binman

Surely you're joking. I hope so

If it was going to be Curnow, it won't be now. From this article: Curnow's agent Paul Connors, said in a statement Curnow had made "a poor choice". "He was pulled over by police for driving through a stop sign. A breath test was requested to which Charlie, in his moment of panic, refused," the statement said. "He was taken to a police station. Charges against Charlie could be being drunk in public, refusing breath analysis and not displaying P-plates."

Refused a breath test? That's serious. A positive reading would be bad but now everyone will be guessing as to why he refused the test. Worried about a positive to drugs? Way over? ? etc etc Could not happen at a worse time for him, a life changing stuff up. Five days before the draft. How stupid can you get? Fails the no dh rule for sure. I can't see us taking him at all now.

Could not agree more. I'd also add the best mid fields have at least 1 stone cold a graders. We don't. You could make a case for both Jones and Vince but if we're honest neither are in the Mitchell, fyfe, hodge, Kennedy, parker, sellwood, priddis league. Track, Gus and perhaps Salem might get to that level, might being the operative word. Can we afford to take the risk at pick 3 of going tall and missing a player who becomes one of those premium mids? I don't think so. By the by that doesn't discount taking curnow given roos loves big, tall mids. It does discount wiedemen

He describes Curnow as a mid who can go forward (or vice versa), comparing him to Stringer. McKay is a KPP

They started following me. Had to get a restraing order. But their persistence won me over

Quality bump

I hope so Ron. After pumping the dees chances up next season to a couple of mates they asked where I thought we'd finish. Being the optimistic type, particularly in the off season, I said top 10. They laughed. The upshot was a bet. Top 10 and we go to a restaraunt and they buy me a $100 meal. Not top 10 and I buy them both a $50 meal

I'm going to buy a new mfc jumper and put number 4 on the back.

Its brilliant isn't it and no doubt is evidence of a vastly improved governance and administration. Professional. I do wonder though if we're not above some strategic leaking as a form of miscommunication in order to disrupt essendons plans at the draft.

Like solving the middle east crisis?

Leaving aside questions about his value as a number 1 pick, courage, relative skill level, how much he annoys some fans (dees and others) etc etc i would be very surprised if, barring injury, he does not play most games next season. Why? Well the evidence of Roos tenure indicates he selects him most weeks. There is no logical reason why this would suddenly change next year. As for talk he was put on the trade table but no one wanted him i call bulltish. Where is the evidence this is true - apart from some vague comments from Roos about everyone being on the table. But there was no rumours about him being linked to any trade. But lets say for the sake of argument they did put him up for trade. Logic would suggest another club didn't offer enough to make it happen, which implies the club rates him high enough not to let him go for peanuts, ie they see him as a best 22 player. If the club really didn't rate him in the way many fans don't they would have bitten the bullet and taken whatever they could have got, as they did with Toumpas. As if another club wouldn't have taken him for say a second round draft pick, a valuable enough trade if you thought a player had no future at your club and you were dead set keen on trading him.

The vibe

I agree with PD that Hannibal can't claim any credit for spruiking Hogan and advocating we select him. As he pointed out when someone gave credit to Neeld for selecting him (when really for his career prospects he needed instant results rather than waiting a year for a top pick to be eligible to play) picking Hogan was a complete no brainer and Neeld should get no kudos or credit for doing so. So PD is spot on and big bad Hannibal should not get any credit either.

Tough on viv I reckon. I hope he has a brilliant year and forces his way back on to the list

Too up themselves.

I do. It is a completely ridiculous concept that is often thrown around. For a start the purpose of a fixture (i wish it was a draw) is not to reward a team for its performance in previous years - finals are the reward for success. Besides it doesn't bear scrutiny as a concept. Look at Collingwood's fixture this year. 5 Friday night games and 5 Saturday night games (we have 0 Fiiday and Sat night games btw). What is this a reward for?They played finals in 2013 but not since. By the the above logic they should be penalsied for poor performance yet are not. Essendon finished second last and get 2 Friday night games this season. Geelong had a poor season yet get a better draw this year. Carlton, despite being woeful for years got 5 night games last year. And on and on. The fixture is one of the best equalization levers the AFL has at is disposal yet every year it releases a fixture that is about tv ratings not ensuring all clubs have capacity to maximize revenue and exposure. Its a joke - and a short sighted one. Collingwood have a huge fan base which is just strengthened by prime time exposure. Yet the AFL bang on about ensuring all clubs are competitive and can grow. Well its impossible to grow without exposure. They should follow the NFL lead where the coveted Monday night slot is equally shared among all clubs, big and small - despite pressure from the broadcasters.

I guess you get used to it after a while

So they play Brisbane 4 times?

I really hope they keep michie

Agree. We have the best young forward in the game. And for the next 2-3 years pederson and Dawes to support him (sounds crazy but reflects the relative talent of all 3) with king and maybe Smith coming through

Can't see why they would cut fitzy and pick Watson up. Actually I can. Cutting fitz frees up a spot on the list. If they rookie Watson the free spot remains. Is that right? If so perhaps worth a punt if nothing else catches our eye draft wise

So he played an important role in a third of our wins. Not bad. Be nice to have him available to cover Murphy again next season.

I disagree with all of the above bar one. Mat Jones contributed last year, indeed wasn't he was a crucial element in of our wins IIRC (though i can't remember which one) with a shut down job on a key hb playmaker? If so he was factor in one of our 6 wins. He provided run and carry, did his job and covered the loss of injured players. That adds up to more than nothing. Not sure of his contract status but if he is contracted i can't see how you could rookie him. Pay him out then pay him a rookie sapary? He'd probably take that. Michie was among our best in the last 3 games, partic against Carlton. He makes good decisions, is quick and a good, penetrating kick. The penny has dropped. Terlich stays and is good depth. No harm in keeping him given we are unlikely to pick up a delisted player. Besides we should honour contracts if we expect our players to. Yep, promote Harms.

My apologies. On reflection my comment was much harsher than I intended. And given I know SFA about juniors more than a little hypocritical. I think parish is a stone cold certainty at 3, not because I know anything about him but because of the signals coming from the club. As for pick 7 from JMs comments you'd think a forward might be on the cards but I still think they are desperate for mids. Sure to be someone who is super competitive, which makes me wonder about curow. He (and others) describes himself as cruisy. Doesn't mean he isn't fierce but makes me think more garlo stoner than viney tiger