 champs and has played forward, middle & back playing colts. I would imagine that Jetta would at very least start in a half forward type role, which is one of the roles Davey plays & a role that Wona may play next year if he has increased his fitness. Cyril Rioli (i know different type of player again) is seen as a future midfielder at Hawthorn, but rarely played there this year. There may be room for all of them in the team in time, but i believe that early Jetta will start forward, which would mean putting pressure on Wona & Davey

This isn't a round 1 best 22, it's an '09. Aussie, Martin & Morton (Maric at a stretch) who had zero games before last season were best 22 last year and from what Grimes showed he wasn't far away and i'd expect him to play most games this year. So to me Grimes is almost a given. So that's 4 untried players which may still be a little much considering 2 have school still, but i could see Strauss & one of Watts or Blease being best 22 players, but maybe the mature Bail is a better option for the bench then Bennell. It's optimistic, but hardly a huge stretch.

As said, there are a few guys a few guys on BF who know there stuff. A couple of them have stuff to do with TAC cups and see games every week, so they know there stuff pretty well. It's a bit harder to pick out the players this year, last year from the u16 champs you could see this years bottom aged players like Sidebottom & Ziebell were going to be right up there, but now all of those kids will have to do 2 years because they've updated the draft age. There's the 3 main one's Butcher, Scully & Lucas, but everyone has commented on them, I'd probably rate Scully just ahead of Lucas but not by a lot. Morabito is the standout KP defender at this stage, but also can play forward. Koby Stevens from Gippsland Power is another gun midfielder in the Judd mold, 6'2, quick and powerful, really looking forward to watching him next year. Luke Tapscot from SA is a small forward/mid who kicks plenty of goals, really solid for such a young kid. Ryan Bastinac from Stringrays is a promising mid, he plays with Scully at Stringrays but they'll play against each other at the u18 champs as the Stingrays have been re-zoned for u18 champs, but Scully has been allowed an exemption to play with Metro. There also Mitch Marsh from WA, son of geoff & brother of shaun, who surprise surprise is a brilliant junior cricketer. Said to be a better crickter, but still a very good junior footballer, plays CHF. If '09 was too early then i might be going a little far, but a few other names to keep an eye on, with many likely to end up at GC are the 2010 class. Look for WA to be strong with players like Jack Darling, Swallow (brother of Andrew from Kangas) and Wally Matera's son who can kick a goal from anywhere. Vic players Toy (won the larke equivilent in u16 champs, a strong bodied midfielder), Libba's boy who plays similar but with more polish. Maverick Weller from Tassie is very impressive, gun midfielder.

I doubt it, Miller left Mt Gravatt at 18 and Bail would've only have been 12 or 13 y.o. I also read in an article about him being drafted that he only joined Mt Gravatt recently, he hasn't always played there.

I've never heard a firm date that he won't be ready by like that, but Bailey has said he's the only one who will still be recovering and will be unavailable round 1. From that you'd think he'd be missing for at very least another 4-5 weeks. Whatever it is i wouldn't be including him for round 1 at this stage. Yeah i see Bate as an important player for us, either as a foil for a quality defender or as the bloke to step up when our KP players are being beaten, our Bradshaw to Lynch & Brown. I really think that Bail should be pretty close to the starting 22 in round 1. He's been playing AFLQ and has done very well there, so why pick up a 20 y.o. if he's not very close to being at AFL level? I expect him to play probably the most of any draftee next year, unless he struggles for form. Jetta is the other one with exposure to playing against men and he will hopefully put early pressure on Wona & Davey to perform. Of our top midfield picks, Strauss has a much more mature body then Blease & he'll also not have to worry about school, i'd hope that he could play 10-15 games and he'd be the one i'd be including earliest in the year.

He doesn't gather a massive amount of possessions, but he hurts the opposition every time he gets it, the sort of player that only needs 15 touches to get in the best. Actually the final u18 game against WA was a good example of this, he had less then 20 touches but was one of the better players on the day. Loves a tackle, i think he understands that because he's so quick he can run done lots of blokes and does so.

