He's even dropped a hint for the media. I can't believe I haven't heard or read anywhere what has taken place, except written here and O'logy.

Bailey's hint:

A: Allen Christensen out with concussion - Geelong. Culprit: Jeremy Laidler.

* Laidler is now out for 2-3 weeks with injury from the Melbourne game.

Trengove was a scapegoat, and the fact that know one else has been reported after this is sickening. One of the most outrageous decisions in recent years.

Didn't inspire the players to lift the following wek against North, or last Friday noght against Carlton, did it?

First, I didn't say it inspired the players to lift. In fact, someone else said DB's comments were about giving the players a kick and I gave an alternative explanation.

Second, I think our effort early in the North game was pretty good, so you could argue that it did give us a [short-term] kick. (Note that this isn't my contention).

First, I didn't say it inspired the players to lift. In fact, someone else said DB's comments were about giving the players a kick and I gave an alternative explanation.

Second, I think our effort early in the North game was pretty good, so you could argue that it did give us a [short-term] kick. (Note that this isn't my contention).

What did you hope they would achieve by appealing Trengove's suspension? You'd expect the players to lift? They did for 1 quarter against North, 0 against Carlton, which was 2 weeks after the North game.

It will be interesting to see what sort of performance they put in tomorrow night after DB's words this week.

What did you hope they would achieve by appealing Trengove's suspension?

I didn't have much hope, to be honest.

I hoped that if they had a case they would have Trengove's suspension thrown out or downgraded, of course.

I also thought that a positive consequence of appealing would be that Trengove, and the playing group as a whole, would feel supported by the Club.

You'd expect the players to lift?

Do I need to reiterate that I was not the one suggesting that DB's comments were designed to lift the players?

I did not make this assertion so if you want to find someone to debate the point with you might need to start quoting someone who actually made the claim you want to dispute.

(For the record, I don't think external stuff like suspension appeals has much impact on the way the team plays - just like 'getting a spray', it's fairly minimal at best).

I didn't have much hope, to be honest.

I hoped that if they had a case they would have Trengove's suspension thrown out or downgraded, of course.

I also thought that a positive consequence of appealing would be that Trengove, and the playing group as a whole, would feel supported by the Club.

Do I need to reiterate that I was not the one suggesting that DB's comments were designed to lift the players?

I did not make this assertion so if you want to find someone to debate the point with you might need to start quoting someone who actually made the claim you want to dispute.

(For the record, I don't think external stuff like suspension appeals has much impact on the way the team plays - just like 'getting a spray', it's fairly minimal at best).

This is the bit I'm questioning Rogue - it's good of the Club to support its players, but what have the players given in return? It's good for them to hear Bailey sticking up for them, so tomorrow night will determine if this means anything to the playing group or not.

I'm not saying you said that it was designed to lift the players. But I'm wanting to know are you satisfied with the response from the playing group after they feel "supported"?

This is the bit I'm questioning Rogue - it's good of the Club to support its players, but what have the players given in return? It's good for them to hear Bailey sticking up for them, so tomorrow night will determine if this means anything to the playing group or not.

I'm not saying you said that it was designed to lift the players. But I'm wanting to know are you satisfied with the response from the playing group after they feel "supported"?

If I was Coach and my players were labelled soft I would publically support them, regardless of what I said/thought behind closed doors.

Since this is my view the question of what the players have given in return is a bit irrelevant - I don't think it's something you do in order to get a response.

Thing is, the coaches and players get asked questions and fulfil the AFL and media obligations. What else are they meant to say ?

I get the point that actions are louder than words and walk-the-walk, not talk-the-talk, but fark, what else do they say ?

Yeah, they have to back it up.....they've only got two hours of the week to do it, the rest of the week the media fill their papers.

But whatever is done by personnel at the club...they're damned if they don't say enough, or damned if they do respond directly to questions.

Let 'em get on with the job, instead of slagging them off !

Nice....

I also think any PR for our club, particularly given that it's us making a stand against our detractors, is good for the Club. Better than no news and the weeks just roll on without a whimper. Let em know we're here and not gonna take this crap anymore, both on the field, and off!

This is the bit I'm questioning Rogue - it's good of the Club to support its players, but what have the players given in return? It's good for them to hear Bailey sticking up for them, so tomorrow night will determine if this means anything to the playing group or not.

I'm not saying you said that it was designed to lift the players. But I'm wanting to know are you satisfied with the response from the playing group after they feel "supported"?

To me the support we're showing is the carrot, and not just for present players. Potential players looking to come across see this sort of thing and it MIGHT ( i repeat might) mean something in their final decision making and go someway towards us securing their services if we're seeking them (eg., Juddy).

What we also need is the stick. Where players who aren't meeting the agreed to and set down non-negotiables (over whatever period/KPIs the FD sets), are banished to the Magoos to try to work on and hopefully develop their game in order to earn their place back in the senior team. Regardless of seniority/experience!