Diamond_Jim

Sounds believable AF....... if GWS don't win next year I do see some of their players leaving. There is just so long that you can ignore the money that will be thrown at some of them

First saw Fritsch play in the opening round this year at Williamstown. Early in the first quarter someone took a strong pack mark. From the pack emerged this young beanpole. When he did it again shortly thereafter I looked up my trusty guernsey numbers as provided by KC to find out that the guy was called Fritsch. Watched him at four or five other games and while mainly hoping for a break out game by the Weed I could not help but notice that this guy was always a chance for a mark and good goal. Would be interesting to hear from others how he does tackle wise and when the ball is on the ground. There seems to be little doubt that he is the top pick from the VFL for the coming draft. The only question is which club will blink first in fear that he may not get to their pick in the next round. My guess is a late second rounder and if not he will be gone by the time our third round comes around.

he won't be there 3rd round is what most think

has the potential ability to be a Gunston type player ........ definitely worth considering

The present game plan is not going to deliver 16 wins simply because while it makes the team competitive against better teams it allows lower teams to stay in the game. When every game is around a 50/50 chance the upsets increase.

But is this true? If so you would expect our effective clearance rate to be top notch but it's average at best. Please don't think I'm knocking him but he has a way to go

Take a deep breath and think on this statement. We are a high percentage handball team many of which are in the nature of old fashioned circle work. Many people have said that Oliver needs to increase his kicking percentage. Lot of upside for Oliver but a good reality check for those who think he is an automatic elite.

Harry had a job telling lottery winners that they had won the big one. IIRC it was for the Oz version of the UK soccer pools. Big money for the winners. Because H was a trusted figure many would ask H what they should do with their money. It was alleged that H received an undisclosed commission from some of these investments in return for his recommendation. With the general economic collapse in '89 these schemes went bad and Harry's role came to light. Rex H was not a fan of Harry as I recall. Anyway he did his time and should now be remembered for the larger than life character that he was. Footy was a very different game in the days of radio and 3AW was king in the late70's and '80's. His sidekick Tommy Lahif was a mad Port supporter and was a real genuine character.

On the start time I have begun to like the 1:15(?) starts simply because the game is played in the winter sunshine and in good light. Very pleasant sitting in the AFL members in the winter sun. Even better if we are winning.

Excuse me for not reading all of the 23 pages but I have dipped in and out of this thread a few times. A couple of questions. 1.Will we have to trade picks and/or players to get him? 2. 600K sounds light in current terms and if it is more what does it do for retaining the large number of key players we need to sign next year?

Of course we could add in the opening of the stadium entry doors (thus creating a wind) to help the home team. This apparently worked wonderfully well for the Russian javelin throwers at the Moscow Olympics in 1980.

Adelaide oval in cricket was always the interesting one: Traditionally hits to the long on or long off boundary frequently allowed the batsmen to run five. Conversely the boundaries square of the wicket were often cleared for six. Boundary ropes have massively changed the game in cricket. Fascinating post on another thread that mentioned the Docker's training facility has other ground dimensions marked out on it.

Interesting to look at them also by reference to home game averages: We are easily the leader of the "rest of the pack". In EPL terms it is time for us to break into the champions league. (Not sure if it includes the Alice Springs game in our average. If it does the average MCG attendances would be way higher.) AFL Season Match Type Home/Away Sort By « 2016 Attendances 2017 AFL Home Match Attendance Team Games Total Average Richmond Tigers 7 426,441 60,920 Essendon Bombers 6 337,616 56,269 Collingwood Magpies 6 296,118 49,353 Adelaide Crows 7 324,245 46,321 Port Adelaide Power 6 243,221 40,537 Carlton Blues 6 234,801 39,134 West Coast Eagles 7 264,982 37,855 Melbourne Demons 6 222,465 37,078 Western Bulldogs 6 217,658 36,276 Fremantle Dockers 6 194,787 32,464 Geelong Cats 7 222,687 31,812 Sydney Swans 7 220,370 31,481 Hawthorn Hawks 6 182,293 30,382 St Kilda Saints 7 198,026 28,289 North Melbourne Kangaroos 8 182,860 22,858 Brisbane Lions 6 94,055 15,676 Gold Coast Suns 7 87,214 12,459 GWS Giants

big call.... do you have inside info by any chance ... (who did he barrack for as a kid seems to be a popular indicator as well)

ok... 1. The waivers are probably no issue as there was a lack of "informed consent." 2. Not knowing what the substances were is not a major deterrent except it makes it harder to prove that the damage is caused by the substance 3. The damage itself can be an issue but let's assume you can show the "physical" damage and then monetise that damage. 4. Now comes the big one and that is showing on the balance of probabilities that the substance caused the damage. One can show that a class of drugs is more likely than not the cause of the damage and that would get you home. If however the damage can be caused by multiple events common in the community other than ingesting the class of substances it is far from certain that on the balance of probabilities the player has proved that the damage is caused by the substance. Remember that while the defendant is in theory the club who may be sympathetic to the player and not argue liability etc, the person paying the money and who in practice gets to decide most things about how a case is run is the insurance company. I assume that LM's costs are at least to some extent covered by the AFLPA but because he could have costs awarded against him should he lose it is a major financial decision. The moral is of course that EFC have got off lightly in that even if LM is wrong in his claim the worry that the club has caused to LM and other players and their wives is absolutely reprehensible and unforgivable.

