Curry & Beer

I think he has done quite well considering that stat. Finds the footy, leads and plays as hard as you'd want and wins contests. Can shank a kick though

mate no offense but that is completely paranoid and crazy. If he had nothing to lose by doing it I would totally agree with you, but he does stand to lose something, with nothing to gain. It's as simple as that.

Careful Mike Sheahan may be reading this.

exactly, this is the attitude I cannot understand. It's about INCENTIVE it would be a risk for no reward, if it backfired there would be a lynch mob formed

i think we agree, no MATTER WHAT happens, we will have the final choice, take it or give it to GC, at pick 3/4. I take it your definition of overthinking translates to opting to decline the 1st round bid and handing him over automatically? Yes I agree there is no way that will happen. Let's say you are right and GC really rate him and want him, then they will bid first round. We STILL have the option after that. It is impossible for us to lose him in that way. nominating day - melb nominates JV (what round is not part of the discussion, all it means is that we have to take him at some point even if it is our last pick, so we will definitely do it) scenario 1: bidding day step 1 - GC bids their first round pick bidding day step 2 - our choice - let him have him (1A) or take him ourselves (1B) 1A: GC has no choice, they must take Viney at overs and deal with the fact he will very likely go home in 2 years. We then use our pick 3 on the player that is effectively 2nd best in the comp. The clubs immediately after us all get a one pick upgrade. 1B: We take Viney at 3 scenario 2: bidding day step 1 - GC bids their second round pick bidding day step 2 - our choice - let him have him (1A) or take him ourselves (1B) obviously we take him at 23 so there is actually nothing we can do at all to influence this process. The only variable is GC's INCENTIVE. Do they risk screwing themselves for no reward, just to screw us, or do they take the rightful best choice available with their pick 2?

That's incorrect logic - step one is we nominate him as a FS (which we are obviously going to do) a week later, the opposing club with the highest pick says 'we want him too, we will offer our first round pick for him' then we either match it or decline it, and he goes automatically, even before draft day, to them or to us. it is not possible for us to overthink anything AFTER they have put in their bid and GC/GWS wouldnt be 'adding' him to their list, theyd be taking him INSTEAD of some other gun kid they rated more as touched on elsewhere, what you calling giving us 'a massive leg up' is substituted by giving a bunch of other clubs a small leg up, and we are not exactly a powerhouse are we

exactly, well put

BY THE WAY, I cited the Ayce Cordy case in the other thread - in 2008 12 clubs decided NOT to nominate for Cordy before the Saints did, just one pick before the dogs. Isn't that PROOF that those other 12 clubs all opted to look out for their own interests rather than trying to throw a spanner at the Dogs? Assumedly he was actually good enough for 13 and thats why the Saints did it, what else did they have to gain?

to be fair I haven't factored all that in - I don't presume to know how GC values Viney, I'm just going on the (loose) concensus that seems to indicate he is worth 5-10. clearly we WANT him, only if our bluff gets called will we lose him accidentally, but in my mind, making the bluff is a 95% bet for us if that catastrophe happened we still get some other kid at 23 and poach back Viney in 2 years

OK I meant HAVE TO TAKE HIM (provided we decline) that's the whole point though, they'd have to be CERTAIN we will take him or they put themselves at needless risk no matter how small that risk might be. No gambler or business man bets on a 95% bet that pays no dividend, that is just stupid

this is the fundamental disagreement - they have nothing to GAIN by doing it either, they can ONLY lose (a loss being forced to take Viney for a pick higher than his value) Sheedy: Melbourne will clearly take Viney at 3, I'm 95% sure, so lets screw them over by nominating him, it will be fun Chocko: Well what if that 5% is justified and they say 'fine take him'? Sheedy: We'll be forced to take him Chocko: Even though we have 6 or 7 blokes ahead of him on our shopping list? You want to risk that just to F with the Demons Sheedy: Yeah if it turned out like that it would suck wouldn't it? Chocko: It certainly would you senile old turd. Get back to the media room while the big boys talk about recruitment.

if they call that bluff, that means they aren't nominating, which means straight to round 2 for Viney? seewhat i mean? if they say yeah right melbourne we know you will take him at 3' then they still cant stop us from making him slide, THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN is to nominate themselves, and if they do that THEY WILL HAVE TO TAKE HIM so why would they take a risk like that for no reward whatsoever

of course! if we don't decline then we are taking him at 3 so obviously they arent required to take him - he's already ours? so how can there be any scenario where they nominate him and don't end up having to take him? we nominate, they bid we accept - viney to melb at 3 we decline - viney to GWS/GC at 1/2 essentially it is impossible for Viney to go anywhere but 1,2 or 3 in the first round (IF GC/GWS nominate) my point is that they won't nominate

