1858

Thanks for the memories Kelvin.

That's interesting. Do you know if such a commitment exists with Nicholson?

Neeld mentioned the extra value in a player like Magner when we first got him in that he is a great player to have at training for the younger players. Obviously this is not the sole consideration but it is a consideration on top of his playing ability.

It's official (although most would have assumed). There will be no Priority Picks allocated in the 2012 national draft. No draft bonus for Suns

I think he probably will be upgraded but have they abolished the 3rd year rookie option? I was under the impression that it would be 6 rookies and 40 on the senior list regardless of the number of vets or has this not been confirmed?

What's the go with the senior list changes next year? I thought with the adjustment to the VL rules next year (ie $100k per veteran of 10 yrs or more senior service and unlimited veterans) that senior list sizes will be adjusted to 40 from 38 or will they stay at 38?

GC & GWS are the only 2 clubs who could come close to a 1st round PP performance wise you'd think but I doubt the AFL would give them considering they are starter clubs and were always going to struggle in the formative years. Based on that I doubt there will be any 1st round PPs given this year. The new system:

Yep, 3rd or 4th this year won't be the same as the last few years if WCE and Adelaide maintain their form throughout. Sheedy must have referred to them as the "mighty bombers" 2 or 3 times at least last week in the media so nice to shove it up him as well.

Thanks, just had a listen. A fair question by Healy I think given the number of other clubs signing up their kids. McLardy handled himself well though I thought.

What exactly was said here?

Have it out with Sando then as he is the professional in charge of the Crows who made the statement.

After their win over Carlton Sanderson noted how good the general skills were of the group and put that down in no small part to Craig.

ok sounds fair, so in the context of Jamar, you are more or less saying we should match the highest genuine offer made to him no matter what it is (as by definition that is the "market value")? You previously proposed that we offer Jamar market value to keep him.

ah ok, thanks. Similar to the PP system by the sounds of it.

Has the AFL released the f/a compensation system details yet or at least hinted when they will?

Will dictate what? If we offer a player package A and an opposition club offers him a better package B (as a UFA) which package is aligned to market value?

Entirely predictable that the AFL takes this stance. In any case until we know what PPs will be handed out at the discretion of the AFL and what our final picks will be it is hard to measure the overs/unders on bidding our 1st rounder for JV.

Parallax error.

A valid question. I'm not trying to justify this approach, just thought it was the case - hopefully I'm wrong. wrt FA compo picks that is a seperate system which theoretically will run into perpetuity (until the AFL change their minds) so all teams will probably just have to cop it.

I was also under that impression. The AFL didn't want to compromise their compromise (of the draft) so to speak when dishing out picks to GWS last year and GC the year before that.

Yeah, fair enough it could turn into a comedy of errors. F/S bidding is before trade week. The mini-draft is at the end of trade week.

Not sure why you said this as I was supporting your original point but yes this is also true.

I think it is also fair to say that at the time the club made that deal they would have projected us to be performing much better in 2012 than a possible 16th. At the time they probably thought a potential bargain was in store down the track (knowing the development they were about to put into Jack).

We also need to acknowledge that if we did end up 16th (and assuming no dodgy 1st round PPs are handed out) it will essentially be our pick 4 that we use on Viney not our pick 3 due to the fact we have consecutive picks. It's a minor point but when we talk of "paying overs" for a player possibly in the 5-10 range it gives some perspective. Obviously using our 2nd rounder is highly preferential but it is our pick 4 not our pick 3 on the line here.

I'm just saying, if the only reason that GWS don't bid on JV is due to some trade we have with them (either direct or indirect) and the AFL views it as such then they won't approve. Sure they may not be able to prove anything and they may not be able to stop a completely legal trade but they still may take action or they could be a headache down the track as a result.