Slartibartfast

Why.

Well if there is competition for him so much the better and we'll get our price. But I certainly dont rate him as highly as you and wouldn't offer that sort of contract to someone who could be a bust.

It's not possible for us to know PD. I think that Langdon might be in the picture. I'm not convinced this is all Hogan driven so we might be more accommodating than people think. But I don't think we'll trade him unless we get our outcome. I mean really we're just having a bit of fun here. We've got no idea. What I love is we are aggressively trying to improve our list.

But they have to match the terms Kent puts on himself. Unlikely. But who cares if they do.

St.Kilda: fine, we'll take him through the preseason draft for nothing.

Happy now Wise or still think Craig hold a grudge?

Don't be. If they stuff us around we just don't trade Hogan and they miss out. They have a lot more to lose than us.

He's a troll, haven't you worked that out yet.

No.

My view is we will have an outcome in mind. If we get the outcome we'll do the trade and if not we won't. There's nothing wrong with either of your outcomes if that's what the FD is trying to achieve. What we don't want is two first round draft picks and no Hogan and not being able to use those draft picks for players we need. We'll only do the Hogan trade if we know we can get what we want.

How do you know the current offer is ridiculous? How do you know we won't get a better offer in 12 months time? It's all about outcomes. We don't want picks PD, we want players. If we get them through the Hogan trade then we'll do it, if not, we won't.

I don't think so. If we can't achieve our objective we just say no. That gives the whole competition a full year to prepare their best offers. Hogan won't "drop off" at MFC because he will want to maximise his next contract which will be long and expensive. It's not ideal but having Hogan on our list next year isn't bad.

Your avatar is appropriate. Rod trades aren't about win losses they are about win wins. We have an objective (and I don't know what that is but most likely involves May). If we achieve that objective it doesn't matter if we get pick 55 for Hogan. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

Well you can think that but it's exactly what I've heard from a completely independent and totally reliable source. It's very disappointing but it is what it is.

The only card Dean Kent has to force or influence Saints is to not go to them and I doubt he's pregnant with choices. He can encourage them to play fair but if they say "no" what does he do? Not play with them and pass up a three year contract? It's not his decision to make. It's between us and them so don't blame Kent if we get a crap deal.

I think what people are missing is that we are about outcomes and winning flags, not winning or losing trades. If we get our outcome by trading Jesse we won't worry the small stuff. If we don't get our outcome we won't trade.

Yeh Wise. It’s just click bait. Don’t worry.

Don't worry Wise, it's all click bait and a lot of other publications and journalists just realized they missed the story and are playing catch up. Still in denial? I like your positivity usually but it's got to be delivered with some sensible recognition of the situation. You're a bit poor on that lately.

Rubbish. How many people would sign up to a subscription to the Australian to see one article on Hogan. You've obviously never read the Australian! And you really don't know what it's predicated on. Denham might be privy to much more information but can't quote it. IMO he's not going to go on nothing and is one of the more reliable and sensible AFL reporters. But you're welcome to ignore it, that's certainly the easier option.

Yep, sure. It's behind a paywall which is a really interesting way to present click bait and it comes from a publication not noted for it's AFL coverage in the lead up to a GF which you'd think is much more interesting. It might not be right but it's certainly not click bait. You need to entertain the concept that Hogan may move.

Not everyone praised his game against Hawthorn. I thought he was awful and said so. It's also funny that many quote his "leadership" in defence of his position in the team and yet in the first quarter on Saturday he was completely undisciplined and showed exactly why he isn't a leader on the ground. Yes, we had 22 players that "stunk it up" but he is supposed to be the leader that help us not "stink it up". He failed and should be called out on it. I can always accept skill errors and poor decisions on the ground, that's part and parcel of the game, but I can't accept the self-indulgent, arrogant, stupid and undisciplined tripe he dished up on Saturday, it hurt his team, the club and us as supporters.

I don't warm to imports like I do "our own" but Bernie for some reason is so different. He came to us when we were on our knees in Roos first year and he gave his all. He won a B&F and was skilled and competitive on the field. He also has a wonderful generosity of spirit I think and a genuine love of life and fun. In the end he seems to have a wonderful sense of perspective in his life. It's time I know but I'll be very sad to see him go and wish him well in whatever he does from here on in. Many thanks Bernie, I think your football skill may have been underestimated but not your character. Cheers and good luck.

You can see it here. https://afltables.com/afl/stats/players/S/Sam_Weideman.html He's been given good experience over three years with consecutive games. He's just young and some supporters are either just impatient or can't judge talent.

Sorry, my mistake. I should have said, "why are you quoting WCE supporters views to back up your view" when you continually tell is it's the coaches that count, not the supporters. And how do you support your stance when the WCE coaches, whose views you always say should be respected, voted Gaff their best player in a year where they finished third on the ladder. To finish third on the ladder a team needs multiple good players and the coaches, you know, the one's who's view we should respect, thought Gaff the best during the year. And to finish third you play some good teams in tight matches where if you don't perform you lose. Clearly Gaff, as voted by the coaches, performed. It's ironic because I have some concerns but I can see the argument for taking him as a FA. But what I won't do is make things up to support my view and then not recognize I was wrong on a number of factual issues. That behaviour is the stuff of schoolyards, not those questioning your arguments and logic. Anyway enough. Like Gaff you have your strengths and weakness and these sort of discussions are not your strength.

And why are you worried by supporters view of Gaff when you continually tell us “the coaches know best”? Do WCE supporters or coaches vote in their B&F?