Obviously sarcasm isn't your strong point along with optimism. If you'd picked it up, i pointed out Coughlan because he's an exception, to show that using Sylvia was a poor example. It's a pointless argument in reality as whatever anyone thinks is true, we won't really know one way or the other until we see him perform.

Carl?

It's due to the nature of an abdominal tear. If you know much about weight training & working out, you always get told to do ab workouts last because it's pretty much the most frequently used muscles, so you use it in some way doing most other exercises and if you work it out first you'll find it harder to do everything else. What this mean is they need to take a softly, softly approach to strengthening his abdominal muscles as anything he does as far as fitness goes will use these muscles. It's all just about gradually doing more & more and over time he'll build back the strength. Also, Bailey didn't say he wouldn't play Round 1 just that he might not. I guess we won't really know how he's going until they can see how far he's come along and if he can complete in practice matches, etc.

If you followed these things as throughly as you say you'd realise that Sylvia's condition was largely about them not knowing how to treat it and that he's started using abdominal strapping which has finally allowed him to return to full fitness, he's an exception and a poor example. I don't disagree that OP is more of a varying injury, but do you want to go tell Mark Coughlan that an ACL is a standard injury with a formalised path to full recovery? I'm not assuming that he will not be carrying more reoccurring injuries, as many players play their whole careers with one niggle or another, it was more a hopeful statement, most people might recognise this as optimism. As far as i am aware Rivers is in a long-term recovery program which is designed to help him recover from his unique injury of an abdominal tear, which is a delicate injury and needs time to gradually rebuild the strength, but that OP is not currently restricting him. Do you know something that i don't about him still suffering from OP? Or are you just taking a typically glass half empty (or glass smashed into 6 billion pieces and the water slowly evaporating) approach, how shocking coming from you RR.

There are always there and it's regularly the same few.... I agree with you totally, Rivers has more runs on the board as our other defenders Garland, Warnock, Martin have all only had a single year (or less in some cases) in the role, one good/decent/gallant season does not maketh a quality KP defender. That's not saying i don't have faith, but i'm realistic that they've still got a bit to prove before being at Rivers level. People who say he's spent too long out of the game, despite only playing a few games this year Rivers showed that he can still compete and conquer the best. Have you all forgotten that Brisbane game (where Jonesy kicked 4) where we got smashed, but Rivers kept Brown to 11 touches & 2 goals in a 50+ point smashing where Bradshaw kicked 6. So you don't believe anything that is reported from the club do you? Because i'm sure that i've heard the club say he's passed the worst of his OP and that it wasn't such a big issue this year. The issue he's had this year are from the torn abdominal muscles and not much to do with OP. Plenty of players have had and overcome OP, like Judd & Hodge, so why couldn't Rivers do the same? From the reports that have come straight from Baileys mouth, if Rivers is doing weight exercises then he seems to be recovering well from the abdominal issues, so once he gets back to full fitness in about 6 months he shouldn't be carrying reoccuring injuries like in previous years. So i see no reason why he couldn't return to his best form or even get better, because i think at his best he could be an AA defender.

I don't think there's much of a chance at all they take Rich, but if they do then it changes things. But all my opinions were based on them taking Naitanui. Tall KPF may be a priority for us this year, but they are not our only need. What i mean by this is we shouldn't take a lesser KPF with a high pick just because it's a priority and pass up someone who we might consider a better player but who's not KP. I have faith that Melbourne will improve going forward, but i'm realistic and know that we've got a lot more issues then just Key forwards. And that risk has to build part of how highly we rate Swift. Without the injuries he'd most likely be top 10, so the concerns are why he'd slip, but if we're confident that he's recovered well then we should take him if he's rated higher then the other players available then. He's not the only player who's had an injury in this draft, a few other 1st round chances who've had series injuries are Trengove, Vickery and Lynch. Swift was just an example anyway, i still want us to take Blease or Ash Smith over talls if they were available at 17. I'm not sure about best friends but i've certainly heard before that Cale & Swift are good friends. I think by "now" he's mean since he's updated his phantom & has Lynch going before Melbourne's pick, that shortens the odds on Swift if he's available

And i'm even more certain that WC will take Swift at 18 if he's available. Statements like that are just plain stupid, sorry to sound mean but that's what they are. If we rate Swift higher but take that risk that we can get him at 19 because we think "we have to go tall with pick 1 & 17" and then WC take him at 18, we have the stupidest recruiting team in the league. That sort of decision would rate up there with freo's trading record. So in response to you statement (if we are to take a mid at either 17 or 19), i think that we almost have to take the mid at 17. It's widely know that WC have good, young KP stocks and want mids, so if they take Naitanui they'll be most likely looking to get 2 mids at 18 & 20. So using that logic we should take a mid at 17 & whatever tall we're after will still be available at 19 because WC will have gone small.

