bing181

It was a multi-way trade, you can't just pick one element out of it and pair that with a player. If you were though, it's basically Kennedy for Toumpas. Both first round draft picks, both played a similar number of games, seems a fair enough trade. But more importantly ... the same logic as above applies to Kennedy as well as to Toumpas: if we can back Jimmy in, we can back Kennedy in. Highly rated junior, first round draft pick by Derek Hine (supposedly Mr. Magic when it comes to the draft), has had a few decent games, knows how to find the footy at least at a lower level etc. etc.

FWIW: Brett Anderson ‏@BrettAndersonIF 48m 48 minutes ago Dees fans need to look at it this way. Essentially swapped Toumpas for Kennedy. Points value of 29+50 equals pick 20 for Howe.

Collingwood supporters disagreeing. Every supporter over-values their own players, even when they can't get a game.

Fifties.

All a press beat-up in any case: "Melbourne Football Club Doctor, Zeeshan Arain was able to set the record straight regarding the recent media attention speculating the entire playing group had adopted a Paleo diet. It seems players were presented with the option of transitioning to a Paleo diet, but the focus was to get players thinking about nutrition as a component of performance and to encourage the consumption of wholefoods. More accurately, the exclusion of processed foods would result in a shift towards a lower carbohydrate higher fat diet with players still consuming ample carbohydrate around game day."

I follow cycling. Lots of cases over the last 10 years or so. Which will become, to all intents and purposes, a season - the next one.

Not sure about all the d's there, but there certainly should have been some clarification of the situation. Though perhaps there has that we don't know about. With the various trades, "the Essendon problem" starts to seep out into the wider AFL.

There are no grounds in the rules for penalties to be negotiated. There are specific circumstances where they can be reduced. Just the way it is.

No it doesn't.

Neither the AFL or ASADA are involved in the current appeal. The penalty is fixed at 2 years. There are some grounds for reduction, the only one possible would seem to be "no fault or negligence". But that will be (very) hard to make stick here, because the players have to establish that they did everything they could have and should have to make sure that there was no infringement.

CAS hands down penalties. AFL as the appropriate administrative body only get to a) endorse and b) enforce said penalties. If there are penalties, they start from the date they're issued, i.e., last day of the hearing (unless there are mitigating factors, hard to see in this case). Which could easily be sometime in February or later. So even if any penalties get reduced to 6 months (hard to see how ...), he would still effectively miss next season.

My god. You have no idea.

Really? I'm really surprised by posters who can't tell the difference between a comment and a fawn. Is it ridiculous? Probably - but then no more/less ridiculous than many of the proposals and comments floating round here, and at least someone had put some real work/time into what they posted.

You're not the bearer of bad news. You're just overreacting.

It won't eventuate. There are no charges against Goodwin in place, even (nearly) 3 years after the event.

Don't do it Nudge, it only encourages them.

Send it to the club/Viney/Mahoney. Who knows ...

Oh for god's sake ...

It's just a ridiculous statement. As ridiculous as saying at the end of 2014 that Port were a top 8 side and nothing they did by way of delistings or trades would change that. Nek Minnit ... Lions brought in one of the biggest A-list players traded last year. How has that changed their "reality", when if anything they've gone backwards? The reality is that even if we do zero trades, we'll have a longish list of players to add to our list, simply because of the long/er term injury situation to players like Petracca, Frost, Trengove, and even Salem, Pedersen, Kent etc. Some of those names are in our first-picked, most should be. Without even starting on improvement with the younger players. How good could Brayshaw be this year? etc. etc. As you show with post after post, you're simply an out and out pessimist, and are confusing "reality" with "negativity".

Just re Melksham (http://www.boundforglorynews.com.au/free-agenttrade-analysis-jake-melksham/): "Melksham has played as a run-with midfielder, but he’s also shown great signs as a defensive half-forward. He racks up inside 50s, although his delivery in there could be better. He can win his own ball on the inside, as he has terrific strength and desire, but he also runs hard enough to be a link-up player on the outside of the contest. As mentioned, he’s a tackling machine and he’s at worst an above average tagger." "Melksham’s form fluctuated a lot throughout 2015, but he played three outstanding games, and all three were games where the Bombers rose to the occasion in tight clashes. In Round One against the Swans, he finishes with 20 disposals, a goal, 10 contested possessions, nine tackles and six clearances. The next week he had a season high 26 disposals against the Hawks, with 12 inside 50’s and 22 uncontested possessions. He capped the season off with an excellent performance against the Suns, with 10 one percenters." ... and: "Pick 25 in this draft will slide down to around pick 30 when it is all done and dusted with academy selections and compensation picks. 30 is just about spot on for Melksham, as he fills a clear need in the Demons’ midfield. He’s still quite young, but he also brings experience to the Demons and he’s the enforcer type that can keep other teams from tormenting Melbourne’s younger brigade."

Under the deal being negotiated Hawthorn would give up their first round draft pick and Anderson and receive Carlisle from Essendon. Anderson would go to North Melbourne along with Essendon's pick 41 and the Bombers would receive North's first round pick (15) as well as Hawthorn's (18). The net effect of the trade would be: Hawthorn gets Carlisle; North gets Anderson and pick 41; Essendon gets picks 15 and 18.

They were all provisionally suspended once infraction notices were issued. Which is why they didn't play any NAB matches (for example). From what I can see, it was from mid-November till the end of March, so actually more like 4½ months.

It's 18 AND 15. Which, for clarification, is two first round picks.

We can't force a player to go where they don't want to. All we could do would be to force him to the PSD, but that's cutting off our nose to spite our face.

Make an effort. At least.