bing181

Absolutely .. he was obviously both well-respected and well-liked at Hawthorn, and subsequently at Box Hill. Great choice by the FD, leadership and experience PLUS a more-than-useful premiership ruckman, all in one deft move. Hope his knee holds up. Seems like it's a long-term injury, but one he believes he can manage. Played the last bit of the season at Box Hill, but whether he can get through an entire season at the highest level remains to be seen I guess. Fingers crossed.

There was a great post over on another board from someone who knew him from Tassie, who basically made the point that he had had enormous difficulty coping with the transition to AFL football, especially being taken so high in the draft. However, he was starting to put that behind him. Make of some of these posts what we will, but I for one wouldn't be unhappy if we took (a chance on) him, especially as a rookie. Still, we'll find out soon enough.

Yes. Clearly, part of the "new" direction for the club is to reinforce our history, honour our past players and champions, and build a club culture around the MFC. Giving out specific numbers is clearly part of that strategy, as is moving players down from higher to lower numbers.

Yep. I remember Flower saying as much afterwards. There's brave and there's smart, and letting yourself be taken out by a deliberate hit from a thug in an uneven contest is neither. In my younger days, I did a bit of Tae Kwon Do (badly!), and one day, we had a visit from a "master". One of us asked him "what would you do if you met two big men in an alley", to which he replied "run". Stretch remains one of my all-time favourite Melbourne players, and I was never happier than when the ball was in his hands - which, thankfully, was often. A great champion of and for the club.

Yeah, nailed it, like your work.

I suspect that's probably right, though given that there was a 5 page thread on him over on the Richmond board at Bigfooty, you wonder just how much of a smokey he actually was! There's certainly some gamesmanship at play.

Ablett brothers mark 2?

From the AFL site: "Youngsters Brad Harvey (Eastern Ranges) and Cameron Johnston (Geelong Falcons), who some considered stiff to be overlooked last week, will also begin training with Melbourne in a bid to impress and try to earn a spot on an AFL list." Could be a nice move if we can get them. But worries me that our first pick is 14ish.

Sheesh, no pleasing some people. We get criticised for not committing on a 2 year deal to an older player with an increasingly fragile body, but when we make a committment to a young, fit 16 year old ... we get criticised. The "what if he does his knee" argument exists in ALL contracts in ALL sports ... and is a non-starter. Thankfully we gave Aaron Davey his 4 year deal ("eek .. but what if he does his knee!"), and thankfully we've managed the coup of coups with young Jack. Rising star or "best in the country" aside, he's obviously going to bring something special to the club. Fabulous news. And completely OT, and echoing thoughts earlier in this thread, and discretely hidden away here on page 5, concerned about our Jimmy.

Yes, amongst all the discussion about how long it's going to take him to get up to AFL speed, this has been a little overlooked IMHO. Only one game, sure, but to come in as a 17 year old (I'm guessing ...) in your first VFL game and kick 3 goals is no mean feat. I agree that it's going to take him a while to reach his full potential, but if he can get in a decent pre-season, and then repeat those kinds of performances at Casey, perhaps we'll see him sooner rather than later, especially if/when places open up through injuries.

No Mitch Thorp in that list???

I'm not sure just what argument this is supposed to support. Howe (for example), had been invited to train with both Richmond and Collingwood, and had spoken to a number of clubs. He'd also been included in the "leaked" Richmond list. If Wallace (ex Richmond coach I believe) or some footy site isn't up to speed on that kind of info, it says something about them, but not much else. As for the other discussion here, all a bit narrow for me. "Best available" and "needs-based" are not mutually exclusive. Nor is there some kind of "absolute" rating of draftees. Even in an ideal world, clubs would list their top 50 very (very!) differently. Finally, i find this idea that needs-based = talls as being a bit limiting. Sure, we drafted "tall", but all 4 are supposed to have elite endurance (new interchange rules kicking in???), both Howe and Cook are supposed to be great kicks, and 3 of the 4 could be ready for some AFL action next year.

I think this is the key here, also hinted at in the club's write-up. Basically, he's never really had the opportunity or support to get to where he could be. Of course, having potential is one thing, but will be interesting (at least) to see what happens once he gets into a professional environement. I like the pick a lot, actually. Gutsy, unpredictable move. Whatever it takes.

Anyone know the order for the Rookie draft? Don't the Giants (cough cough) have the first 8 or something? How are we placed in all this?

Good post. Re Howe, I think the clue here is in BP's line that he's really come on in the last 6 weeks. Ready to make the next step? We're about to find out!

BP: "We had a slant towards talls, but we ... just thought that the players we picked were pretty much the best available at those particular picks. Troy Davis has got a body that could quickly step up to playing in the AFL and so has Tom McDonald, so while the talls can quite often take a longer period of time, these guys - at least three of them - we'd expect to step up quickly. "We acknowledged that tall forwards were an area that we needed to bolster in our list, but we were able to get what we were after at the opportunities that presented. Like every club ... we're very happy."

There's a huge build-up to the draft, and by the time it comes round, everyone has massive expectations - not to mention opinions. The reality was always going to be something of a let-down, and I suspect some people were hoping for a Lynch or Heppel to fall to us. The fact that it didn't turn out like that doesn't mean we got it wrong. Let's at least give the FD and the new boys a chance before we start sticking the boots in.

Yep, sums it up well for me.

Been a bit of press around lately as the draft approaches, and with it a bit more info re our Jack. I liked Emma Quayle's notes re him that he was popular with his teammates, and serious about his footy - so, we're not talking about a Thorp or Anthony here! (On the other hand, Age article on VFL players mentions that we're still interested in Thorp. This one just won't go away, maybe there really is something there?) Getting back to Darling, a few posts around the place mentioning that he's had OP this year (partly why he has been back a bit on last year), and that the head injury and the after effects are proving fairly worrying - perhaps there's a question mark as to his ability to get back to full fitness. I'm sure the FD are onto it, but ... hmm. Damaged goods?

A club that didn't want to knock back a young Luke Hodge. (for example). Best available, whoever that is.

?? Surely that's what happened. Cam didn't like "the truth" (1 year and then prove yourself), and walked. And once again, just because it's all a bit of a shock, doesn't mean that the process was badly handled. Moving on people ...

Unless you were actually involved in the negotiations, you don't know what was said to Cam. And even if we take some kind of "worse case scenario" here, what does it show? That the club told a 31 year old he had to earn his place? The club have nothing to apologise for. Let's move on, this is getting a bit tired now. Revisit at the end of 2012?

Have read a couple of reports re pre-season training, and the thing that jumps out for me is the number of players who seem to have come back with a more mature attitude, if not fitness. Optimistic that we're going to see a bit more of that potential realised next year as players step up. A bit intrigued by Maric. Important year for him, and judging by initial reports, maybe the penny has finally dropped re the necessity of just working very hard, all the time. Still early days though - now let's hope that all of them make it through to Round 1.

Yes, about the only thing predictable about the draft is its unpredictability. And if it's not Lynch who falls to 12, it'll be someone else. Maybe.

Getting OT here (Mods ... another thread?), but done all that, and still nothing. Found a good tip re opening the Silverlight .pkg file and removing the "check system" component, but can't get into the .pkg file to edit it. Just don't know that we should be having to jump through all these hoops ... or why the AFL is so unable to fix a known problem with their site. Incompetence perhaps.