nutbean

If he turns out half as good as Bernie then a 2nd rounder is cheap. If he turns out half as bad as Tom Gillies then ewwwwww. Melksham circa 2012/13 would be very nice.

I am afraid he is far too eloquent for a Demonland poster.

They switch ends of the table 4 times a roast.

You see - you need to have zero credibility like me then nothing is on the line at all.

Im with you - we gotta think big !

and his watusi is a sight to behold....

Peter Daicos making a comeback ? Just the small forward we need

I use Rivers as the example - he believed that there was very little chance of Melbourne playing finals in the short term and he was coming into the twilight of his career - he opted to go to Geelong where he played into two final series before retiring at the end of the season. I bear him no ill will. So what about the likes of a Frawley - he is 27 - he gets an offer to play in a team that is in premiership window ( and ultimately won the flag) and is almost guaranteed of playing finals for at least a season or two as opposed to staying at Melbourne where we MAY play finals during his career. What would you do ? Many would say - stick fat as Garland is doing - many others choose to take the Frawley path.

Hmmm..don't listen to the coaches...there is a novel idea... ( and on Frawley vs Garland - it is obvious what we supports demand - it is loyalty however if you step into the professional sportsman shoes it may well be that at the end of their careers Frawley has a premiership medal to his name and Garland doesn't. Some footballers would prefer saying that they were one club players - others are happier to say they reached the pinnacle of playing in a premiership side - different folks, different strokes - however I think you find that many players will opt for the premiership shot)

well done to all and to the posters I will quote Bilbo Baggins I don’t know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.

Everyone who is moving and everyone who is not moving - take everything with a grain of salt under the end of trade period. Lots of white noise out there and certs to move will stay put and players not expected to move will find a new home - tis the way of the AFL world

I loved Col's quote - the only better thing would have been to hear Patrick Dangerfield and Dion Prestia both say in unison "“I was watching the game and people said ‘wouldn’t you love success?’ and I said ‘it wouldn’t mean anything to me unless it was with Melbourne’.

It actually means something - it actually means a lot. It means the club holds all the cards. But if you are alluding to the fact that contracted players move - spot on.

Without any insight, I read the deal differently - by making the deal over a long period of time, with the yearly increase in the salary cap - they made an offer knowing that he wouldn't play to 36 but the payments are spread out over a longer, more manageable period. The major risk is of course injury.

Wosha is now officially Essendon coach

No argument from me. He was poetry in motion. Made the hard look very easy.

I am not a huge NRL fan but holy moley that grand final was a great game

I agree with everything ...except your last line. It is what football is all about...therein lies the disconnect between fans who pay hard earned money to watch their team play each week good bad or indifferent (and we supporters have seen mostly bad) and a host of players (not only Frawley) who treat it as a profession.

He had been unimpressive until the last 3 weeks when he had a couple of solid games and a pearler in the big one. He is still a touch iffy by foot but I got rounded on last year by a poster(s) for defending Frawley. I was never for a minute calling him a superstar, I was just annoyed that the minute he put his contract on hold ( and made some fairly unintelligent comments) that he became the biggest dud that pulled on boots that we definitely wouldn't miss and I believe was called a cancer on our club by some. ( just got called that again by a poster above...)I think we look to have done ok out of the deal but so have the Hawks. As to the comment above as to how Frawley will be feeling .... Seriously ????? I am tipping that chip will be pretty damn happy tonight. for the record.... The same treatment is now being meted out to Howe. A superstar ? No. But just because you put your contract talks on hold you don't automatically go from a serviceable footballer to a complete dud.

To a certain extent yes - Paul Roos. He was going nowhere for months. Not interested...not interested...not interested - then bingo. I agree with you that it looks to me that Treloar is going to the Pies and I also think that Danger is going to the cats. We, like most of the cellar dwellers, have to throw a little more to get quality at our club and even though the responses most likely will be a resounding no, I would keep on throwing out offers to anyone we want no matter how convinced we are they won't come. No only means no the day after trading is over. ( as another example - the Cats were convinced they had Frawley signed sealed and delivered all last year- Hawks had a red hot go later in the picture and bingo. We aint no Hawthorn but we still should keep throwing our hat in the ring. The worst that will happen is a player may continue to say no.

Agreed...well almost ... I would have stopped at "I thought his comment was rather unintelligent .." Pretty much sums him up .

I would think not. Roos and co are well aware of the current landscape and players putting contract talks on hold and exploring their options. It is where the competition and player movements have moved to. To me it is more that they see "x" amount of value in Howe and have a fixed idea of what we will pay. I think they also see that Howe is a bright shiny thing that may attract interest above his actual worth from other clubs.

Very rarely do you see Hawthorn backmen torn apart - and this is not in small part due to their midfield pressure being so ferocious that opposition rarely get clean entry into the Hawks back half. Frawley has been quite good the last two games but don't downplay how much help the Hawks backmen get from their mids.

I understand where there can be a perception of bias on any news program where there is "reporting" on an issue - any news service, lateline, 7:30 report and a host of others. I have never understood the claims of bias on Q&A - it pulls panelists from across the spectrum and the audience asks questions. You may wish to point a finger at Tony Jones' moderating or even the questions it allows but can it honestly be said that both sides of the equation don't get a say ?

Sam Rowe ( has that one been done yet ?)