Slartibartfast

It's a good discussion to have. I can't agree that players have to go where they are traded. Apart from anything it seems to breach individual rights. When Frawley leaves to chase success we can trade him to Saints where he can't have it. That's not "fair". A player who has personal reasons to stay in Melbourne is suddenly traded to Perth. I don't think that works. Trades need to be win win and with the player having no right of veto that is unlikely. Teenagers don't have the right of veto because their drafting is part of equalization and the rules after that need to be a balance between player rights and club needs. Contracts not being signed until October precludes players being signed up during the year. Hogan and McDonald wouldn't yet be signed. Your "market value" argument doesn't hold IMO because contracts are for 2 to 5 years normally and contract anticipate performance with clauses in them adjusting payment where necessary. If you're worried about players signing before October you'd shyte yourself at long term contracts. The May cut off for list management idea is interesting. But if we wanted to draft someone in what happens to list sizes? Does someone have to get cut? What about his contract? I suppose contracts could be restructured to run to April or May 30/31. It's an interesting idea but I'm wondering how it works with the draft and list sizes. But is certainly adds something to the mix and gives fringe players opportunities. I'm wondering if clubs should have to nominate (say) 30 players by season start and the balance of players are FA for one/two months. Now that would be interesting. The whole list management debate is a good one. It will be interesting to see what comes of it. Oh, and on the "receiving" team getting a FA and paying. I'm not suggesting the "payment" goes to the "giving" club, that compensation is already catered for. In my mind if Hawthorn get Frawley they might have to pay their first 2 picks in the draft whereas Collingwood might have to give up pick 12. The issue for me with FA is the receiver gets something for nothing. That is the greatest threat to equalization and should be addressed.

Hmmm. Are you suggesting that the MFC medico's are faith healers? That seems a little over the top. But you clearly don't trust them. I'm not fussed one way or the other if Hogan plays this year or not. My point is that the Club has all the necessary information on which to make a decision and if they say he's fit to play and they want him to play seniors or at Casey that's fine with me. I also don't think we need to be worried about tall players with a history of back injuries making plane trips because I think there is a fair chance the medical staff will be all over that.

No, sorry Jack, I trust their judgement so no need for me to have that info.

You seem to be removing the rights of the players. Players cannot veto trades? How does this relate to FA? What are you getting at here? October sign on? Ablett, Scully, Franklin and I reckon Frawley all committed well before the end of the season. What does this achieve? It doesn't seem to achieve anything in terms of equalization. I can't see how the last two relate to FA. How does the list not being finalized until the end of May work? What are you trying to achieve? What has injury replacement got to do with FA? I don't like FA as I like the concept that players play with one club for their careers but that must be balanced with a players rights to play where he has an offer he wants to take up.The mechanism of that is of course a vexed issue. If we are going to have FA I'd like to see is the "receiving" club have to pay something. At the moment they get something for nothing and that's the greatest problem with the equalization concept and FA. For all I don't like FA I respect, for example, Frawley's right to now play for a team that is competitive. He's put up with crud for 8 years, he's paid his dues and he deserves to play where he wants now to have a chance at some success in his career. I think it would be unfair to deny him that right which, if I'm reading your OP correctly, it seems to do.

I'd try not to worry about it Jack, But you may want to just let the medical staff know in case they don't realise. That should put your mind at rest.

This concept of protecting him from injury so he can do a full preseason is dumb. When did he hurt his back?

I lost too many cups of coffee that way reading Dee-luded's posts so I put him on ignore. But I visit him just for fun sometimes....

He kept Boak to the second lowest number of possessions he's had this year.If Boak had had 40 possessions the same people ignoring Jordie's input would be asking why we didn't tag him. It's the football equivalent of being colour blind.

Oh FCS. Footy is an opinion business. Get over it.

If Chip leaves then two Tyson deals would do me!

I want to see: GRRM recognize how wrong he was about Tom McDonald. If you need more of a look at Blease and Tappy go back to remedial school. Some games from Strauss. The coaching situation resolved. Watts played on the wing. Strauss getting some games Howe moved forward. Saints, Brisbane and GWS win 3 more games (but not against us). Campbell apologise to MFC for the Watts decision. RPFC show some humility. Edit: I'm obviously keen to see Strauss get some games!

