Agree on that, Think its a reach to anyone in the top 10 besides Gold Coast. Reckon Port will take him with one of their picks.A late first rounder I might, but a top 10 pick, I'd rather not. Huge gamble on something we haven't seen him produce.
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.

System Upgrade - Search is back! - Post feedback.
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Agree on that, Think its a reach to anyone in the top 10 besides Gold Coast. Reckon Port will take him with one of their picks.A late first rounder I might, but a top 10 pick, I'd rather not. Huge gamble on something we haven't seen him produce.
And in other news tonight the GWS has traded away all of its 2014 afl draftees. All of Pickett, Marchbank, Ahern, Steele and McKenna have been traded in the 2016 trade period2014?
Would really prefer Battle tbh. I'm too unsure about Marshall. On one hand, he hasn't produced good football consistently yet. On the other, he barely had a pre-season due to other sporting commitments. Definitely a gamble.Agree on that, Think its a reach to anyone in the top 10 besides Gold Coast. Reckon Port will take him with one of their picks.
You guys could end up with both, I actually prefered Battle to a lot of draftees this year but the fact he is a short key forward puts a few clubs off him.Would really prefer Battle tbh. I'm too unsure about Marshall. On one hand, he hasn't produced good football consistently yet. On the other, he barely had a pre-season due to other sporting commitments. Definitely a gamble.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
I'd be ok with both, but we would need to use picks 14 and 17 on them. We would then need to use picks 30 and 31 on inside mids though - Dylan Clarke, Drew, Scharenberg, etc.You guys could end up with both, I actually prefered Battle to a lot of draftees this year but the fact he is a short key forward puts a few clubs off him.
Do you think barlow would be a good fit. He is quality inside midI'd be ok with both, but we would need to use picks 14 and 17 on them. We would then need to use picks 30 and 31 on inside mids though - Dylan Clarke, Drew, Scharenberg, etc.
I'd love to have him playing alongside Wines, but haven't heard any rumours about us being into him.Do you think barlow would be a good fit. He is quality inside mid
neither do i **** the game and **** carltonLOL
We all know * have no concerns about that.
not the thread for it, but i would suggest GWS were far more organised than Essendon in this respect....and its far less embarrassing for them as a result.
PeterWho's Bedford?
He's already announced he wants a trade to Hawthorn next season.Hugh Mcluggage will slide to pick 88
Great!!!! We will thrash it out for 2 weeks and then get him with an illegal trade moveHe's already announced he wants a trade to Hawthorn next season.
I always think of Harry McKay when Marshall is brought up. And when I think of Harry McKay I think 'major bust'.Yes I do. You are taking him all on "potential" and very little output.
I always think of Harry McKay when Marshall is brought up. And when I think of Harry McKay I think 'major bust'.
This. Brings back memories of bad things. I remember how bad McKay was.

Hawthorn hoping Bedford slides
Which club does he play for?....Never heard of him.
Just don't look at his Beep test results...Good speed, good size, quick & able tackler, good decision-maker....But that kicking efficiency?
Marshall has nothing sustainable about him - not a one grab mark- even if he had the strength - not a fast lead up forward - hasn't kicked more than 2 goals in any Championship game . Think everyone is looking at him because of the shortage of KPFs ... taking him would be a big fail IMOI always think of Harry McKay when Marshall is brought up. And when I think of Harry McKay I think 'major bust'.
Good speed, good size, quick & able tackler, good decision-maker....But that kicking efficiency?
