Macca

We gave up pick 2 for White, pick 3 for Hogan & pick 2 again for Tyson & Salem. So it's either/or for mine. The picks given up can be utilised on possible A graders but that's the chance you take.

Pick 3 for Brayshaw ... happy with that (so far) Hogan in the mini draft ... excellent result (again, so far)

I wouldn't necessarily do that either. Quite happy to take chances in the draft when applicable but I accept the consequences of those chances that are taken Boom or bust

1st round draft picks can become busts 'nb' ...in fact, more than half of all 1st round draft picks have become busts. If I can find the time, I'll list them all one day. Equally, there are just as many top players who have been picked outside of the first round It's a bad system

Even if we did find out what difference would it make anyway? We made our decisions in a bad system. Moaning in hindsight is pointless.

Spurs out! ... came down to the last play in game 7 - the Clippers now go on to play Houston. Cleveland will miss Kevin Love - I now believe that the Bulls can win their conference semi-final match-up. The other series' can go either way. Conference semi final match-ups Atlanta Hawks vs Washington Wizards Cleveland Cavaliers vs Chicago Bulls Golden State Warriors vs Memphis Grizzlies Houston Rockets vs Los Angeles Clippers

Here's the 2012 list ... check out numbers 33, 34 & 35 (nice work if you can get it) BRW Top Sports Earners 2012 As t20 gains in popularity more & more young sportsmen are going to choose cricket over other sports - especially here in Australia if CA are smart with their endeavours to capture young talent. The impact may not be huge on the AFL but the AFL would be fully aware of the increased competition they will have in the future (with regards to the choices that young sportsmen have these days).

I get what you're saying 'cfh' but I actually believe and have nearly always believed that those picking these draftees are doing the best they can, all things considered. They are making decisions that may or may not work out - all the expertise in the world still doesn't guarantee anything. The real skill in drafting is being able to pick the diamonds in the rough ... even so, Brady at pick 199 still doesn't make a whole lot of sense. All drafts have numerous players that end up being overrated and underrated. It's the same story every year in all the drafts. Our draft (the AFL's) is the most confusing of all (mainly because of the age of the draftees) In the NFL, most of these draftees are 22-23 years old and there are still numerous busts. Having said all that, I still accept the drafting process to a large degree and the results and picks that come out of these drafts are all quite fascinating. My expectations are always tempered though - 2 of the big questions out of this draft will be Winston & Mariota. Can both be great or could both be busts? Or any other result in between? As for GB's picks so far ... I've read up about Randall & Rollins but to make a prediction on how they're going to turn out would be a guess. Randall is a safety & Rollins is a CB but are either or both going to be productive players? Who knows? .

The timeline needs to fit in with the blood tests too .. It's entirely possible that all the Essendon players were administered with TB4 (knowingly) and for the TB4 to not show up in those "said" blood tests (because it was out of their system) So, if they are in fact found guilty of taking TB4 by the CAS (if WADA appeal) then the lack of positive tests (if that was to eventuate) shouldn't make any difference. WADA/ASADA just needs to prove intent (normally that's the case) The '"proof" part can be as little as importing or purchasing a product that contains PED's. Where the lines have been crossed is the whole burden of proof/ comfortable satisfaction/ absolute guilt/ beyond reasonable doubt argument. The more confusing it all becomes (or became) the greater the chance the Essendon players can or could get off (in my opinion) Basically, if the tribunal had followed the WADA agreement to the letter then they should have found the players guilty ... as it stands, it seems to me that the tribunal wanted a lot more than "comfortable satisfaction" The rules of engagement were shifted. Again, it's just my opinion rather than me reporting the facts. Most of what I've written is already known but sometimes it's necessary for a bit of a refresher.

The evaluation of Watts' game is not really the issue here - his supporters can generally see his faults and his detractors can see those same faults. Where the evaluation differs is the expectations attached to Jack - my opinion is that it's his 7th year and what you see is probably what you're going to get. He may improve dramatically but more likely his improvement will be incremental. His draft pick number is very difficult to ignore because of all the hype attached to top end draft picks - but it's gone way past that now. He was drafted in 2008 and is that under 18 year he had back then even relevant any more? His team play when he has the ball in his hand can't be questioned though - he's got vision, creativity and excellent disposal skills - his team play is not in a traditional sense either - his basketball background aids his team play in the sense that players are often "released" when he gets the ball to them. Roos just needs to figure out a way for Jack to get more of the ball. He did get 3 clearances late in the game last week so we might see him used that way again - throwing him on the ball for periods in the 2nd half of games could be a ploy that Roos uses again.

