2015 Non-Crows AFL Discussion - Pt. 1

[AFC979810]

Jeez - looking at the Bulldogs you would have to pick em for the spoon now.

Finished 14th last year and based on their top 7 best players from last years B&F you would have to say that they are in a world of trouble.

#1 Libba won't play and #3 Griffen is gone. #5 Murphy, #6 Boyd and #7 Morris are all over the age of 32. Throw in the fact they lost seasoned players Higgins and Cooney as well.

They have some very talented kids (Macrae, Libba, Dalhaus, Bont, Boyd, Wallis) but will really really struggle over the next few years.

 

[DJ75]

Jeez - looking at the Bulldogs you would have to pick em for the spoon now.

Finished 14th last year and based on their top 7 best players from last years B&F you would have to say that they are in a world of trouble.

#1 Libba won't play and #3 Griffen is gone. #5 Murphy, #6 Boyd and #7 Morris are all over the age of 32. Throw in the fact they lost seasoned players Higgins and Cooney as well.

They have some very talented kids (Macrae, Libba, Dalhaus, Bont, Boyd, Wallis) but will really really struggle over the next few years.

I think you are spot on. Bulldogs are in a World of trouble. St. Kilda probably not far behind, but they look better than the Dogs. I also think Carlton are an injury or two away front he same level.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Bulldogs would want to hope Boyd turns out alright.

FWIW I reckon it is a good trade for them and will be a bit like Kennedy at the Eagles, which is looking better as the years go by.

Short term though

 

[AFC979810]

Bulldogs would want to hope Boyd turns out alright.

FWIW I reckon it is a good trade for them and will be a bit like Kennedy at the Eagles, which is looking better as the years go by.

Short term though

Absolutely agree.

I think it was a smart list management decision. Griffen will be 29 at the end of the year and they have the foundation of a very good midfield in Macrae, Libba, Wallis, Bontampelli and Dalhaus all under 23 combined with two young but very highly rated young forwards in Stringer and Boyd.

If those 7 players can start to mature together its a very good core.

 

[azza77]

Interesting. I preferred McGovern as a key forward which he played the first half of the year. Kicked 13 goals in his first 7 AFL games and was a great target inside forward 50.

Think he will have to go back and play that key defender role now that Mackenzie is confirmed out for the year. Definitely has the size.

Yeah no doubt he also showed a lot up forward, but he also went back in the latter part of the year and was great at intercepting markls and breaking up a lot of opposition play, despite the fact that he didnt really have a direct opponent. Will most likely have to play a lot tighter now in a backline consisting of Brown and Schofield. They could be in serious, serious trouble if the injury prone Brown goes down as well, think the next option in line is a very raw 19 year old, Tom Barras... (unless the elect to drop another forward into their backline).

Lets just hope Mitch shows the same versatility as his brother Jeremy

Jeez - looking at the Bulldogs you would have to pick em for the spoon now.

Finished 14th last year and based on their top 7 best players from last years B&F you would have to say that they are in a world of trouble.

#1 Libba won't play and #3 Griffen is gone. #5 Murphy, #6 Boyd and #7 Morris are all over the age of 32. Throw in the fact they lost seasoned players Higgins and Cooney as well.

They have some very talented kids (Macrae, Libba, Dalhaus, Bont, Boyd, Wallis) but will really really struggle over the next few years.

Have just discussing this with my friends actually ever since the news was confirmed. I thought they would already be in a little trouble this year losing the senior players they did, despite the fact the finally have an actual key forward to kick to in Tom Boyd.

Add to that list of yours one Dan Giansiracusa and other experienced heads in Goodes and Williams, I think its going to be a long year for the doggies this year. While their midfield has potential written all over it, I reckon they will get absolutely dominated in the midfield battle on multiple occasions this year.

 

[Pdub]

K. Tippett went down holding his knee at the Sydney intra-club, is going to get scans, will most likely miss the NAB challenge and the first couple rounds of the season.

 

[MRB37]

K. Tippett went down holding his knee at the Sydney intra-club, is going to get scans, will most likely miss the NAB challenge and the first couple rounds of the season.

Far out, with the amount of football he hasn't played since his left we would have been better off letting him walk for nothing and avoiding the entire mess all together.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

K. Tippett went down holding his knee at the Sydney intra-club, is going to get scans, will most likely miss the NAB challenge and the first couple rounds of the season.

Daddy's bad karma.

 

[footy4ever]

K. Tippett went down holding his knee at the Sydney intra-club, is going to get scans, will most likely miss the NAB challenge and the first couple rounds of the season.

Of course it'll be two rounds. Round two V Port at Adelaide oval.

 

[Geoffa32]

Of course it'll be two rounds. Round two V Port at Adelaide oval.

Nah Tip has played Port in SA since leaving us. His first year at $ydney he kicked their first goal. I know this as I loaded up on him for first goal and had free beers for the rest of the day.

Got to admit I enjoyed Port beating them that day.

 

[AFC979810]

NikkiNoo - you seem the most informed about the Essendon Saga.

Is there somewhere that you know of, that has all of the information described in simple & easy to understand terms. Basically an 'Essendon drug saga for dummies'?

Also - as we get nearer to the season starting - your thoughts on whether Monfries/Ryder will play this year for our friends over at Alberton.

 

[Danoz]

NikkiNoo - you seem the most informed about the Essendon Saga.

Is there somewhere that you know of, that has all of the information described in simple & easy to understand terms. Basically an 'Essendon drug saga for dummies'?

Also - as we get nearer to the season starting - your thoughts on whether Monfries/Ryder will play this year for our friends over at Alberton.

