TOPIC:

Points & salary Cap fellas .... hmmmmmmm no chance , who are you going to drop off the list ??????

Actually liked what McMahon said about the situation. Something like the WAFL owe Garlett a duty of care. Not an exact quote (i can't remember the exact quote) don't shoot me or him down too much.

I actually don't want him as or small forwards have been doing fantastically. Collard 5 last night. For him to come into the team would definitely put some noses out of place which could be very disrupting for a club.

And that's just putting someone out of the starting line up. To fit him in to the points we would have to loose players probably like the 3 east perth boys.

Rowan Brookes,(?10 points) Blake Borrett (?10) and Mark Deaves (?5).

Maybe other mid bodied players like Sean Lynch (?2)

All very upsetting to the current playing list.

Did I miss any other peripheral high point player out?

I am not including the Mortons, Bev, Kane, Risol, Moody or Leyendekkers.

He may 'go on take the money and run' like the song says and play country for $1500 a game.

If my maths are correct we have 56 players on our list with a total of 128 points. Out of that list only 2 players haven't played either a reserve or league game this season. And they are only one point players.

We are under the 130 point player cap and with Garlett being a 10 point player I think it will be hard fitting him into the player points cap. Who makes way.

Sean Lynch has been playing some good football in the reserves averaging 22.5 disposals and if he can continue this form might be able to play a league game soon.

Brookes is another who has come across and has talent according to those at East Perth but just needed to get some game time. Played his first game of reserves against the Bulldogs and had 11 disposals, kicked 1.2 but had 8 marks.

Whilst a fit Garlett with his head in the right space would definitely be a benefit to the side and may allow Bevan to play midfield I can't see how he would fit in with the player points. Obviously he would also benefit from having a player such as Chance Bateman as a mentor.

It has been noted how the squad looks gelled and everyone seems to be fit and playing together after the first two rounds. You wouldn't want the club to get rid of 2-3 players that have a points value of 2 or more and will work hard in the reserves to accommodate Garlett and potentially cause disharmony amongst the playing group.

Whilst he's be a good player I just can't see the club being able to accommodate him in the player points and therefore I change my original stance and say no.

If they can fit him into the player points, I'd love to know how?

Garlett is also worth 10 points due to him being a non zoned AFL player who has played between 0-50 games. Personally I think that is stupid and this rule needs to be looked at. It should be 10-50 games.

On another note the 3 year rule kicks in next year for Paul Bevan which will see his points halved. Currently he's at 12 so he should be 6 next year if he plays on. That frees up 6 points to use

mikeh wrote: I found the clubs statement a bit confusing. It seemed to be saying that because Dayle hasn't indicated his footy intentions that he wasn't a part of their plans but that if he wanted to play they might reconsider. Have I misunderstood what Bottrall said?

Make no mistake mike, Garlett will be in a swans jumper within 3 weeks. Swans are not going to pull the wool over my eyes. He's too good a player for them to not be interested. They wouldn't in a million years put 15k ahead of winning games of football

If they really want Garlett a couple of reserve players worth two points won't be an issue, Tim Hunt is worth 10 points isn't he??? And he's playing ressies give me a break 10 point players should be your a graders which Garlett is.

Tim Hunt had a restricted preseason from what I hear, a bit like Mitch Morton had. Been playing ressies to get his match fitness up and I'm sure he should be in contention to play league football sometime in the next month.

Mr AFL wrote: Tim Hunt had a restricted preseason from what I hear, a bit like Mitch Morton had. Been playing ressies to get his match fitness up and I'm sure he should be in contention to play league football sometime in the next month.

Who cares about his preparation he's no Dayle Garlett as are either Brooke's Borat or Deaves, I guess what I'm saying is these fella's you talk about shouldn't be an issue getting rid off if the club really wants Garlett.

Clubs would be naive to sign any contracts before a piss test is completed & passed. Be careful what you wish for...