GHardeman
Team Captain
- May 26, 2013
- 334
- 290
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Looks like we will get the other half of the pack.Which we got a half eaten pack of burger rings as repayment, Melbourne at least will get a decent pick
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Looks like we will get the other half of the pack.Which we got a half eaten pack of burger rings as repayment, Melbourne at least will get a decent pick
Looks like we will get the other half of the pack.
Yes Melbourne are in a rough patch at the moment, which is of their own doing.And all us who barrack for Melbourne can just rot? It is not our fault either. We have had one AA player in the last eight years and the Premiers just cherry picked him for unders because of rules that came in after he was signed.
No. Some of it is of the previous administration's doing and some of it is unfortunate circumstance. There have been plenty of mistakes made at Melbourne, but they are now getting punished on the field and in the court of popular opinion for decisions made years ago by people who have been discredited and gone. Is the Mitch Clark situation Melbourne's fault? Could they have done anything else to help the guy out? I am not saying it is all bad luck but Bruce and McDonald are a few years ago, Free Agency was brought in in 2012. It has cost Melbourne its only AA player for unders. That is not Melbourne's fault.Yes Melbourne are in a rough patch at the moment, which is of their own doing.
Perhaps Frawley is scarred by how Melbourne handled guys like Bruce and McDonald as they aged.
If a club doesn't provide a good environment for players then they will leave.
Melbourne fans need to stick fat, whilst demanding excellence from those at the club instead of the adopting a defeatist view that the system is against them and they need special assistance.
He is actually a very good player. Whatever you are paying you are lucky to have him. He matches up really well on Hawkins and other behemoths and often he plays in games where teams get 70 inside 50s and the forward he is on is quiet. Don't underestimate him. Most people have not seen very much of him because he plays for Melbourne and they are not particularly watchable, but he is fast courageous and capable. I am filthy about the circumstances in which he left (changed FA rules) but this guy can play.FFS! He's not that great a player and most astute people on here would realise that he wouldn't be earning crazy big money at Hawthorn. Shaun f**king Higgins will probabaly getting a decent wedge at North or where ever he ends up, will we all bitch and moan then? Loving the Sydney trolls, this is so different to the Franklin deal, the 10 year contract for buddy was the icing on an extremely corrupt cake and is the big difference.
Exactly!but the other half got eaten
Not sure what all the fuss is about. Has Frawley played a decent game in the past 4 years? Feel sad for him that he is going to a Club about to commence its slide, with its best players about to face mortality and very little quality below. But I guess anything is better than staying at Melbourne.
The evaluation is not true either. This guy is a very good footballer, who matches up well. He is unwatched by many, they just look at a few highlights and mistakes, but he can seriously play. Look at Cheney, an ex Demon who handled a stopgap job manfully in the middle of the year. Frawley is bigger, faster, an excellent mark and spoil who will deliver the ball the ball to the Hawks running backs. You should have had to pay more for him.Pretty rich coming from a fan of the wobbles. But speaking of slides, Bucks is the one pushing your club down one, you blokes need to fix that up stat.
Yuck.I like the idea of bottom 4 clubs not being able to lose a player to FA, it protects them from being poached and feeding the stronger clubs.
Plenty of clubs hv it just as bad, the Dogs were stung by expansion clubs, hv had bad luck with injuries important players and hv had a couple of senior guys leave.No. Some of it is of the previous administration's doing and some of it is unfortunate circumstance. There have been plenty of mistakes made at Melbourne, but they are now getting punished on the field and in the court of popular opinion for decisions made years ago by people who have been discredited and gone. Is the Mitch Clark situation Melbourne's fault? Could they have done anything else to help the guy out? I am not saying it is all bad luck but Bruce and McDonald are a few years ago, Free Agency was brought in in 2012. It has cost Melbourne its only AA player for unders. That is not Melbourne's fault.
Yuck.
Imagine being stuck at a club that's falling apart, and being told you can't leave until you start winning games.
He is actually a very good player. Whatever you are paying you are lucky to have him. He matches up really well on Hawkins and other behemoths and often he plays in games where teams get 70 inside 50s and the forward he is on is quiet. Don't underestimate him. Most people have not seen very much of him because he plays for Melbourne and they are not particularly watchable, but he is fast courageous and capable. I am filthy about the circumstances in which he left (changed FA rules) but this guy can play.
