Spaghetti

My favourite Whelan moment has to be his hit on Hird. Solid bump.

Maybe I am missing something but if he placed a bet for someone else and was to be repaid for the bet then all he has done is allow his account to be used. He would not have been betting, he was the agent of another.

Given that and volunteering the information, the fine was pretty severe in my opinion.

Not calling Maric a liar, but anyone could use this excuse. I'm sure the AFL code of conduct which he breached stipulates it is a breach just to have your betting account used to bet on AFL games.

How annoying, can you set all polls to close in X days?

According to some people who have seen him on BigFooty, late pick / rookie / not at all. No doubt being the brother of Jack makes him more noticeable, but nothing special I have heard.

Not many people have one.

This is a joke surely?

I'd say two-thirds of my friends have them. Not saying that's representative, but to say not many people have them is stupid.

Hah, check out afl.com.au

Melbourne 2.0 4.3 8.7 12.10 (82)

Richmond 1.5 4.8 7.10 12.14 (86)

GOALS

Melbourne: Dunn 2, Miller 2, Petterd 2, Jetta, Bate, Newton, Davey, Jones, Grimes, McMahon

Richmond: Brown 3, Deledio 2, Morton 2, Vickery, Nahas, Riewoldt, Hislop

I thought it was quite obviously after the siren. But no complaints here. Couldn't have a better way to lose from a tanking perspective.

It's ok, but it's just a showcase of past players :S

I'm not sure about abolishing it. But perhaps moving the PP for two consecutive years of < 5 wins to the middle of the first round. For example, if we were the only team to qualify for a PP this year the picks would go like this:

1: Melbourne

2: 15th

3: 14th

4: 13th

5: 12th

6: 11th

7: 10th

8: 9th

9: Priority Pick (Melbourne)

10: 8th

etc.

Obviously there is still some temptation to tank, but it significantly reduces the benefit.

Still there

If you want a laugh, check out the BF thread on this topic. There is a princess in there likening it to child abuse. Getting quite a lot of attention for what is really a nothing article.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=587364

Disgraceful.

Yep, today could have been MUCH worse. Credit to the backline.

Yea, costs more money to promote rookies. Unless they are going to play AFL, there is no point

This is the funniest thread I have seen in a long time. What are you? 12 years old? Grow the $#*& up. Jesus, go on any forum of any of the other clubs and you will see bashing of every club.

What are you honestly hoping to achieve by posting here? An apology?

This is too funny coming from a Freo supporter. Please, keep posting.

Just saw the Bigfooty thread, that is not the guy who knows Jurrah, he has been found out before.

There are a couple of people who do genuinely know Jurrah and his family, judging from reading previous threads about him there. But I wouldn't have thought they would have had match committee meeting yet, let alone decided a team so early in the week.

Hah! Love the video

those in the know say hes a great player but how many inside players do you need,

If he averaged 9 handball receives last season it seems he is both inside and outside

If I could be bothered I would drag up a thread from his first season where no one could speak highly enough of the guy.

I meant without an extra cost to the member.

It is a dumb idea financially but would immediately take our membership to 45k overnight.

What's the use though? Just for bragging rights? It doesn't increase attendances, it doesn't make us more attractive for sponsors, all it does is hide our true membership count.

The untouchables is not true. Every club can just name 12 people coming out of contract and voila.

I don't see how this works. Surely clubs will just renegotiate with players they intend to keep midway through 2010. All GC17 will be left with is the uncontracted players that clubs don't want anyway.

Estimates eh? As in guessing?

They know we're coming.