Have a listen to Nikki's news in the podcast

She basically suggested she expects them to get a year from the INs, taking them through to November.

 

[NikkiNoo]

Have a listen to Nikki's news in the podcast

She basically suggested she expects them to get a year from the INs, taking them through to November.

There is so much going on with that damn saga! I only cover a small part of it in the podcast, but probably the most important part relating to the INs.

For me the year would be the acceptable penalty, and it also would be a clean option for the AFL as well meaning that the other AFL teams have an 'even' year against Essendon. I have a correction though on what I said, as Ben McDevitt confirmed last week that what the 34 players have been charged with is normally a 2 year penalty. So that is new information to me. I think that a year would still be the minimum that I would find acceptable with the information we have.

 

[AFC979810]

There is so much going on with that damn saga! I only cover a small part of it in the podcast, but probably the most important part relating to the INs.

For me the year would be the acceptable penalty, and it also would be a clean option for the AFL as well meaning that the other AFL teams have an 'even' year against Essendon. I have a correction though on what I said, as Ben McDevitt confirmed last week that what the 34 players have been charged with is normally a 2 year penalty. So that is new information to me. I think that a year would still be the minimum that I would find acceptable with the information we have.

Thanks Nikki.

Do you think there is there much of a difference between what you find acceptable and what you think the actual penalties will be. I understand there is a lot of water to go under the bridge.

 

[NikkiNoo]

Thanks Nikki.

Do you think there is there much of a difference between what you find acceptable and what you think the actual penalties will be. I understand there is a lot of water to go under the bridge.

I'm hoping it is the same, but who knows as we have never had something like this before.

 

[rocket18]

I have a correction though on what I said, as Ben McDevitt confirmed last week that what the 34 players have been charged with is normally a 2 year penalty. .

Thats interesting, two years is the norm. I would be satisfied with that as I don't beleive Essendon have done themselves any favours with how they have conducted themselves.

Surely to get less then the norm you need extenuating circumstances - I can't see that here.

If Said got 2 years for 1 drink anything less than 2 years will be a joke.

 

[Mike Smyth]

No way the Essendon players get more than 6 weeks.

 

[Danoz]

No way the Essendon players get more than 6 weeks.

I guess we'll find out. Hopefully the first sanctions are handed down prior to the season, all players will remain provisionally suspended while it's all appealed.

I have a feeling the tribunal will go for a harder punishment (ie a year) with a whole lot of negotiating going on behind the scenes. If they give less than that ASADA/WADA will appeal and the CSC (I think that's what they're called) will likely end up giving the players longer than a year. If they give more, essendon will appeal and do their best to bring it back under a year, but the players will likely miss the year anyway. If they give a year, both sides likely to begrudgingly accept.

 

[Sanders]

Far out, with the amount of football he hasn't played since his left we would have been better off letting him walk for nothing and avoiding the entire mess all together.

There was plenty of footy he didn't play before he left

 

[Deaneus!]

I also think Carlton are an injury or two away from the same level.

 

[AFC979810]

No way the Essendon players get more than 6 weeks.

Is that what you hope so Ryder and Monfries get to play for your favourite team?

 

[NikkiNoo]

Thats interesting, two years is the norm. I would be satisfied with that as I don't beleive Essendon have done themselves any favours with how they have conducted themselves.

Surely to get less then the norm you need extenuating circumstances - I can't see that here.

If Said got 2 years for 1 drink anything less than 2 years will be a joke.

Saad got 18 months. The AFL drug tribunal gave him a 6 month reduction as it was a two year penalty. ASADA protested the 18 months as it was a positive test. This was one of the rare cases where ASADA didn't win the protest.

 

[NikkiNoo]

I guess we'll find out. Hopefully the first sanctions are handed down prior to the season, all players will remain provisionally suspended while it's all appealed.

I have a feeling the tribunal will go for a harder punishment (ie a year) with a whole lot of negotiating going on behind the scenes. If they give less than that ASADA/WADA will appeal and the CSC (I think that's what they're called) will likely end up giving the players longer than a year. If they give more, essendon will appeal and do their best to bring it back under a year, but the players will likely miss the year anyway. If they give a year, both sides likely to begrudgingly accept.

Another correction from me about the appeal process. If ASADA appeal it goes back to the AFL Drug Tribunal. WADA can also appeal, but that appeal goes direct to the Court of Arbitration Sport (CAS). So it could have two appeals against it, if ASADA and WADA deem the penalty to be unsatisfactory. Hence why I've said before that penalties being given is far from this saga being over. Still a fair distance to go.

 

[Danoz]

Another correction from me about the appeal process. If ASADA appeal it goes back to the AFL Drug Tribunal. WADA can also appeal, but that appeal goes direct to the Court of Arbitration Sport (CAS). So it could have two appeals against it, if ASADA and WADA deem the penalty to be unsatisfactory. Hence why I've said before that penalties being given is far from this saga being over. Still a fair distance to go.

In your opinion, do you think there is a length of sentence which would not be appealed by anyone? Clearly ASADA/WADA won't be happy with 6 months, but would they appeal a 1 year ban? Is it Essendon or the players who appeal if they think it's too long, and would they appeal 1 year?

 

[Glenno23]

What would actually be "fair" for the other afl teams were if Essendon were given 17 weeks

That way every team plays them once in their weakened state, and the teams that double up, just play against a normal (but not match fit) afl team

But that wouldn't work either as i'm sure that certain teams will play them twice before someone plays them for the first time

Just give em the full 12 months!