Dr. Gonzo

I agree it should be on them but the fact is there's no way we can afford to lose one let alone all of them.

IF (thats IF) we lose Frawley, Sylvia, Watts & Davey retires/leaves or signs a much smaller contract how in blue hell are we going to meet the minimum salary cap requirements next year?? And don't say we'll poach players from other clubs (Dale Thomas) because there is no chance in hell he would want to come especially when other clubs (eg GWS) could offer him the same amount of money we could to play in a rubbish team albeit they have a rosy future. Pedersen will think he's hit the jackpot as we'll have to restructure his contract to pay him $600K/year just to meet the 95%. This is my fear about Neeld. Losing the games, losing members etc I can cop to give him a bit more time to see if he can coach but if we are going to leak all our senior/best players because of him and have to field a VFL side next year he's gotta go now. Losing the players is what will hurt the club, members and sponsors will always return when we start winning but losing the players will mean we are just another 3-5 years bckwards from where we are today. The person who mentioned Fitzroy losing Lynch, Roos, Pert, Osborne etc hit the nail on the head.

Where's Collingwoods social club? At the Lexus Centre? I don't buy it this isn't the 60's/70's anymore who would even go if we had one anyway? Far more important things to worry about.

Eltham College or Eltham High? Gee it's lucky we didn't end up with him, we all know Geelong only picks up one dimensional spuds.

So you saw a 2nd year player with only 25 games experience playing in the 17th side twice on TV and once in the flesh and are prepared to write him off completely as ever being able to be a decent player in the future? I am assuming one of those games you watched on TV was not the game against the Cats?

Yeah I don't get the Tebow move either especially if he's just gonna sit on the bench for all but about 4 snaps like he did last week. I'd love to see him in a different position like the RB where he can use his strengths to his advantage. Would keep opposition on their toes as well as they wouldn't know if be was going to be passing or running. Not all that confident against Miami but thinking we should be narrow favourites. They did touch us up in week 17 last year when Holmes cracked it in the huddle so who knows hoping for a win though because after that we have a tough 4-5 week stretch that includes both the Texans & 49ers though they are at home.

Got a 10 leg multi on Monday mornings games - for a $5 outlay looking at a $2700 return if it gets up. Left out my Jets because they're as schizophrenic as Melbourne were under Daniher so not a good team to bet on. Looking forward to Pats/Ravens and seeing how the Jets back up from last weeks debacle against Pitt. Loving RGIII at the moment though with those injuries last week and the fact theyre in a pretty tough division could make it difficult for them to get a playoff spot. Will be keeping an eye on them though.

Not better than Jones - Jones showed this year he is one of the most consistent midfielders in the comp, he can win his own ball, disposal has improved and he can kick goals. Vast improvement from where he started where he tried to bullock through everyone like a rugby player. Caddy would sit comfortably in our starting midfield though I feel. Better than Moloney and actually reminds me of a younger version of Sylvia though without the "off-field" issues. Is a strong player who can find his own ball and can hit the scoreboard. Haven't seen enough of him to really comment on his defensive side but I don't think there's much doubt he would make a better option than some of our starting 22 this year.

Well he was injured pretty much his entire first season. No-one is suggesting he will be a franchise player, but can he be a good 10-year midfielder who can kick goals and win his own ball? Absolutely.

He has proven he can play midfield in the AFL in a crap team against significantly better opposition most weeks. He has proven he has the body to match it with more senior players. And most importantly he has proven he can kick multiple goals a game, something which none of our midfielders bar maybe Jones is capable of to date. Is he Gary Ablett Jr.? No, and he's not even Nathan Jones, but getting him at pick 13 would be about right. It probably won't be enough though as I have a feeling either Carlton, Richmond or Saints will offer a pick just before ours and Geelong will also offer their inactive compo pick, something which is of worth to the Suns considering they have to downsize their list this year so they can bank the pick for next year.

Pretty harsh when it was spelt out in the post above he's been coming to terms with the aftermath of losing his father. Pretty rough on a kid forced to move interstate at the age of 17 and leave his grieving family behind.

Not if Melbourne, Richmond, Carlton or St. Kilda are willing to offer their first round picks. There is no doubt Essendon want him but they have nothing to trade so it is unlikely they'll get him. A hypothetical 3-way trade could occur with Geelong offering up picks, Tippett going to GC and Caddy to Geelong. Still think we should go hard for him though.

But that's what I'm saying. If he was rated a pick 7 two years ago then how can we make the assumption the player rated as pick 13 this year is going to be a much better prospect. Caddy hasn't dominated games but he has had a couple of very good games playing in a very poor side. He is also the exact type of player we need and has a couple of years in the system something a potential pick 13 would not. Would I rather get Bennell or Swallow from GC? Of course but theyre not on the market and if they were it would cost much more than pick 13.