Why is everyone ignoring what I am saying Have you or have you not understood the concept that if he nominates him HE HAS TO TAKE HIM So you are saying he will think 'well there are several better players available but gee I hate Melbourne" please explain

nope http://www.afl.com.a...px?newsid=66411 "f the club nominating the father-son player declines to match the selection nominated, the club with the successful bid must use that selection at the draft on that player. Any club that makes a successful bid on a father-son selection is bound to use the pick they nominate." which makes old55's point about them being 'cunning' totally irrelevant, surely we are not so self-obsessed we would think that Sheedy is going to take a player 5-10 spots ahead of where he should go purely to pizz us off, that is paranoid crazy talk. 17 clubs will hate it, but they won't be able to do anything about it and we'll get viney 15-16 picks cheaper than market value... and at the end of it we'll have 4 of the top 12 in the draft. Oh yes.

good post but the part I don't get from yourself and others is the importance of whether the other clubs 'believe' us when we say we are not going to take him at 3. From their POV it makes no difference, if they don't believe us and call our bluff they they HAVE TO take him, so unless they truly believe he is 1st/2nd best in the draft they simply won'tdo it - why would they? and as I said earlier, they will know damn well that if they rain on our parade they will be facing a certain go-home factor in exactly 2 years time and nobody wants that do they. Even if it all backfires and the end of the day we'll have at least upgraded our pick 3 to a pick 2 and some other hopeful will come to the club at 23. we can't really lose here

i'm obviously missing something, cos as per my earlier post, i agree with your rules and t0 me they spell game-set-match for us getting viney at pick23, without doing anything but an obvious, yet uncalleable bluff that we will pass on him at 3 if forced to

if there was ever a hollow victory, that was it. We should have won by 20 goals, but we didn't because about 17 blokes had drop-worthy games. Just because the scoreboard says something it doesn't mean a whole lot sometimes.

To my evaluation we have pick 3+4+12+Viney all sewn up, which is a very tidy draft day indeed. Better than any of our previous 'windfalls' even Sculgove. I don't get the problem? GWS/GC are the only things in our way, ask yourself - what is their incentive? If you think they are going to let some desire to 'screw us over' you are thinking way too self-centredly! They will do what is in their best interests like every other club! We will bluff and say we are not going to take him with 3. Everyone will know it is a bluff, but they cannot call it. If they do, they are forced to 'take unders' for their pick 1/2 with a pick 5-10. Why would they do that? Even if they truly rated Viney as a pick 1/2, or they do indeed just want to screw us, they would know they are taking a kid that will almost definitely do a scully-like ship-jump 2 years later. It makes absolutely no sense. Besides, by 'screwing' us, all they do is put themselves 5-10th in the draft order (Viney's worth), and everyone ahead of them rolls ahead one spot! So even if that happens, we will use pick 3 on the player that is actually worth pick 2, since somebody 'wasted' their pick on Viney. all the other clubs with 5-10 picks will say thanks very much for upgrading us a pick. If our bluff was called it would be a truly idiotic move by the club that does it, and it won't happen. Make no mistake, if I was Todd Viney i'd be putting the issue completely to bed by having a quiet word with the lad, suggesting he take his foot off the gas for the rest of the year so that the idea a pick 1 or 2 will be used on him is out of the question. Tanking? You bet.

young under-20-gamer who has some obvious potential but some serious deficincies at this stage. -nevertheless a portion of the supporter base declares he will become a star. We've seen a billion of these come through and almost none have actually become stars, so I'll wait and see thanks. Blease is exactly the same. We have shown we are not able to produce the 'complete' player and our young blokes who can't kick or have a poor work ethic or whatever rarely work these flaws out of their game

hardly noticed today

Jones Grimes Howe Green Dunn Sylvia just as many crosses as there were ticks next to t.McDonald's name for me today

3 years each http://www.melbourne...x?newsId=143600 brilliant news, somebody pinching Howey would have been the icing on the cake of this season urgh fix title please mods sorry

jamie bennell needs to be Wayne Carey I think that would be a good idea

Don't buy it, they continue to prop us up financially, gift us extremely good fixtures and the sculyl compo was very generous. They could have easily found ways to shaft us with all these things if they really wanted us dead