Lucifers Hero

I'd trust Demons 11, who has a good track record of mfc info, a lot more than anything reported in the media.

Pick 7 and Bowes for a salary dump is a furphy. Gold Cost will want a good pick back, most probably a future first and depending where it lies give a pick back. Effectively they are sliding down the first round draft order not simply giving up pick 7. eg from contenders Geelong and Brisbane it might be there future first (high teens), from Ess or Saints it might be their future first and GCS give a 2022 pick back. After all they have plenty of them this year: 7, 25, 31, 34, 43, 52, 67, 70, 79 and they will get pick 5 +/- swaps for Rankine. I reckon they will swap a few the 2022 picks for 2023 picks and won;t use the last three.

Would love some insight into why he decided not to sign 🙏

Another example of how incompetent the Trade Radio set up is the AFL 'Trade Talk' website is showing the 2021 material. No idea where they are posting this year's ramblings to keep track of them or to see if there is anything worthwhile to read. They have a daily blog and that seems about it...

Maybe we didn't give him encouragement to stay...

There wouldn't have been many assistant coaches during the time the report covers. Process of elimination for those who knew them and then the name spreads like wildfire among the media.

Semi official:

The Tradio Radio guys seem to making stuff up as they go along. If I had to guess, Kozzie will sign for two years or four years the latter being his FA year which is when most players sign up to.

MFC have ruled out trading Weideman. Another rubbish story made by Tradio Radio! They should stop throwing names around without any back up. It is getting more and more embarrassing for them.

Absolutely agree that a club has more bargaining power for a contracted player. I was clarifying the Roos reference.

They started going downhill when in 2020 when some players treated the Qld hub resorts like holidays but that didn't stop them whinging about being there. Then they were bundled out of the finals very easily and it has all looked to hard them since. As always, down hill skiers!!

That was for FA's where a club can get a better deal trading them out a year early than getting a lesser AFL compensation pick when an FA.

Thanks for reply. Cornes has been pushing the Port barrow for a while. I wonder if a reference to 'not signing a contract this year' is a bit of embellishment to spice up trade week. Those guys on trade radio are not covering themselves with glory this week let alone credibility. If there was some truth to it I would think it would have been out there by now and other clubs would join the hunt.

Seriously? That has certainly gone under the radar! Something you've heard or read about his contract?

If the AFL used the 'bringing the game into disrepute' rule a club wouldn't need 'behavioral' clauses. It is another example football clubs' and the AFL's 'optics' management and inaction on social behaviour breaches coming home to roost.

Not necessarily. A ruthless approach to list management would be to trade out a couple from our starting 22. Don't blame them if there is little chance of getting into the starting 22. If they can get more chances and better deals elsewhere good on them.

He has shown good VFL form in the ruck and can kick goals. While we all know his weaknesses he needs a fresh start and I really hope he finds one with more senior game opportunities than we can offer him.

Brenton Sanderson seems a loose canon. His latest conjuring trick: "... believes a player like Cam Rayner, the 2017 number one draft pick, could get caught up in all the trade chaos – given Brisbane need draft points to match a potential rival bid for Ashcroft". I didn't hear the trade radio session but going on the media report, he had no basis whatsoever, not even an 'I've heard ..." or "hypothetically' but throws a kids name out there. I get the need for click bait and something to talk about this week but imv it is unfair on the player and family to indulge in such fabrications.

If It wasn't clear I 100% understand their reticence and share their doubts about the AFL it having failed them many many times but you are missing my point about a way to get to a resolution. Anyway, I've posted the information that has come up today. People can interpret it how they wish but just note the last thing I'm doing is defending the AFL and the quoted post makes it look like I do. I don't.

Serious question: who would qualify for the panel with those criteria?

It is understandable the indigenous families feel the Adelaide camp is a good example of the 'system' having failed them. Not only did the AFL Integrity Unit find nothing to see, Work Safe SA also gave the all clear. As I mentioned it is hard to see how the AFL will even get to first base to set up a panel.

The more serious concern in terms of trying to get a resolution is that the indigenous families don't wish to testify or for the issues to go into the legal system (according to John Ralph). Without them telling their stories to a representative body Clarkson, Burt and Fagan will forever stay accused and don't get the opportunity to put their case.

Beveridge and Toomey saying Ess not interested and Toby will either go to GWS or stay at the Dees.

Just to add more layers of complexity. According to John Ralph first-nations-families-reservations-to-give-testimonies “It’s become a political minefield, and my strong understanding is there are deep reservations about – what now are five First Nations families – in terms of them actually testifying. It would be a disaster if they didn’t testify, because we’d never get a resolution on this. “Those families believe they’ve already told Phil Egan their story, they’ve already told Russell Jackson about it. They haven’t got confidence the AFL can work through this, because of the Eddie Betts saga and some of the allegations there that were never really followed through.” “They (the families) don’t want it to go to the legal system, but that independent panel, they want it to be truly independent. They feel like they’ve had 30 years of racism issues and people not being censored for racist comments. Meanwhile Fagan has confirmed his categorical denial of accusations and “I also confirm my intention to participate fully in any investigative process, provided that it is independent, fair and impartial, and respects my right to be heard". chris-fagan-statement The latter part looks like a recent addition to his prior statement. Maybe he has read the John Ralph report. It looks like both parties have reservations about the 'independence' and 'fairness' of the panel process. Good luck to the AFL putting together a panel that satisfies all parties. This may take forever just to get to first base.

The football media led by The Age is reporting two years to 2024. BUT The following show his contract is to 2023: AFL Press Release at the time he transferred from GWS. Footywire which is usually accurate. The Contracts thread prepared by yours truly is almost never wrong 😉 However, if anyone can find something more reliable than the football media great but until then its best to stick with one year to the end of 2023. I reckon one media person has said to 2024 and they have all jumped on the bandwagon!