nutbean

What ? You are going to give swallow time are you before condemning his selection ? What a novel concept. I might be wrong but wasn't cook taken in the same draft ? Prepared to slam darling over cook but you will wait on swallow. A touch selective no ?

I have no clue ? Please explain to me in what world a rookie selection is not speculative ?

outranks major letdown

in fact if we want to draw the line today on 2010 (which included Darling) the whole bloody industry got it wrong as the best of the bunch so far has probably Heppel at no 8. Swallow has been ok but no world beater abd looking at that list now Jeremy Howe would probably be elevated to a first round draft pick. Surprise surprise - the players that had an instant impact are in the top 4 teams Isaac Smith, Puopolo, Fasolo, Darling - so yes playing with mature stars in a well coached enviroment is going to be so very important.

And by your very example of Rockcliff and Fyfe it shows the impossibility of the task when everyone passes on Rockcliffe adn Fyfe until they became highly speculative picks - the same as Howe was speculative for us. If Darling was such a sure thing why didnt WCE pick him up with pick 3 - Gaff has been no where near as impressive as Darling. Because Darling wasnt considered by WCE as a first round selection.

How can Dimwit defend his ongoing actions - yesterday AD condemned his actions but wouldnt accept his resignation. Today he lets he scamper from the problem. Sack this incompetent.

I am proud of the way the club has handled itself in adversity - I am a little worn out by it all and I patiently await the day when i can be proud of how we won a premiership and how humble we were in victory given all the adversity we have lived though

i shouldnt have not made light of it. i apologise. The stupidity of it is that if a player whinged then so be it but this whole onlythe indigenous boys meeting in group would have been so easy to check up on and equally hard to get the coach and five players to lie about it happening.

Nothing frustrates me more than goals that should be kicked that arent. Brad was always guilty of this.( and we got a few of those too)

was there a big hooha when they broke of into backs, mids and forwards group? Was there rumblings that they should be trained individually rather than in discriminatory groups ?

gutsy mark - not one person on this site has ever questioned Barty's guts. Did anyone see Brad Millers grab for the tiges in the first minute of the game ? A pearler. He then went back and slotted it straight through the small sticks .sigh

I hope you are right - we all look at the games from different angles but I firmly sit in the camp that he needs to play 2's until he shows more desperation. I do not have the expectation that he dives head first into big contested footy packs - that has never been his go. i want him using his assets - linking, taking the outside handball, leading up and spreading wide. ( there was misreport in the HS article - they called him a star - it has been a while since he was a star)

As long as he talked to them ranga by ranga not as a group I dont have a problem with it

I am completely dillusional - I always believe we can win. I never imagine 10 goal losses. The worst my mind can conjure up is a spirited small loss and that my friends is why I look 102 - years of expectations shattered.

And that is correct approach. On something as important as selling advertising on the jumper a competent administrator would budget for its value. So rather than sell it cheap and lock yourself into a below par arrangement that has the potential to impact further sponsorship ( Set the bar low and how do think other potential sponsors will negotiate in the future. ) you contine to work at gaining sponsorship with the best strategic partners at the best $ figure. You have contingency plans to make up the shortfall by cuts and other streams of revenue.

What is the KPI for sponsorship. 1/ How much of the jumper the sponsors names occupies ? or 2/ How much money we receive and for how long we receive the sponsorship regardless of the size and position of the occupation on the jumper I think this is where the argument is getting lost. It is not about the back or front of the jumper, the shorts , the socks or the jockstraps. We have just landed our biggest ever sponsor and will continue to look to add to this and not undervalue our real estate. I dont understand the problem with this. Edit: any house can be sold - its just a matter of how low you set the reserve price

I'm with you - his name is way too hard to splel

Mark Neeld Presser. 1/ Happy with the AFL response ( Demetriou and Mifsud) 2/ Accepts what Aaron told him 3/ Has no idea who started the false information What I did like was his grumpiness - and how he pointedly woud not answer or interpret questions that clearly should be directed at the Demetriou and his comments .

All is good - I could have done worse - I could have called Akermanis a journalist.

I will edit my comments as your are correct. My issue is not only did Mifsud release details of a private conversation, he released it to a highly inappropriate person - a person who has the power ( and used it ) to disseminate any information he sees fit.

My only issue is this. The club needs to stand strong and do what is right in all things and that includes dropping players who do not perform. If we drop Davey, Green and say Tynan( please dont drop him), the first journalist who asks if we dropped Davey because of "what he has said" - I would show contempt for the question by replying. "we have narrowed the culprit down to 8 - the 3 we are dropping and 5 more at Casey we wont be promoting. We will keep dropping players from the seniors and not promoting players from Casey until the malcontent owns up"

There are some facts to this issue and some unproven allegations. On the facts as they stand, I find galling the Demetriou could support Mifsud in any way shape or form. - Demetriou has stated that Mifsud does not leak to the media -WTF ? Facts - 1/ a private conversation was had between someone and Mifsud in his official AFL capacity 2/ He has revealed details of this conversation to a party outside the issue - a breach of confidentiality - sackable offence right there 3/ The person Mifsud breached the confidentiality to is a media commentator - sackable offence number two Whether the person lied,didnt lie, change his story, was misunderstood is immaterial. Mifsud has taken an official conversation and revealed it a party outside the AFL - a media commentator no less. These are facts and the facts are indefensible. As to who said what to Misfud - I have not the vaguest idea and will not condemn on speculation. The 'reports" have said a senior MFC indigenous player and we only have one of those. But we are relying on journalists and media commentators say so that Aaron Davey has said anything so this is allegations not fact. My only issue is my faith took a massive hit on believing a press conference from a kid in March last year and it turned out to be hokum. Unfortunately that is the way I am built so once again, in the absense of any proof I will believe the statements Aaron has made. On a different note - I separate this from the playing issue and I walked out of the G on Saturday convinced he should be the first player from the seniors named at Casey this week and what has transpired over the last 24 hours does not change my view.

How could you slander one of your own - I still reckon Scully is staying

its just Aarons new release

breaking news on AFL 360 stand by