Might be Tuesday week dc ... the original tribunal verdict came down on March 31 IIRC. 42 days from then is Tuesday 12th May. I've given up trying to guess what might happen - I would like WADA to appeal just so we can get some closure either way. To not appeal would leave a lot of unanswered questions. .

You're right of course but most people will stick to their argument that they're not taking any notice of his draft pick number. If you do a search you'll find there are hundreds of threads on our top end end picks (Watts has over 200) yet later draft picks hardly get much attention at all. Sylvia has over 150 threads and he just happens to be a pick 3. Many people will acknowledge that the draft is not a very accurate measure and is largely flawed but many of those same people still refer back to drafts as if those drafts are accurate. Since the inception of the draft (1986) more than half of all the 1st round draft picks have become busts (in terms of expectations) The forgotten drafts .

My question centred around whether these documents "seized" by Worksafe might be new evidence that WADA hasn't seen as yet. A would-be appeal by WADA might need these documents as supporting evidence (if WADA indeed have access to the documents that Worksafe has obtained) Of course, a lot will depend on what is contained in those documents.

Part of being a top player is effort, dedication, absolute determination, vision/creativity and skill. All the great players have all these attributes but most players fall short in at least one area. Sylvia's greatest deficiency was his lack of vision and creative skills - he didn't have the capacity to bring his teammates into the game to any great extent. Usually players with his base talents can do that but he couldn't. If we look back in hindsight it was a glaring omission from his game - 'rjay' alerted us about it a few years ago and It's something that many of us couldn't see unless we were really looking. Looks can be deceiving sometimes. His game was far more suited to a bygone era really ... if he had played in the 80's or the early to mid 90's he would have probably had a much more fruitful career. He came into football when the game was changing to dramatic effect - 2 way running, flooding, the 'press' and a heavy slant towards players being good defensively caught a lot of our players out - not just Col. I bear him no grudges.

Could WADA have access to these same documents?

We've got a tough 6 weeks coming up ... any win against Freo, Syd, Hawks, Dogs, Port or the Pies will be a hard earned one, After that, it gets a hell of a lot easier. 2 wins in the next 6 games would leave us at 4/6 (which is sort of acceptable) But that's from a supporters point of view ... the playing list and FD will only be thinking about winning any game. The team has already won 2 games that most thought we'd lose and we really should have beaten Adelaide too (lost the game against the Crows in the last few minutes of the 1st quarter and the first few minutes of the 3rd quarter) We desperately need the players who are coming into the side because of injury to play their part ... and we need to see an improvement from the rest of the team (as good as we've been, there's still loads of room for improvement) I reckon the key is our forward line - Dawes & Watts both need to do a lot more and both can ... Hogan just needs to keep playing the way he is and our small forwards need to play their part. Another performing marking target on occasions (vanders?) would place pressure on the opposition too. Of course, the forward line is dependent on the midfield so they need to continue their improvement too. We could ill afford to lose Tyson. As for who we're better than - it's way too early to tell but the speculation is a bit of fun. 10 wins will make us better than a number of sides ... and 10 wins is achievable. .

There was always going to come a time when we were going to question certain players who might come into the side ... all we needed was the seniors to start winning/looking like a football side. The transitional period we're now in puts pressure on our depth. The next big step for the club is to have 28-30 AFL standard players on our list. After that, adding 1 or 2 is a difficult assignment. One more draft to get the number up to 24-26 and another draft to get to 28-30. At least we're finally on our way but we're still going to need a fair slice of luck with draftees. Roos knows this and that's why one of his biggest attributes is identifying players in their early 20's* who can play the game and needing an opportunity. The draft is just one way of bringing talent to the club ... acquiring 2 or 3 top rate free agents wouldn't hurt over the next 2 off-seasons. In the meantime, we need to cross our fingers that we don't get too many injuries and hope that a few of our depth players are capable of coming in and playing a role. They don't need to be standouts. *The recruitment of vandenBerg looks to be a stroke of genius (so far )

Fair enough - you answered that well and I wasn't trying to put you on the spot 'rw' I guess I've just decided to go into bat for him to offset the unrealistic expectations that I see here. I'll say it again but he's only played 19 games and a number of them have been as a sub. He also played 14 of those games in 2013 when the whole club was in disarray ... we hardly had a decent player that year. He probably should have spent his first year at Casey but instead of that, he was thrown into the fray.

