Just now, daisycutter said:

wonder if there will be mass vomiting in sydney town if tb4-cronulla win 

of course we know there will be if storm wins but for different reasons

At least cronulla said "wow we did the wrong thing" and took their medicine so to speak

16 minutes ago, biggestred said:

At least cronulla said "wow we did the wrong thing" and took their medicine so to speak

agreed, but it is still a short  time from guilt to premiership (if they win) so i was wondering if the sydney public have goldfish memories or don't give a $hit

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

agreed, but it is still a short  time from guilt to premiership (if they win) so i was wondering if the sydney public have goldfish memories or don't give a $hit

Don't give a shlt 

18 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Don't give a shlt 

Way off the mark, 'bub. It made (makes) all the difference that the players coughed up, didn't bother with endless noisy posturing (well, maybe with a bit from Gallen) and served their time. The Sharks behaved very differently as well (nor did they have a James Hird to drag things out forever and to get everyone offside) and the general impression left was that it was all down to Dank. There are other factors as well (turnover of players) but the Sharks, who've never won a premiership, are now sentimental favourites all over NSW and even amongst several Queenslanders I know, despite the fact that the Storm are more or less a Queensland exclave.

Cronulla is a good example of what could have been at Essendon: accepting guilt, serving a sentence, being forgiven (I know you think that it's once guilty, always guilty as far as the Windy Hill mob is concerned, but the criminal justice system doesn't work that way and there's no real reason football should be any different). 

1 minute ago, Dr John Dee said:

Way off the mark, 'bub. It made (makes) all the difference that the players coughed up, didn't bother with endless noisy posturing (well, maybe with a bit from Gallen) and served their time. The Sharks behaved very differently as well (nor did they have a James Hird to drag things out forever and to get everyone offside) and the general impression left was that it was all down to Dank. There are other factors as well (turnover of players) but the Sharks, who've never won a premiership, are now sentimental favourites all over NSW and even amongst several Queenslanders I know, despite the fact that the Storm are more or less a Queensland exclave.

Cronulla is a good example of what could have been at Essendon: accepting guilt, serving a sentence, being forgiven (I know you think that it's once guilty, always guilty as far as the Windy Hill mob is concerned, but the criminal justice system doesn't work that way and there's no real reason football should be any different). 

do you have ANY understanding of the sydney public ?? because that was the inference...now go away and think again Dr !!

Dear Dr  I have a Nephew who is involved with the Sharks...and a daughter who now calls Taren Point  home.

They reckon, and I concur, they got away with much...........they're chuffed !!

( not proud of any of that ....just saying ...lol ) 

Edited September 26, 20168 yr by beelzebub

41 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

do you have ANY understanding of the sydney public ?? because that was the inference...now go away and think again Dr !!

Actually, you implied, if there was anything to be inferred that would have been up to me; but that's a difference that - like the difference in how the Sharks' and Bombers' cases proceeded - has probably slipped your notice. Of course, it's hardly surprising that you'd miss the point, indeed any point about Cronulla since you seem now to view the whole world through the procrustean lens of your monomania about Essendon (even if I do agree with certain elements of it).

Here, I'll say it again: the Cronulla issue is settled, over, done with, closed, it's a dead parrot; and that's how things could have been for the Essendon players. It's not a matter of whether people in Sydney or elsewhere give a sh*t or not. The players did the smart thing; they've done their time. And part of cutting a deal was getting away with something, whether it was 'much' or not according to your nephew or anyone else, so nothing new in that. 

I do, btw, know a bit more about Sydney that you're likely to be able to infer or even guess at. 

 

15 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

Actually, you implied, if there was anything to be inferred that would have been up to me; but that's a difference that - like the difference in how the Sharks' and Bombers' cases proceeded - has probably slipped your notice. Of course, it's hardly surprising that you'd miss the point, indeed any point about Cronulla since you seem now to view the whole world through the procrustean lens of your monomania about Essendon (even if I do agree with certain elements of it).

Here, I'll say it again: the Cronulla issue is settled, over, done with, closed, it's a dead parrot; and that's how things could have been for the Essendon players. It's not a matter of whether people in Sydney or elsewhere give a sh*t or not. The players did the smart thing; they've done their time. And part of cutting a deal was getting away with something, whether it was 'much' or not according to your nephew or anyone else, so nothing new in that. 

I do, btw, know a bit more about Sydney that you're likely to be able to infer or even guess at. 

 

the way sydney is expanding doc, hopping dicks creek must be a suburb of sydney by now. next you'll have the chinese buying up all the land for apartments. lol

7 hours ago, daisycutter said:

the way sydney is expanding doc, hopping dicks creek must be a suburb of sydney by now. next you'll have the chinese buying up all the land for apartments. lol

It's the Gold Coast hordes massing on the border that worry us most at the moment, daisy. But yeah, with talk of high speed trains back on the agenda we might soon be only a couple of hours from the centre of Sydney town. We'll have to balance the fear of cosmopolitanism against the vast profits to be made selling out to developers. A difficult choice.

Oh, and go Sharks!

(posted from the goldfish bowl)

would love to hear Jobes reasoning behind not giving the brownlow back

1 hour ago, Abe said:

would love to hear Jobes reasoning behind not giving the brownlow back

He's dragging the decision out until after CAS look at the appeal, which is hilarious when you think about it, because the appeal is based on a jurisdiction issue.

Thier CAS appeal is basically "The AFL tribunal cleared us, CAS has no right to override without it going through an AFL appeal first (I think?), therefore we are innocent". The appeal has nothing to do with actual guilt or innocence, it's entirely technical.

So even if the appeal is somehow upheld, he'd be keeping his medal on the basis of a technicality - that ASADA took their appeal straight to CAS, bypassing a lengthy (and likely unnecessary) appeal to be heard by the AFL tribunal.

Great way to keep the Charlie eh?

Just now, Choke said:

He's dragging the decision out until after CAS look at the appeal, which is hilarious when you think about it, because the appeal is based on a jurisdiction issue.

Thier CAS appeal is basically "The AFL tribunal cleared us, CAS has no right to override without it going through an AFL appeal first (I think?), therefore we are innocent". The appeal has nothing to do with actual guilt or innocence, it's entirely technical.

So even if the appeal is somehow upheld, he'd be keeping his medal on the basis of a technicality - that ASADA took their appeal straight to CAS, bypassing a lengthy (and likely unnecessary) appeal to be heard by the AFL tribunal.

Great way to keep the Charlie eh?

Surely they'll see that they had to go to CAS to get a fair trial, the AFL were going to do anything to get them off.

1 minute ago, Abe said:

Surely they'll see that they had to go to CAS to get a fair trial, the AFL were going to do anything to get them off.

lol, you're a funny man Abe.

Just now, Choke said:

lol, you're a funny man Abe.

Oh yeah we're talking about EFC lol

23 hours ago, Abe said:

would love to hear Jobes reasoning behind not giving the brownlow back

When you are an entitled little [censored] all your life you don't need reasoning.

Edited September 27, 20168 yr by Biffen

On 27/09/2016 at 7:49 AM, Abe said:

would love to hear Jobes reasoning behind not giving the brownlow back

That would be like hearing Gollum's reasons for keeping the One Ring --- limited variations on "Its mine! **** off!"

Jab Watson will always be his name