Caddy is a big bodied midfielder who has decent pace and a decent tank with good disposal and can hit the scoreboard. Would definitely take him for Martin or pick 13 & Bail. If we baulk at getting him because we don't want to get rid of Bail I would be extremely [censored] off with the club it would be another massive blunder. I think people overrate draft picks, a lesson I would have thought we'd have learnt of recent times. Caddy went pick 7 two years ago and has had a couple of good games - there is nothing to indicate pick 13 this year is going to be a vastly better player and Caddy already has two years in the system. If its one thing our club is crying out for it is midfielders who can kick goals. Jones is currently our only one (but not multiple goals a game) and hopefully Trengove will get there too. Caddy can kick multiple goals a game which is something we could sorely use.

No I think you misread my post or I was unclear - I just said people who wanted to vote were locked out and unable to, I didn't make any guesses as to their intention.

There were members not allowed in who wanted to vote and there were also "proxy" memberships bought up by wealthy Melbourne supporters and used to vote for the merger. If Hawthorn voted for the merger they would have faced a lengthy court challenge to get the new team up.

Does anyone have any video or audio footage of stuff from around the time of the proposed merger? I know there is a Hawks supporter on BF who has a collection of news clippings/video reports etc about Hawthorn as well as the pro-mergerpamphlet which I have downloaded somewhere. I have the merger match downloaded but would like to get my hands on any news reports, interviews, footage from the Dallas Brooks Hall/Camberwell Civic Centre etc as I have always thought about trying to make a documentary on the proposed merger someday. If anyone has any footage PM me I have tonnes of games on VHS/DVD that I can trade for. The only footage I have seen from the nights of the votes is just snippets shown on TV at the time and the brief footage shown on That Was The Season That Was 1996.

This is an ugly period in our history but it was now 16 years ago - hopefully we can all acknowledge that both sides were trying to do what they thought was right for the MFC and move forward as a united club as we all know the club needs all the support it can get.

Yeah anyone who thinks we would have just absorbed the Hawks players and changed back to the red & blue Demons after 5 years would have been in for a rude shock. It would have ended in legal battles that would have shattered the already politically fractured new club. The old Fitzroy crew took Brisbane to court just because they wanted to change the kind of Lion they had on the jumper, do you really think the Hawthorn component would have just let us change back to the Demons and get rid of the yellow? Not to mention our entire history would have been wiped (go and check how many flags are recorded in the history books for the Bribane Lions).

Oh please, if a player can't cop a spray from a coach we might as well just all give up. He is a paid professional athlete getting paid very good money to run around and kick a ball. He's not a primary school kid FFS.

I was only 14 at the time but can remember reading the papers about it as well watching the voting meetings on Talking Footy or whatever it was. There may have been vitriol shown but they were trying to destroy our club so of course people were emotional. Would love to see footage from that night if available (from both Camberwell Civic Centre & Dallas Brooks Hall) as well as news clips from the time - would make an interesting doco (in the style of 30 for 30) particularly considering the Merger Match in R22.

TD didn't hijack the thread, the thread had already evolved into a general discussion on drugs, their impact on society and how society deals with the drug question. The thread is about a former champion player addicted to drugs who has now been arrested. TD's post is well within those parameters.

It also reduces the amount of violent crime, by the users to fund their habit and by the pushers to maintain their turf. The problem is while certain governments are able to fund their covert wars through black budgets funded in part by the illicit drug trade there is no hope of decriminalisation on a large scale. It is also an extremely convenient method of depriving people of their civil rights on the basis of labelling them a "suspected drug user". The thing with keeping all "recreational" drugs prohibited is that humanity is also deprived of the many benefits that some of these substances could provide. Marijuana has so many benefits that are well documented that it is a crime to keep it illegal. The fact that research into other drugs such as psilocybin, LSD & MDMA is halted by the criminalisation of them has probably put psychiatry back decades. I am convinced that the guided and educated use of hallucinogens can help people with addictions or other minor mental "illnesses" (for lack of a better word) far better than current psychology/psychiatry and the drugs they peddle on behalf of companies like Pfizer which are far more dangerous and addictive than many prohibited substances.

It wouldn't surprise me if most of these drugs are developed by US intelligence/military related industries - they already feed their pilots (and probably other armed forces) "dextroamphetamine" i.e. speed to enable them to perform long missions at optimum level. Diet pills are also basically "speed" which suppresses a persons appetite. Drugs are everywhere and I agree that the issue needs to be addressed in an intelligent way rather than just illegal bad, legal good manner. I think what is being fed to us in our food and what is prescribed by GP's/psych's is of far greater importance, particularly when people either don't know what they are consuming or are relying on someone else's "expertise" to make the decisions for them.

Yeah I understand that and I'm not having a go at you, just using this as an example. Many kids are exposed to drugs by the age of 14-15 and are just as ill informed about making a decision. I know there were some kids in my school who had tried marijuana before they had even finished primary school. The problem is around education I agree but even that counts for nought sometimes when confronted by your peers and the invincibility of youth. Just saying drugs are bad and shouldn't be touched is counter-productive because once a kid tries marijuana at the age of 14 or 15 and realises there isn't much wrong with it and they are not going to die it increases the chances they will then try something a bit "harder" because they think, well if I was lied to about this drug they're probably lying about all drugs.