The evaluation is not true either. This guy is a very good footballer, who matches up well. He is unwatched by many, they just look at a few highlights and mistakes, but he can seriously play. Look at Cheney, an ex Demon who handled a stopgap job manfully in the middle of the year. Frawley is bigger, faster, an excellent mark and spoil who will deliver the ball the ball to the Hawks running backs. You should have had to pay more for him.
It is clearly good luck to him. My point was it was bad luck for Melbourne. Frawley actually had not given the level of service that should make him an unrestricted free agent, but Melbourne could not make a counter offer because of a technicality. If they could have made an offer, the recruiting clubs would have to pay more, improving the MFC chance of compensation. You might not agree with it, but this bad luck for Melbourne.Plenty of clubs hv it just as bad, the Dogs were stung by expansion clubs, hv had bad luck with injuries important players and hv had a couple of senior guys leave.
Free agency is not meant to be an equalisation measure. It is a mechanism brought in to enable players to move to a club of choice after giving a certain level of service to a club, basically shifting the power from club to a player.
So after putting up with bad decisions at Melbourne, Frawley wants out to enjoy his footy...good luck to him.
Yes FA dudded Buckley too.The evaluation that Bucks is not doing with well with the pies is a very very true evaluation
It ain't bad luck for Melbourne it is just good luck for Hawthorn.It is clearly good luck to him. My point was it was bad luck for Melbourne. Frawley actually had not given the level of service that should make him an unrestricted free agent, but Melbourne could not make a counter offer because of a technicality. If they could have made an offer, the recruiting clubs would have to pay more, improving the MFC chance of compensation. You might not agree with it, but this bad luck for Melbourne.
How arrogant are you?Yuck.
Imagine being stuck at a club that's falling apart, and being told you can't leave until you start winning games.
Not sure what all the fuss is about. Has Frawley played a decent game in the past 4 years? Feel sad for him that he is going to a Club about to commence its slide, with its best players about to face mortality and very little quality below. But I guess anything is better than staying at Melbourne.
You are missing one thing. The AFL offers compensation (I know people don't agree with it but at the moment it is offered). The more a team pays a FA the better the compensation. If Frawley is restricted, Melbourne can force up the price and either keep him or get better compensation. As an UFA Frawley can take unders and MFC are stuck with it. Only the higher teams will benefit from that because no-one will take unders to play for a bottom 10 team. So the system determines the club of their choice, ie the top 4-6 teams and that is not the design either.It ain't bad luck for Melbourne it is just good luck for Hawthorn.
If FA wasn't in play, Frawley could/ would still have left and Melbourne would have had to work out a trade or see him walk into the draft.
All FA does is enable a player to get to his club of choice, and enables the club they pick not have to give up anything to get them.
Do you think he would have got to Hawthorn via the draft? Past Carlton, Collingwood, Geelong? It is good luck for Hawthorn. Exactly that. Luck, to be in the right place at the right time.It ain't bad luck for Melbourne it is just good luck for Hawthorn.
If FA wasn't in play, Frawley could/ would still have left and Melbourne would have had to work out a trade or see him walk into the draft.
All FA does is enable a player to get to his club of choice, and enables the club they pick not have to give up anything to get them.
Inadvertently?The evaluation is not true either. This guy is a very good footballer, who matches up well. He is unwatched by many, they just look at a few highlights and mistakes, but he can seriously play. Look at Cheney, an ex Demon who handled a stopgap job manfully in the middle of the year. Frawley is bigger, faster, an excellent mark and spoil who will deliver the ball the ball to the Hawks running backs. You should have had to pay more for him.
Let's see what he is like with some time and space in a good team.Inadvertently?
His disposal is s**t.
That isn't how restricted free agency works, their is no bidding war.You are missing one thing. The AFL offers compensation (I know people don't agree with it but at the moment it is offered). The more a team pays a FA the better the compensation. If Frawley is restricted, Melbourne can force up the price and either keep him or get better compensation. As an UFA Frawley can take unders and MFC are stuck with it. Only the higher teams will benefit from that because no-one will take unders to play for a bottom 10 team. So the system determines the club of their choice, ie the top 4-6 teams and that is not the design either.
Wtf are you talking about?How arrogant are you?
If the club is falling apart you don't stick a knife in them and twist. You're already a better club are you not?
Although I'm of the theory that this is all just teething problems, when the big teams inevitably tumble down the ladder, the bottom teams finally get drafts that aren't compromised, GWS surge up the ladder. It will all equal itself out.