Bluey's Dad

I don't think trading is the issue. I agree with that concept for free agency though - if you're in the top 4 you can't bring in free agents. The issue here IMHO is players nominating destinations. If you're under contract, you go where your club trades you. In exchange, you get free agency.

That's really it. The AFL doesn't give two shits about this sort of stuff. We laugh and make jokes about inconsistencies and bs on-fly rules, wet lettuce penalties and massaged outcomes. At the end of the day, the AFL doesn't care what we think. They have a billion dollar product, and all of their actions are designed to enhance or retain this product. They don't give a [censored] about fairness or equalisation. And we can't do a thing because: 1 - We love the sport and will keep watching. 2 - The number of people who turn off is insignificant when compared to the impact on their bottom line if they don't take these conflicted actions. It would require large scale protest action to get the AFL to actually change their behaviour, and that's just never going to happen. Seriously what are we going to do? Organise a nation-wide boycott of Hawthorn games? There'll never be enough of a groundswell to actually make any noise.

Correct. You can't avoid a drug test and get a lesser penalty than failing a drug test. Otherwise anyone who'd taken a PED (or an illicit drug possibly laced with one) would simply avoid the test and cop the lesser penalty.

Magner was serviceable for a pick 42 rookie draft. But yeah, overall pretty bad.

If I know the AFL, and I think I do, there will be 2 books thrown. The first will be approximately 4 pages long and printed on rice paper. It will be wafted softly in the general direction of Whitfield, and may or may not softly glance his cheek. The second will be an enormous leather-bound volume, bound with a hard spine plus additional appendices, launched from the Herald Sun's media cannon at Sammi Nowland's unsuspecting face.

Surely not. Didn't he put off his retirement plans in Hawaii to come to us on big bucks? Surely putting his plans off for 3 years is enough. I'd be pretty sad if he ended up at Collingwood.

I feel sorry for Sammi Nowland. She does not deserve the [censored] that will be unloaded on her if Whitfield is banned. I had exhausted my supply of vomit bags during the EFC saga (I have a couple left for when Jobe is allowed to keep his medal though), but will now need to order another truck load. The AFL is actively making it difficult for me to follow the sport I love.

I agree. However from my understanding of the rules, if someone avoids an illicit drug test, it's assumed that they have avoided a performance enhancing drug test, and the penalty is therefore harsh. Is that right? I'm pretty sure that's what happened here and that's why Whitfield is in so much trouble.

Ah Wrecker, we may disagree on many things political but you are a funny bastard. Very good.

I can't wait to see the ads with the returning bombers players in the lead-up to this match. Big victorious rock music, drug cheats in full on hero stance mode. Fireworks in the background, maybe explosions. Walking with serious faces towards the camera. Tag lines about "overcoming adversity" and "against the odds". Clips of banned bombers laying massive tackles, showing "grit" and "agro", massive crowd cheering them on. Oh yes. I can't wait.

Banner it!

Ah of course! I'm sorry I had it the wrong way around. Thanks for the correction. I'm not sure what I was thinking, assuming the AFL wanted an ACTUAL penalty.

Tooheys logo makes that

Maybe that's why the loaded up with 11 draft picks. If they're kicked out of the first 2 rounds, they still have picks/points to bid on their academy players. It's not like the AFL can fine them. They're a franchise club. It'd be like moving the money from your left to your right pocket. So what does that realistically leave in terms of penalties?

Can you take this post to AFL House? Or even maybe to someone in the media. These are all excellent points, especially the one about multiple picks and open list spots. That change could not have been clearer from the AFL, and now GWS have all those points. I guess it's possible that when it comes time for them to actually use the points on draft day, the AFL will say no? Maybe? I dunno, following this sport is too much work sometimes. The mental acrobatics to make sense of it all is just exhausting.

Yeah this makes no sense to me either. Trades are a unreliable, and to meet the requirements they MUST trade to get the picks in to satisfy the rules. I assume if they are unable to, the AFL will just rejig the rules again.

I think there was an article today or yesterday saying ASADA have sought outside council, basically in the event that the AFL squib the penalty. Probably a good idea.

This explains the AFL ruling: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-trades-2016-geelong-carlton-close-on-tuohy-deal-20161019-gs5okq.html

Lol

I wouldn't mind one of Barry either. We can use it when someone unintentionally wrecks their own argument. "You just Prendergasted yourself"

They called their draft forums "Essendon is not appealing draft board". I lol'd.

Sure, but WHICH ONE? Dun dun duuuuuuuuuuuuun. PS I hate the new 52.

As much as I'd love to get Hibberd for second round next year, he probably is worth 29 this year. If we get him for 29, I think it's a fair deal.

Cool isn't it? The better Hibberd plays for us, the more likely it is to devalue to pick Essendon get in exchange for him.

Is the tweet still up? I wanna link it to a north supporter lol