Forgetting Vickery are we? But he'll be gone as well. Burgen say lots of things, doesn't mean it'll come true. He might know were interested in a few ruckman & he's put 2 & 2 together and got 22. Everything out of the club has been that we'll go best available at 19, obviously position has some consideration but even taking into account that we need a ruckman, we still need mids and i don't think Roughead would be that high on our list.

Did you have any reason other then that you think we'll pick a ruckman then to think we'll take Roughead at 19? If not, you are calling something a "certainty" based on a coincidence of opinion between you and Burgen? Have a look just how many players Burgen listed as options for us at pick 17. Count them all, there's 12. That's a lot of players, almost twice as many as listed possibles for the 16 picks prior. Translation, Burgen haqs NFI and he's covering all bases by casting a wide net.

186cm is a medium forward, the smaller side of medium, but still. Medium is more about the way a player plays the game, a non-KP marking player is often called a medium forward. You'd call Mark Williams from Hawthorn a medium forward, despite him only being 180cm. As for the Key Forward remark, i can't totally agree with that either. Fevola is the best genuine FF in the game and he's only 191cm, Lynch is almost 192cm and could stil grow a little. But to be a Key position player, you have to command the position and to me Lynch just doesn't do that. Maybe he will, but at this stage i haven't seen it and i have doubts about him being a KP player at AFL level. While there is a trend towards taller players, i wouldn't write a KP player off just because he's not as tall as Franklin or Ryder, if he's got other skills then he can still make it. But in saying all of that i have doubts about Lynch and he's not a high priority for me. But that's the 2nd Phantom that has him going to us, the other being the HS phantom from the other day. (But in saying that other then the obvious ones the HS picks were pretty average). I rate Neville as a much better player then Leroy. Some people have hopes of Nev going into the middle, he much more versatile then Leroy who is more of a forward pocket, so he could turn out to be a jet of winger for us. If that's the theory behind picking him then it could be a good move

Yeah fair enough, guess the order is the best thing to look at as opposed to the actual selections. I'll say one thing, based on this draft Barry is one tight lipped SOB, because (hopefully) burgen has got nothing out of him. I won't dislike the players we take and i think Roughead and Lynch could both be good players, but i might be disappointed for a while at the players we overlooked. If they win brownlows or Colemans, or even BnF and club goalkicking awards, then i'll eat my words. At least he has players i would like in the mix for us. If he'd given us Watts, then WC's 18 & 20 (Swift & Schoenmakers) and then Redden at 35 and i think i would've called for them to just call out Burgen's draft on Saturday!

Another thing, he has us rating all these players at 17, yet we take Roughead at 19 even though we could've got Redden who we also liked at 17 for pick 35? I know the clubs don't know where players will get drafted after our pick, but if we did that it would've been a really poor choice. You'd think that we could use the logic that if we let Roughead slip by that one of him or Redden will last to 35 and we can pick another mid or KP forward we were interested in? I also think that Burgen is using the fact that Lynch trained with us as part of his AIS scholarship too heavily, just because they've got to know him a little better doesn't mean we'll take him.

Not bad Shaft? I think it's putrid. We overlook Swift for Lynch??? And then following that we overlook Schoenmakers for Roughead? Poor form Burgen Go through the rest of the draft, we don't pick a single genuine midfielder, the closest we get is Walters who is very short and there are question marks on him being a midfielder at AFL level. So basically we end up with Watts, another KP forward, ruckman, a medium forward & 2 small forwards. I would not be pleased with that.

I'm pretty sure the same thing happened last year with Essendon's 2nd pick, they were just about the only club not to talk to him and then he got a major shock when they called out his name.