pantaloons

Tanking has resulted in numerous premierships in the AFL and major sports around the world. Tanks don't kill people. Imbeciles kill people.

Computer, Dr Evil and John Dorge all give a resounding no. Not good enough, and doesn't play a position we are desperately lacking in.

I hope you've got a good microwave.

I recommend anyone shocked by today's delistings steer clear of watching The Sixth Sense lest you be rolling around on the floor suffering a heart attack at the end of the movie. Today's action was predictable, and in my view, fairly tame. We already knew three of the eight were gone, and the rest of the choppings were on the cards. Those eleven or so players who were left uncontracted until October were always going to be in the gun. Most of those still uncontracted are not really AFL standard if we are being honest, due to lack of skill, size or ability, but seem to have survived this list lodgement because they compete. Anyway, thanks to these lads for their service. The end of the AFL dream for most of them. Others have said it, but not trading Bate for 39 was a lose-lose for club and Bate, and was always going to be the case. As zany a decision now as it was then.

Give Viney 1, 5, 6 or 7. That way I can save a couple bob on my son's impending guernsey purchase.

No worries. I wondered about Ball. Though did he just nominate the Pies as his team or did he specifically put a price on his head? Money wouldn't have been a deterrent for Melbourne, but him refusing to play for us would.

I'm not in favor of the Gysberts trade, but is a membership card actually flammable? It would be mildly embarrassing if you went on a tirade in front of Neeld and then tried to light up your membership only for it to fail to ignite.

Can you nominate your price in the national draft? I didn't think you could. In which case, it's another reason the PSD would be preferable for him.

Wow, we are going round in circles at a rapid rate. I'll leave it at this and people can argue and babble amongst themselves. I'm not suggesting we receive pick 8 for Martin. I'm suggesting we'd have been better off with pick upgrades. I don't think freeing up list spots was reason enough to trade these guys for diddly.

For the love of Pete. I think I've been pretty clear. To recap: 1. If Neeld wanted to trade those three today because they're the spawn of Satan, a cancer on club culture or just not part of his plans, then be my guest. 2. We have picks 49, 53, 70, 73, 74 and 88 in the middle of the draft. That is nonsensical. 3. These players were obviously worth something to their new clubs.

That's not what I said. People were asserting that we needed to trade Gysberts, Morton and Martin because we needed the list space. I'm saying that we still have plenty of guys I'd delist in a heartbeat and that trading for the sake of creating list spots was not necessary.

Use your brain and have a think about it rather than rubbishing other posts. 46 for Morton and 49 would have been worth more than 88. The pick downgrade with the Gysberts trade was laughable. Pick 73 in the Martin deal is utterly useless. The returns on these players is effectively nothing. You're missing the point that these picks we've accumulated between 49 and 88 are garbage. As for needing list space, can none of you seriously rattle off a handful of players to delist?

Where do nice guys finish? If they wanted to trade those guys, fine, but you've got to do better than that. We should have at the very least come up with some pick upgrades a la North and Collingwood near the deadline. 53 and 73 for Martin? Useless. It can be dressed up any way people like, but to end up with a draft result like this is nothing short of amateurish.

Don't forget good old pick 70.

Unforgivable to end up with that collection of slop picks. Total lack of smarts.

For Pete's sake, I can't believe I'm that desperate, but just give them 49, 53 and 70 for Ray and be done with it. We don't have a recruiting manager and clearly were not interested in using any decent picks so just [censored] them off.

The only way I can reconcile this trade is if it leads us to trading picks 49, 53, 70, 73, 74, 88, Bennell, Petterd and Bate to GWS for Pick 1.

On the surface, this appears to be narrowly behind Bassett for Collins and Williams as the worst trade in MFC history. I hope I'm proven wrong.

What pick, Norm?

We don't know if it's a terrible deal yet because we don't know what the pick would be. I wouldn't trade Gysberts unless the return was very good though.

Well, it doesn't really add or detract from my argument, but as you wish: PJ for 29 Brooks for 6 and 31 Wood for 14 Renouf for 33 Lisle for 29 Old Everitt 33 Street 20 Meesen 38 Warnock and 69 for 24, 56 and 72 Hale and 52 for 19 and 71

Huh? That's not their draft position, but what they were traded for.

Tell that to clubs that spent similar or better picks on the likes of Meesen, Brooks, Robert "the lesser" Warnock, Lisle, Renouf, Hale, Paul Johnson, Wood, washed up Everitt, the list goes on.

Because he is a freakishly tall human being, and people of that size command a lot more than people of the same ability but 10-25cm shorter.

No. Why take poor man's Clark when you have Clark? Besides, we need an a-grade midfielder with 4, especially if we're not going to address the midfield in the trade period.