wretched.sylph

no. it's lions that got cleaned out by homesickness, botched a coach sacking, and fell into board-level disarray.

the free agency rules to be fixed or scrapped.

agreed. i thought Lynch was great; loved his willingness to criticise the umpires ("what is it over 5 metres now?"). i also found it interesting that several times he started to comment but cut himself short (i wonder why?).

the issue with AOD is just not that simple. the problem in question concerns the status of AOD when prepared by a compounding chemist. Dank has claimed that AOD, as used by the EFC, was permissible because it was compounded (that is possibly what he was referring to with his "bowels" -- he asked whether it was legal as administered 1). i will be very surprised if any infraction notices are issued over AOD (pleasantly, of course). TB4 is the nasty which is set to bring them all down. 1 I'm guessing: there is no specific evidence that this was the case, but it is consistant with what Dank has said and done.

did the team ever play 2 great games in succession?

nah, i reckon the life ban coming his way will put an end to that.

his disposals sucked 'cos Garland was behind the ball and Jones was also at the bottom of the ruck. since the rest of the team didn't really move he had Buckley's or none of getting the ball to a team-mate.

GWS are intending to dominate the competition for decade(s). they are chasing top10 draft picks in order to get a spread of ages through their list. they will get the spoon again in 2014, unless St.Kilda can beat them to it, will probably bottom out again in 2015, and will have 2–3 years after that of trading into the top10 with the excess they have hoarded from their 3–4 years on the floor. the end-game is a team of top10s with a 6–8 year spread that will be unbeatable for a decade. it is an outrageous power-play. in a sense, they are deliberately doing what we inadvertantly did over the past 7 years, but they obviously think they can get it right. they are exploiting the rules and uncritical AFL largesse to "tank" on an unprecedented scale. the risk, of course, is that they will be unable to break the loser-culture. i remember Scully's first season very well. he was so smooth and fast and clean, it was easy to see him developing into a truly great player. but season 2, he was going going gone, before a ball was ever bounced, and didn't bother trying. i believe that that year of no-effort ruined him. his developement consisted of acquiring bad habits and a worse attitude, and that developement is evident in every single game he has played for GWS. A team of Scullys is not hard to imagine.

Like

but those draft gurus are guessing, just like us. a "maximum ceiling"? how the hell did he figure that out? from Salem's form as a beardless boy playing against other beardless boys? a crystal ball i would accept, but not observation, because observation cannot account for the fact that none of these kids have played in the AFL, which is precisely and particularly where they will be tested. most of those gurus just flick nonsense onto the page in order to put some space between each iteration of "elite". all that can be said of these two boys is that they have good physical attributes and talent. we can also add that MFCs recruiters saw something which neither the draft gurus nor us are privy to which inclined them to one side of the coin rather than the other. i am glad we took Salem, because right now as i type Salem is a Demon and that makes him special. he is automatically better than Freeman, who is a filthy Magpie. that it might have been otherwise is irrelevant, because it isn't otherwise. for my part, i will track Freeman's progress each Queen's Birthday and perhaps one other match per season, otherwise i would have to watch Collingwood matches ... ick.

restore some karma?

comparing Jones and Dawes is an apple/orange thing. Dawes is a KPF, and KPFs are more injury-prone than nuggetty little centremen. but does it matter? Dawes played 12 games in a really bad year. He's tracking well at the moment and it's fair to think he will play a lot more games this coming year. i do wish people would stop goal-counting to measure Dawes's performance. i don't think that's a fair way to judge him. with Dawes, more than any other player i can think of, one must consider the things he does which don't pull stats. as an example: i once saw him sprint (well, lumber quickly) from pocket to opposite flank to cover an unmarked player, he made a contest and spoiled the mark, held the ball up on the ground, without taking posession, until backup arrived, then punched the ball out and into the path of a team-mate who delivered the goal-assist pass. no stat for Dawes, but it was his work that made the goal. it's just an example, but i think it shows something of the kind of player he is. it's also important to reflect on Cloak's performance with and without Dawes in front of him (no stats for creating space for fellow forwards). and in relation to the goal-scoring comparison between him and Fitzpatrick, let's not forget how many goals were pinched from Dawes by team-mates (Dawes gets free kick in goal-square, Davey plays on, etc), there were lots of 'em (and i admired his attitude towards this: all goals are team goals). finally, are we watching the same game? because i see Dawes doing those things every time he plays. he is a good choice for captain, but i won't care if he doesn't get the gig. i would personally love to see McKenzie made captain (though i am very confident that it won't happen). because of this: his stats from 186. Jordie McKenzie never ever gives up.

Nahas can't get a game with the tigers because he is a greedy little ego-brat. can't see his team-mates for the goal-posts.

no, Bailey is still employed by the Crows. http://www.afc.com.au/the-club/information/staff

he has stated his solution over and over again: give every team an equal opportunity to take profits from the gate. pretty simple. "prime time slots" are not the issue here. we will play the same games regardless of which strip the players are wearing, but we'll lose less money if the strip isn't white. are you serious? no, 28000 is not nominally better than 15000, it is the difference between a humble profit and a significant loss. there is nothing "nominal" about that. Macca has argued that winning isn't likely to gain us better fixtures. his argument has not been refuted and i don't see how it can be: "big club, big fixtures" has clearly been the AFL's strategy for decades. furthermore, winning games simply must be more difficult for clubs which are financially hamstrung (for any reason). it is significant, in terms of winning games over the coming years, that MFC cannot pay 100% of the salary cap. of course they are complaints. complaint is the only response to injustice available to those without power. we have no power, and biased fixturing is an injustice. fair and equitable fixturing and scheduling is not a luxury to be earned but a basic right shared by every club participating in the competition.

The commercial opportunities in the 2014 fixture reflects our on field performance over the last couple of years. Peter Jackson, MFC CEO (2013.10.31) ouch!

i reckon all the decisions made during those years needs to be taken with a grain of schwab.

Roos has written in the past that he rates Dunn highly (HUN, last year, i think). Dunn has learned to keep his mouth shut, which has been his biggest liability in seasons past, and has had a good year (playing out-of-position). i would be very, very surprised if he isn't in the 22 in season '14. he will not be shown the door, nor should he be. [edit: missing word from dodgy paste replaced]

i think it worth mentioning, particularly with reference to the above post (#17), that players are often happy to take a pay cut if it means achieving premiership success. i recall the talking head King saying this explicitly with regards to Carey — "we didn't mind, because we knew we needed him!". as such, it is often easier for successful clubs to find the extra cash needed to lure a top-class player. as far as compensation specifically is concerned, i doubt we are likely to see it changed, but if it were i would prefer compensation awarded as a draft-pick one round after the departing player was initially drafted, and based on current ladder position. and i would like to see zero compensation for free agents who were chosen with priority picks. 2c

that article is outright hilarious, in a paper-cut sort of way: "Newbold's comments followed McGuire's suggestion last week that Melbourne and the Bulldogs potentially receive a salary cap next season of 110 per cent" rat-cunning really, given that neither team are likely to be capable of reaching the regular salary-cap ceiling. in reality it would roughly amount to an extra 10% of equalisation pretense (which is the best kind of equalisation, apparently) and a good hard belly-laugh for Newbold, McGuire and Co..

i wonder if Hodge and Roughead will be wearing their "badges of shame" to the grand final this year?

half time.. switched channel to the hawthawn v north game.. just in time to see Harvey spit on an injured Brian Lake. shocked me.

lol

Jesus the opposition would love it when we turn it over. They'd go coast to coast without either player getting out of jog. Jesus we would love it when the opposition turn it over. We'd go coast to coast without either player getting out of jog.