It's been a long, long, long thread, and it appears Joffaboy is the first to crack after pages and pages of posting. Just a question,
Joffaboy, how many times have you seen these guys play? How many times have you interviewed them, or visited their families? How many times have you viewed their medical reports or spoken to their coaches, teachers, doctors, talent managers etc? No, I'm not saying you don't have a right to an opinion, that would be silly and unfair, but would you not accept that the opinion of the team of full-time, professional, well-paid recruiters would be more informed than your own? Also, I'd much, much rather we lose a few hundred members than make a decision that we don't believe in. The recruiters have earned the right the back themselves in.
On the Petracca vs McCartin argument, I have nothing more to say than everything that has been said in this thread, IMO if we are confident Petracca's hips are fine he is the best player in the draft, if not, it's a line-ball call. McCartin has played some exceptional football and is far and away the best pure forward in this draft at this point in time. He has shown real ability in his bottom-age year but his body didn't let him string it all together this year.
The real comment I want to make, is on McLure's point, that we were disappointed in Petracca's testing. Personally, yes, I was slightly disappointed, but CP was dealing with a hip injury and performed admirably considering the circumstances. The argument in itself is flawed, we could ask Nat Fyfe to take a clean hands test right now, of course he would perform poorly, he can barely move his shoulder! His testing in the AIS was very, very good, not Angus Brayshaw level but impressive nonetheless. How could you possibly judge a player on his injury-hit testing numbers?