I was at the game and I've only read the first 4 or 5 pages of this thread. My first observation is that we have progressed from a team that was regularly beaten by 100 points to a team that is now fairly competitive most of the time. We still get bashed up by the really good big bodied teams (Freo, Geel) but rarely at other times. We have learned to get ourselves to a position where we can win but not surprisingly for a team that won so few games in the last few years we don't yet know how to win. We are getting some real time training in that this year and will get better at winning games when the opportunity arises. Secondly I just can't stand the Grimes bashing. For those that weren't at the ground you may have missed the number of times he ran and supported team mates, spoilt and literally put his body on the line countless times. He is a player that will make skill errors but to want to blame him or even single him out for our failure is just silly. How about you look at Howe's kick out to a two on one contest when the majority of our players were on the other flank and the complete inability of Tapscott and Blease to show anything other than one or two cameo's for the day. We had some shocking non contributors but I've not read much about them, probably because they didn't get the ball often enough to make a mistake. A word of praise for Ro Bail. Unless you watch him you just can't believe how much running he does. The goal he kicked in the last when he started the forward thrust on the defensive side of the wing and ended up kicking the goal was an example of how he is able to bring numbers around the ball. He's limited as a player but his application and gut running courage is something to be admired. Jack Watts was sensational in the third and Hinkley may well have won the game when he took Kane Cornes from Jones and put him on Watts in the last. You'd have to think Watts should play that third quarter role for the rest of the season. No love for Jordie? Kept Boak to a mediocre contribution and the only goal Boak got was when Jordie wasn't on him. There is undoubtedly a place in the team for a good tagger. Lastly we looked spent in the last. When we had the ball from a mark there was often no movement. None, and so often we just kicked it to a stagnant situation. Roos game plan is very physically intensive and our young bodies are tiring. Very disappointing to lose, very encouraging for the future.

I'm so glad you put your name in the thread title. Humble as ever..............

I think if you read the posts I've made here my concern is that we don't make the mistake of taking a footballer who is not a genuine midfielder. I'm not saying Petracca isn't and that's why I asked the questions I did. In the past we made terrible mistakes by taking footballers who we thought would develop into mids - Blease, Tapscott, Strauss, Bennell and Jetta. And before that the classic example was Sylvia. From what I saw of Petracca, and I've acknowledged that it's only one game, he didn't look like a genuine mid, he looked like a tall flanker who's main attribute was his marking which I don't think is enough of an asset at AFL level. IMO we need a genuine ball accumulator like Sloane, Shuey, Redden, Rockliff and Beams to name just a few we passed on, who can participate in possession chains and has the agility to find space in tight and make and execute good decisions. Clearly the recruiting department will have the necessary information and do due diligence and I'm not questioning that. I'm just discussing the type of footballer we want and asking if Petracca has those attributes.

That's my concern. That won't cut it at AFL level. Think Jeremy Howe.

I get worried about players who rely on power at under age level. Also Trengove tested well but I always felt he was a tall in a small body. I want to see him play like a midfielder with a bit of class. I just didn't see it in that one game.

Can Petracca run? Does he get involved in possession chains? Does he have pace? Does he have excellent lateral movement (agility). How much of his game is built around high marking? Is he a dead set genuine midfielder? I don't know the answers to these questions as I've only seen him play against SA on TV in the champs where I couldn't judge these attributes. I liked Ahern.

Looking forward to your reports KC, thanks for your efforts.

It's the role they play, particularly at stoppages.

What great news. Hogan and McDonald were almost more important than Frawley.

No, it's not the last place. The last place is as a high half forward and you'll find the GPS results of players supports this.At least that's the situation at Melbourne, I don't know about other clubs.

You seem to miss my point, which is a common theme in our conversations. I wasn't saying it was original or contained anything new, just that it was a good article that summarized where the situation is now and who is doing what. It's an editorial Jack - an opinion piece, it's not trying to present "new" stuff. And I was offering my opinion on it. I can't be bothered reading all the link you've left but as Axis has said it's an Essendon fanatic. That taints his contribution and renders it meaningless to me but if you want to rely on it that's your prerogative. Anyway I like Caro. If you don't why do you keep reading her? Your continual reference to her and the debate and discussion you cause by your comments are exactly what she's after. It's ironic that while you have a very low opinion of her I reckon she loves you!!

Another sensational article by Wilson. Interestingly Gary Pert said on the Mike Sheehan interview last night that Collingwood supporters thought Wilson had a vendetta against them. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-continues-to-duck-for-cover-20140707-zsz9w.html Flanagan writes fantastic feel good articles, Wilson is in a class of her own with this sort of stuff.

What people seem to fail to realise is that Tommy is a fantastic contested possession player and is rarely beaten. He turns it over. Fancy that from a young key position player. MFC will be desperate for him to extent his contract.

As much as I might agree, we're dreamin'.