not as simple as that.... if you call a witness you cannot challenge that witness (cross examine) unless you can declare the witness hostile. To have a witness declared hostile is a legal process which at its simplest requires you to show that the witness told you one thing and then when he/she takes the stand says something diametrically opposed. Not very easy in practice. There are also rules that excuse a witness from answering if the answer might incriminate the witness. All in all a minefield. On the other hand the Australian Crime Commission who kicked this saga off has some very fancy powers but I cannot see them getting involved... requires a formal referral etc PS The irony is that in the original AFL tribunal decision there was lots of talk about he failure to call witnesses and what if any presumptions could be brought to bear as a result of that action

Just came across this article on the AFL site a certain synchronicity perhaps http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-08/afls-integrity-unit-head-departs-for-monaco THE AFL'S head of competition integrity, Brett Clothier, is leaving the League after more than eight years to take up a key position in international athletics.

not really... our bottom six rarely fire so we need to think about improving them if we are to be a serious threat in finals. Hannan was a good find and could fill the bill but it is hard to get excited about the likes of JKH, Bugg, Kennedy etc

Balic in JKH out ... not suggesting a trade ... just asking would it be a good outcome

A good and thorough analysis Dee Licious. Hard to disagree with the thrust of your post although I would have some different views around the edges. For example I would offer the Weed two years not three with a view to extending at the end of 2018 if he shows promise. So far this year he has gone backwards a little and therefore next year is a key development year. Same to a lesser extent with Stretch. On JKH.... he is on the fringe but equally there are around three players in the present 22 who are also on the fringe. Are there better available elsewhere .. I don't know. Spencer will definitely be offered a year but whether he is content I do not know. Perhaps the cost of retention is a two year contract. Trengrove is gone unless a miracle occurs in the remaining part of the season. Time for Garland to go and free up a place on the list perhaps. Your excellent post underscores the multiple issues that must be considered in long term list management. Glad I don't have the job.

Today's Age is reporting that Joe Daniher has been offered and is likely to accept a three year contract from the Bomber at $2M for three years. Given what Bulldogs paid for Boyd and the upcoming 20% increase in the salary cap this seems on the light side to me. Perhaps as the article suggests there is a loyalty factor: "Daniher's commitment to Essendon is yet another example of the club's ability to keep its most talented players. Despite an acrimonious last five years as a result of the long-running supplements saga, the Bombers managed to hold on to the vast majority of their stars, including key position men Cale Hooker and Michael Hurley, both of whom had significant contracts thrown at them by rival clubs. With rumours of Essendon's interest in Martin swirling late last week, coach John Worsfold moved to reassure members what was at the front of the club's mind. "My keenness is on Joe Daniher. He's the No.1 priority, and we're working really hard to get Joey signed," Worsfold said on Friday. "I'm not too interested in worrying about anyone else until we get Joey locked away, as well as Zaka and Darcy Parish as well." Not suggesting we should make a play but perhaps it is a sign the Forwards are not the mega stars they once were. Dustin Martin and Fyfe at around $1.5M a year are the new benchmark. Makes you wonder about what the likes of Petracca and Oliver may command next year if they really hit their straps. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-set-to-resign-joe-daniher-on-threeyear-2-million-contract-20170530-gwglth.html

On a slightly wider note it seems that this year could be a big one for trading. Listening to Peter Gordon (president of the Bulldogs) yesterday he made the obvious point that clubs are looking at a 20% increase in the salary cap over the next five years. How individual clubs spread that around is mainly up to them. Some may choose to invest it in one or two players with back ended deals etc. He mentioned this in the context of say North going after Dustin Martin. With our five or so key younger players it will be interesting to see how MFC decides to play the game and of course the likes of Oliver or Petracca could be the subject of big offers from other clubs.

He has an X factor together with an excitement factor... MFC need that along with a good team.. perhaps I am still dreaming of that magical player

There is something about this guy that says he could star in our game plan

Dylan Grimes ?? seriously... if Zak Jones moves the worst pressure move he could have was one to the MFC. Brothers at the same club sounds great but in reality that is the worst competition one can have. Speaking of brothers.... I got onto the end of an SEN interview with Glen jakovich the other night.... does anyone know if he mentioned his brother Allen?