Search results for query: *

Was highly rated, good get for the crows as category b rookie costs you nothing.

Make it so that the destination club of unrestricted free agents have to match whatever offer the losing club offers.

That was pretty much what I was thinking, picks 2 and 5 aren't near what he is worth, but the club would accept them as opposed to the alternative. So one rumour goes is that Ablett is trying to get the club some compensation that is closer to what he is worth than what the farcical...

Don't like the proposal, if a player on the rookie list isn't in your best 38 years after 2 years, then they should move on. Its not particularly fair on the players either. Rookies aren't paid much, so the club should either stump up and let him earn a proper footballing wage or free him up to...

I'm surprised the saints are even entertaining a trade with collingwood - you would think they would not trade a gun to any team who is highly likely to challenge in the next couple of years (geelong, collingwood, bulldogs and adelaide)

There can still be some appeasement - allow players who are eligible for the PSD to nominate minimum terms on their contract as they are currently allowed to for the PSD.

No - the scholarship program does not include the Riverina league (or ACT) as far as I am aware, so it made no difference. Of course I stand to be shot down in flames again!

You're half-right about the one-year guaranteed contract for rookies. That is true for rookies from within your state, but I'm fairly certain interstate rookies have to be contracted for at least two years.

Its a good rule, a few years ago Geelong traded Ronnie Burns to adelaide, Adelaide got Burns and all we wanted was a reduction in our Salary Cap. But to make it legal we had to get some lump of lad that Adelaide didn't want. We kept him for the year required and then dumped him. Not really fair...

Was hoping that King would retire, former captain, long term player, AA, b&f and now pemiership player. Its the sort of career where you only want to play for one club. He is surprisingly young when you consider how long he has been playing for. Charlie would be a semi-regular in most...

Is that right? I thought we had to use one of our normal picks, not a traded for pick.

That's almost 2 and a half hours for the first two rounds, seems a tad excessive and certainly wouldn't be attractive to tv.

Richmond would still have to pay him that amount if he asks for it. If it is discovered that an agreement exists between Polak and Richmond to subvert the draft, then penalities may be applied.

As a 50 year old, he might struggle for a yard or two of pace. I hear his son Tom does alright though.

mms://wmt.streaming.bigpond.com//UCS-wh_afllive1 open in windows media player

I'd in fact argue the opposite, having one is important, having both salary cap and restrictive trades is restrictive and make the competition less even. If you had a fixed salary cap and free trade then players would move more often, but as one teams salary caps fills up, the other's...

I doubt the cats will be particularly active trade time. While a gun forward would be good, it's not as big a priority as in previous years. Also given the need to have 3 vacancies come the draft as well as a spot for a likely rookie promotion, then it's unlikely the cats will recruit any...

Aint this the truth.

Tenace is probaly worth about pick 5, but why would we trade him? There is no added benefit to trading him, only disruption to a tight team unit.

Don't know about Bairstow's bairn, but Che Turner probably won't cut the mustard.

Ottens would probably veto any Hawthorn deal, unless he had no choice, as per the subject of this thread.