Bluey's Dad

Tim Watson quoted in The Age: "I think what they do want is do want him not to appeal," Watson said. "He is strongly of the view that the best thing for the players is for him to appeal. You've got to secretly admire him for his guts and stance." However, Watson outlined that he would advise his 1993 premiership teammate to cease his action now. "I would say not to appeal," he said. "I can't see what the upside would be." I don't understand Tim's point of view. The best thing for the players is for Hird to appeal, but there is no upside? How is it the best thing if it has no upside? Anyone shed some light on this for me?

lol, you know an Orca's not a fish right? Or are you trying to say we're going to get something better than a 'big fish'?

Anyone tell him that's how tier 1 compo works? I swear people just get more and more misinformed the more people on the radio whine.

Maybe, but the AFL stories on the Essendon drug scandal didn't go to the Essendon website. Maybe the individual club site admins just select which ones to mirror.

I think what stings the worst was remembering the way he played for us. There was such passion in the way he went about everything. He was aggressive and put his body on the line. He was magical to watch. I think the feelings of betrayal are worsened because he embodied everything we wanted from a player, even for so few games. He cried when interviewed about Jimmy. Seemed to me to be as Melbourne as anyone could possibly be. I'm really disappointed it didn't work out.

I really hope 'Prendergasted' catches on. Good stuff

We saw this when Ox pretty much read out GNF's post about Mitch Clark verbatim. The term "blindsided" even made it onto the afl website news story. The first time I read it, it was GNF and nothing else had been reported at the time.

We have Vince and Goodwin. Join the party, Danger!

Perhaps he has a hidden love of baskets and is given to understand that we are a case of them.

Encouraging post. I'm trying to reconcile "well-managed footy club" with "MFC", but it seems to be happening :D

I'm not sure I'd put Luke Ball in that basket. He got to Collingwood because we didn't have the balls to take him. Eddie's smug chuckle on draft day when we didn't call his name said it all.

Doesn't matter. Either way, the price we paid is too high. Not sure If I'm coming across right. I'm trying to say we're grossly under compensated for what we've endured. Pick 4 or Pick 20, it doesn't matter. Either way, losing this much for 8 years isn't worth it. BUT getting a PP, any PP, is better than nothing. If it was a value proposition, no one would even consider paying the losses we have for a PP, even pick 1. I'm saying even pick 1 is under compensating for our extreme badness, and we don't even get that.

Nope. He's worth an "after first pick FA compensation pick" or "tier 1" I think they call it. Which for us, because we are horrible, is pick 3. If it was St Kilda, he'd be worth pick 2. If it was Sydney, he'd be worth Pick 19. The after first pick is supposed to be the equalising factor in compensation so bad teams get compensated more than good ones. The offers we've read about would put him in the tier 1 category.

The more I think about this, the more I think it's just because of the Frawley comp. Although the two have nothing to do with each other, the AFL is all about looking good, and they probably think it would be a bad look if we had 3 picks in the first round. Even if the cost of those 3 picks was: Pick 2 - Being the second worst team in 2014 Pick 3 - Loosing the most sought after free agent in 2014 PP - Loosing 35 games in 8 seasons or whatever that stat was. I bet if you asked any other team to pay that price for that reward, they wouldn't.

Although that's true, the 2 reasons they explicitly stated we would not get one last year were Clark and Hogan. Neither played all year. On that basis alone we should have been given an end of first rounder.

Anything on other forms of assistance?

She is a cruel mistress.

Hope? Hope is that you? I don't remember what you look like.

something something wait for grandma something

I guess if they were sufficiently insulated from unbiased commentary and advice then that might be the case. Hard to believe that though. How could any reasonable person trust being insulated from the outside by the very organisation that betrayed them in the first place?

I'm so sick of the politics, vested interests, biased reporting, favouritism, cronyism and spin that engulfs the game. FFS can't we just have a fun sport to follow?

Caro reckons the players were offered 4 weeks plus finals this year as a penalty but turned it down, WJ quoted her before. That's as watered down as it's going to get. I couldn't believe that was offered, let alone that it was turned down. If I were a player I would have jumped at it. Hopefully they'll end up with proper sanctions that don't embarrass our entire country in front of the world-wide sporting community.

This doesn't sound good to me: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-19/united-crows-back-sacking Van Berlo saying the players had nothing to do with the decision but they are 100% behind the board in sacking Sando. I just can't see a scenario where every single player on the list wanted Sando gone. Smells like spin to me.

I guess it depends. Maybe they were just trying to delay everything for as long as possible. If that's the case, they've done pretty well. Another few more years of delay and they won't have to worry about half their list sitting on the sidelines for months on end.