Diamond_Jim

Time to drop Alice... Used to like it but no more I live in fear of being GCS' bunny in Darwin. Bulldogs lost to GCS this year and lost the following week in Melbourne Bulldogs also got an SA team in Gather Round (and lost)

too small we need a tall

The boundary line game is finished. Ask the Lions who are probably best suited to play the style with multiple fit high class experienced forwards. The strange thing is that when two corridor teams meet (GWS v Pies for example) the corridor gameplan often falls down as well

You simply can't carry two injury prone under performing aged forwards. If we had no salary cap and a list of 60 then maybe.. but in the real world something has to give

Take a look at the third quarter Last quarter only marginally better (put the scores out of your mind as that was the thing that kept it interesting)

Lions played slow boundary line football like we do. Collingwood probably should have won by around 20 but they didn't really take the game on either. Not sure I would call it a great game. Tentative close game more like it

Lions kind of deserved that Have played conservatively all day

Lions need to attack... not hug the boundary

Slow play that quarter by both teams

Go hard for whoever missed their finals team if they fit the bill.

With deals like they have given to North and the entry of Tasmania plus the inevitable 20th team a year or two later the future draft landscape is a minefield

Had the same thoughts yesterday. Cannot continue the same error in 2024. One year contract for a makeshift forward. Perhaps a Melksham type if no talls available (McAdam is a decent start)

Watching the 2021 GF again. Before the game Fox had a segment on Bulldogs smothering. Not one looked like Maynard's uncontrolled leap forward into a player... Football Act !!!!

Only a row.... In the AFL members I could have a section. If on level 4 one got most of the stand

Robbie Williams got a million which was considered a bargain

Would it be healthy or maudlin if I watched the 2021 GF witth Dennis Cometti commentary. This one hurts even more than last year... What a waste

Tend to agree.... there's not much else available. (Save for a back up ruck of the Preuss type) We may even not take up all our list spots if TMac and BBB also retire

Umpiring living up to the men's standard but we'll take it

The flipside is that assuming North get bottom of round 1 for McKay is he rated as one pick difference? Could be

About the 5th last game JJ played one of the best VFL games I've seen in the midfield. He has the talent

There's smoke... there's uncertainty... there's fire How large is the question

They do but what does it say. One of the things about contracts is imagining imponderables and dealing with them. GCS contracted Ablett junior and massively front loaded his five odd year deal. The contract had no clawback provisions when he left early. Then there was the Treloar fiasco. (Admiitedly not the lawyer's fault that time)

Nail on the head By asking the question post trade who takes the risk.

The Saga continues See this post I just made on the Trade Rumors thread A potentially big twist in the Grundy deal... (Collingwood playing the spoiler) This column can reveal that, when the deal goes through, Collingwood will seek clarity from the AFL as to whether the club can remove itself from the deal, and therefore clear the $350,000-a-year space in their future total player payments. A senior club source, who wouldn’t speak publicly due to the confidentiality of player contracts, confirmed the Magpies had discussed internally the status of Grundy’s seven-year Collingwood contract if he were to move clubs again. Collingwood’s position will be that it had a deal with Grundy and Melbourne, but not with Grundy and Sydney. It’s a position that might be difficult to get past the bosses at AFL HQ, given that Andrew Dillon and Laura Kane are both lawyers. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/money-money-money-why-the-grundy-poker-game-is-heating-up-20230926-p5e7s6.html

A potentially big twist in the Grundy deal... (Collingwood playing the spoiler) This column can reveal that, when the deal goes through, Collingwood will seek clarity from the AFL as to whether the club can remove itself from the deal, and therefore clear the $350,000-a-year space in their future total player payments. A senior club source, who wouldn’t speak publicly due to the confidentiality of player contracts, confirmed the Magpies had discussed internally the status of Grundy’s seven-year Collingwood contract if he were to move clubs again. Collingwood’s position will be that it had a deal with Grundy and Melbourne, but not with Grundy and Sydney. It’s a position that might be difficult to get past the bosses at AFL HQ, given that Andrew Dillon and Laura Kane are both lawyers. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/money-money-money-why-the-grundy-poker-game-is-heating-up-20230926-p5e7s6.html