The Chazz

This is the bit that I'm struggling to understand. Should a player contract the virus, the competition will shut down for 2 weeks. The club of said player realistically will be placed in to isolation, meaning they can't train in that time (especially as a team). Are they expecting to just resume to full transmission as normal at the end of the fortnight? Can't happen.

I'm glad you saw what I did there... I'd compare his feet to that of a wet tissue.

Good news, should be back for Round 6.

Voted "Yes". How could you not want to see Norf [censored] off with us for giving them Pick 18 in a compromised draft?

DL, what's with the posting of a tweet or whatever, then copying & pasting the words as a separate statement, even though it's the same? Just curious.

Why wouldn't they be televised? Have I missed something?

I say the time will be right if one, any or all can prove to be high quality junior footballers, not because their dad played for us. If they are average juniors, then I have zero interest in them.

And if Gawn doesn't have a brilliant year, we can only finish 17th or 18th because there's no lower you can finish. We would be just worse and win less games. You are seriously underestimating the role of a ruckman. Slobbo has 2 rucks in his top 10. Most top 8 sides would kill for a quality ruck. You are embarrassing yourself.

Ah yes, I was waiting for that Carlton game. Yes, Gawn didn't play, but guess what, the "irrelevant" ruckman on that day, Preuss, had 40+ hitouts. When a ruckman dominates, players like McDonald (ie a key forward) should be of value, that's their job. Gawn is a consistently dominant ruck, which is why he's by far our most valuable player. Justone last thing, if you're going to come back at me with specific games, how's about you do it with games that are against top sides, not insignificant nothings. Cheers, "mate".

It tells me that Tom needed to pull his finger out last year. It also tells me that if Gawn doesn't play fantastic that the damage would've been worse. Tom's an important link in the chain, but that chain has minimal impact if Gawn (or our ruck in general) isn't playing well at the start of it. All that said, you haven't actually declared your alliance as to who our MVP is, so I'm going to stop disagreeing with someone that is just out to try and argue against someone for the sake of it.

18 goals from 15 games, including a bag of 6, in a team that is 5th for inside 50s. I'd say Tom's value is dependent on the performance of players further up the field. I just thank God that Max had the year he did, and that the Gold Coast are in the league. 2019 would've been a whole new level of [censored] had it not been for those two factors.

You've actually proven my point. Max is more valuable than Tom. Thanks.

TMc's dominance (kicking goals) is only as good as the delivery in to him. The delivery in to him is only as good as the time given to the mids/half forwards to hit a target. The time given to the mids/half forwards is only as good as the dominance around the clearances. The dominance around the clearances is only as good as a dominant ruck. We get the ruck right, we generally dominate, and Tom is on the end of that. Our game style is structured around that, yet some people are saying that Max isn't our most important player. Sheesh.

Absolutely. Read my post above for a better explanation of why I think Max is by far our MVP.

So because TMc can play multiple positions and Gawn can't, that means TMc is more valuable? Point is, we can move Tom out of FF, and still have other scoring options. Yes, Tom can be an adequate replacement in defence, he's too slow to be an an adequate replacement for Langdon or Tomlinson on the wing. His ruck work is competitive at best. Gawn's importance is in two key areas for mine. Our midfield rely on him feeding them - they aren't very good at sharking an opposition ruck. Their dominance, which can be quite a strength, relies on Max winning the ruck contest. If our midfield are dominating, then our avenue to goal is very unpredictable, and as we saw in 2018, can score big scores. The other important role Max plays is being able to drop back in defence. If sides start getting on top, and isolating Lever one-out, which gets him out of his comfort zone, Gawn can play the intercept marking role very well. The Gawn/Grundy comparison has nothing to do with Max's value to our team. But it's also a comparison that I don't think has a true winner (like comparing Black Caviar with Winx). There's areas that Max has Grundy covered, but there are areas that Grundy has Max covered. They are both high quality, A+ rucks, and we're fortunate to have one on our list.

You do realise you can be both the best and MVP?

Gawn is our most valuable by a long way. If people bring up any other name, they're just trying to be too cute.

Early long lunch, FD?

I'm not big on these sorts of threads because there are so many considerations that are totally out of our control. But hopefully when people see some of the teams above they will start seeing how close to being out of the side Jones is. He needs to earn games this year, and not be given a free pass to the 300-club because of loyalty.

Clutching at straws. I clearly said that offering 3 years allowed for him to give us 2 years of onfield return. This year is the 2nd of his extension. Until last week, he was on track to deliver that, but went down with a contact injury.

Seriously terrible post. Bidding war? Were you in the negotiation room? Do you know what his contract value is? What would Sydney offer us? 4th round pick? Something/one that we would have to give an automatic 2-year contract to anyway? Yes, it would've been cheaper to spend two years on a late pick, but chances are they would've played as many games as AvB well play in the same time, with a much higher return should AvB actually stay on the park.

Two years would've been preferable, but I don't think the third year was as poor a decision as you are making it out to be. One year might have seen him recover then request a trade to Sydney and we get next to nothing for him as he would be out of contract. That said, giving him the three years allowed him the first year of his new contract (2019) to not over-do it, getting his body right for him to make an impact in his second year (2020), allowing us to then have him locked away for the third year (2021). I would expect that if he has again broken down, that the club would encourage him to consider retiring, which means it frees up a spot on our list next year, we pay him out (which wouldn't be a significant wage), and we're really in no worse off position than what we would've been had he signed a two year extension (other than the financial side).

Maybe they didn't want Kent around for another minute more, hence why they weren't willing to offer him what he wanted (or at the very least compromise with him). And perhaps AVBs offield qualities far outweigh the weight of carrying him during his new contract. You need to look at the bigger picture when worrying about who was offered what, which includes onfield, injuries and offield. From memory, a couple of years ago there were 4 of our boys in Bali on an end-of-season trip when there was a bit of a story going around. While no names were mentioned in the press, it speaks volumes that 3 of the 4 that were there are no longer on the list, and the 4th one is our captain this year...

Should always aim to have 2 talls and a relief ruckman in your forward setup.

Was going to play a drinking game tonight where I have a shot every time Luke Breust gets a contested possession. Hopefully I can get drunk on the smell of rum, because there sure won't be any going down my throat. Softest player I have ever seen.