So do we go back to the well where we sort of know what we're going to get or do we take a punt and invest in the future? I also saw enough promise in Toumpas in his 1st season to warrant giving him an extended opportunity. If he comes in I'd like to see him get 4 games (at least) Bail & M Jones weren't listed in our best today for Casey and at least Toumpas got his hands on the ball. Again, I'm not saying that he's going to be a top player or even a good player. My argument is for opportunity. My fear is that if he doesn't break into the seniors soon then what? Coming into their 3rd year, a draftee needs to show the MC something - in the seniors.

Question ... do you have a general disappointment in Toumpas based on your expectations of the no.4 pick in the draft? ... and what are your expectations of a no.4 pick? Me ... I hope for a good player or better but if that doesn't happen I put the result down to the vagaries of the draft. I don't lose any sleep at all if a draftee doesn't make it - no matter what number they get taken at. They either make it or they don't make it. It's that simple. Picks 1-10 - hope for a good player or better Picks 11-20 - hope for a good player Picks 21-30 - pray for a good player Picks 31 onwards - thank your lucky stars if you get a good player.

All well and good dc but who comes in for Kent? Bail (goes hard but has had numerous chances and has highly questionable disposal skills) M Jones (ditto) McKenzie (ditto) Riley (maybe as a defensive forward but again, he has questionable disposal skills) Pedersen (I highly doubt we'll go with another tall to replace Kent) Stretch (huge maybe - him being selected would surprise) Gawn/Spencer (maybe if we feel we need another pure ruckman) Grimes, Terlich and Fitzy are in line to replace Jetta with Grimes being next in line you'd reckon, There's also a chance that Tyson may miss. I'm not exactly a fan of Toumpas either - I just want to see him given an opportunity and a fair go (and I certainly won't be judging him according to his draft pick number like many do)

Were you there dc? I'm not going to take one persons opinion as being fact here - there might be an agenda. Another person who was there said he played quite well. So who do we believe. Dinky kicks? They've all been guilty of that on occasions. He's not Robinson Crusoe. He's a 3rd year draftee - we need to find out if he can cut it ... many others in the 2's have had 5+ seasons and are extremely limited footballers. In fact, those types are taking us nowhere. If Toumpas fails - so be it. But he needs an opportunity either way. I also reckon the Toumpas detractors want to keep him at Casey so as to strengthen their own agenda later on. The PF brigade are gaining numbers but I don't value any of their opinions. They are way too impatient and believe in the draft too much.

Maybe they were saving him for the seniors next week? (at least 2 are almost certainly out of the seniors through injury (Jetta & Kent) whilst Tyson might be doubtful) Others have said he played reasonably well and the positive is that Toumpas had 20 odd possessions in the first half when the pace was on. That's what the MC would be looking at (amongst other things)

We need to find out if Toumpas can play at senior level - because of injuries, we've got a chance to promote him and give him a good crack at it (4 game block) A match committee does not think along the lines of bringing in a player for 1 or 2 games (unless they are last man in for an otherwise automatic choice) They will give a player an opportunity to prove themselves. Others have been given ample opportunities and have been found wanting. They really are now only depth players for when we have a rash of injuries (which may or may not happen) It's worth noting that Toumpas has only played 19 games (14 of which came in that horrid, dysfunctional year of 2013) It's often accepted that a player usually needs 60-70 games under his belt before that player will start to feel totally comfortable at AFL level. On top of all that, he was our leading possession winner in the 2's today so in many ways, he's earned his spot. Straight swap for Kent whilst Grimes will probably come in for Jetta.

Mine is just an opinion stuie ... he's still got to perform like any other player. I reckon we've got about 12-14 performing to satisfactory or better levels (in terms of what the team needs) We get to 18-20 and we're doing very well ... and if 6-8 can take their game to another level we're cooking with gas. Watts has a role to play with a fair bit of upside - I don't see anyone in the 2's taking his spot in a hurry (Pedersen is more of a utilty/2nd ruck option) It's all about the team - creating mis-matches is where Watts comes into proceedings. Others like Watts can play a role when we create an advantage but can they be as damaging in that scenario?