bing181

Not sure if this has been mentioned. MFC are interested in Lion's first rounder, pick 20. They need the points for Ashcroft. Apart from 28, for lower picks we have 40, 48, 53, 64. Then maybe add a 3rd round pick for Tomlinson if anything goes through under FA. Not sure how much we'd have to give up for pick 20, but we obviously aren't going to take all those lower picks to the draft. "The Lions will have multiple takers for the pick, with the Giants, Melbourne and Western Bulldogs among the clubs expected to hold extra middle-range and later draft picks by deeper in the Continental Tyres AFL Trade Period to have a swing at pushing up the draft board."

Impossible to see how that happens. 2 in the top 15 might work. In any case, this year's draft has now been compromised somewhat by those high compensation picks pushing everything back.

Not for mine. Pick 5 plus trade to get another first rounder and take that to the draft. Much better for the club long-term than another player in his late 20's (or getting there). We're going to be losing a LOT of our key players over the next 4-5 years, starting with Melksham and McDonald next year, May the following year, Gawn and Viney the year after that.

I think it's probably a question of semantics. For Lamb, back-room offers and calls to check on availability or hint that player X could be available for the right place are probably everyday occurrences. For the rest, we don't know who did what in all this. Between MFC, Geelong, Oliver's manager and any number of others who might have been across what was gong on, we'll probably never know the details.

Personally, I can never see trades in raw terms like this, there are too many variables and it ignores context. We needed a player like McAdam to cover for the absence of Melksham and loss of Bedford. I'm not sure who else was available, but if this is what it cost to fill that hole, so be it. The issue with McAdam isn't so much his ability but the fact that he seems to be injury-prone. Fingers crossed for a better second year with us.

Also ignore them getting rid of players like Treloar and Grundy while still paying large amounts of their salary.

Also true of Jackson. He was OK enough to be worthy of a game in his first season, but he's now into his 5th season and is still improving. Against that, 5 years in and he's not exactly taking the comp apart, and the difference between 2nd year and 5th year Jackson is not all that flagrant. 9th in Fremantle's Best and Fairest, still not the finished article. Not knocking him, would love to still have him, but I'm not sure even Jackson is a good counter-example for rucks take time.

Who should we be trading in that won't be coming - or to put it another way, who should we be trading in that isn't going to cost an arm and a leg in terms of picks and salary?

If we finish up near the pointy end of the ladder and win a final or two and then you throw in Academy and F/S picks, trade compensation picks etc., that F1 could easily end up not far off pick 18.

The only actual info out there is that it's Taylor (on his Linked in Profile) and presumably Lamb as he's the List manager. In other clubs it includes the coach, so probably Goodwin. And you would imagine head of the FD, Richardson. But other than that ... who knows. I took it that when Gawn mentioned 10 people there was a touch of hyperbole - no committee of this sort would have 10 people and it's hard to imagine even who they could all be.

None of us know where this is coming from. There was a lot of info around what was going on with Geelong that only they could know. Today’s could have been Oliver’s management. etc etc

We suspended Steven May for drinking while in concussion protocols, while May and Melksham had to do community service after their punch-up. Don't think we're reluctant to apply penalties where necessary. Perhaps in Oliver's case suspension and/or missing matches wasn't seen to be in anyone's best interest. He needs routine. Difficult to get the balance right.

Found out what exactly? Found out that we wouldn't be getting 2 first rounders for him? Also hard to believe that the Board only "found out" in the last day or two when this has been going on for a week or more. We'll never know the true story here, but I suspect that the only real reason this isn't going through is that we can't get Oliver's salary off our books plus a couple of decent picks. Could be wrong of course.

Aren't interviews with Viney always awkward?

ADHD is not a mental health issue. It's neurological disorder. However, living with it can create mental health issues though equally, people with ADHD can enjoy perfect mental health in the right environment and with the right support.

"The false dilemma fallacy involves presenting a limited number of options as if they were the only options available. This forces people to choose between two extremes, even though there is a spectrum of possibilities in between. The fallacy is misleading and prevents honest debate."

None of which is true, much less a fact.

FWIW, I listened to some of the "what's next for the Dees in 2025" and the cough pundits cough had us in the window and/or with a bright future (JVR, Judd, Pickett, Rivers etc). With caveats of course, but no reason to write us off yet. And we actually did OK earlier in the year with an underdone Oliver so who knows. Always look on the bright side ...

A player with ongoing personal/behavioural issues who has been average at best for the last 18 months and who's on a massive contract until he's 33. None of that is going to help his worth. The other question in all this that hasn't been brought up anywhere, would Oliver be prepared to take a pay cut to help this go through?

Also no surprise that these issues arise in off-season. And just in regards to all this: seeing what we've seen over the last 18 months I'd be surprised if Oliver can make it through the remaining 6 years of his contract, regardless of where he's playing.

Only goes so far with ADHD (though can certainly help), and there can be side effects which might be incompatible with elite level sport. But biggest issue is consistency, with many people stopping their medication or not taking it as required.

Unless I'm missing something, we don't know who was contacted but it wasn't just Geelong.

None of this information is public so we have no real info, but from what's available elsewhere Goodwin would just be one vote amongst the 4. Which is to stop coaches driving the list off a cliff for short-term gains. In any case, putting two and two together, whatever Goodwin's feelings are he has to support Oliver publicly in case none of this goes through and they have to work together going forward.

That would be the List Management committee that every club has. Ours includes Lamb, Taylor, Goodwin and presumably Richardson.