Rhino Richards

I dont think that has been alleged here but thanks for your summary on Jack. Good to see he is focussed.

Why would Brisbane trade Leuenberger when Charman is on his last legs? Given we have taken GAWN and Spencer with Fitzpatrick in the background wouldn't Leuenberger be maturing within the timezome of those aforementioned players. I am not sure I would be paying over the odds for an injury prone ruckman. We seem to have more than enough of those.

Neither Brisbane nor MFC are overstocked. In fact there are still ?? about our rucks. GAWN, Spencer and Fitz are still 2 years away at least from being regular AFL ruckman. Injuries aside, Meesen and PJ are potentially in their last season. PJ might have the nod over Meesen. But neither are AFL capable. We need Jamar to be fit and playing.

Last year the rides were free up for the first 2 hours. But get there early and know which rides you want to do because the queues get very loooooong.

Stokes trafficking of drugs has nothing to do with the inequities and the problems with the AFL system. The fact is Stokes did not comsume any drugs as far as we know and there has been no prior evidence (again as far we know) of his involvement in drugs. There are no strikes when you traffic drugs and nor should there be. The AFL wont step in on this matter because Stokes is in deep trouble through contravening the law. His statements without a lawyer present are damaging to him. Footballer found ingenius ways too really screw up. Stokes has picked one of the more sinister rules to break. He is a toxic individual atm. FWIW, Cousins was an individual who's life was going off the rails big time. The AFL is no prince but Cousins was no scapegoat. The AFL should have acted sooner on Cousins. At least when Benny ran from the booze bus if not earlier.There was plenty of circumstantial evidence in football circles that Cousins was consuming and the AFL should have hunted he and other in WCE earlier. They should be addressing other matter too on their plate, But we know they wont. But that issue is seperate to Stokes disasterous tangle with the law.

Right you are. Stokes.....a scapegoat??? He is in the position he is of his own actions...no elses. If he is found guilty and convicted, the AFL will act through the guise of the Club and he will be suspended/sacked and deregistered.

If you can sling a 80 to 100kg footballer with a handful of his jumper or holding one arm then you must be in WWF. The whole issue of dangerous tackle is to outlaw the tackles consisting of two action. One to effect the initial tackle the other to inflict damage, pain or injury. The game must act to ensure that no players head or spine is unduly compromised in a tackle or contest. Spear tackles, taking out the legs of an airborne player and swinging an already pinned player and driving him recklessly into the turf. "Every player in the competition understands that there is a slight possibility of being hurt when these things happen and they accept that. " They can comfort themselves with that every time the Doctor moves the neck/vertebrae support in hospital

There are varying levels of assault. And aggravated assault and unprovoked assault are repugnant. Bt there are lighter forms of assault. But I did a general comparison between drug (cocaine)trafficking and assault. And you said it yourself drugs have no place in sport and we have someone who traffics it. Ouch thats bad. Perception is very important here and in general convicted drug traffickers compete in society against a number of other low lifers none of which represent anything positive in the minds of Joe Public.

No it doesn't. It lets the Court find him guilty and the Club to determine under his contract that he has breached it because of a criminal conviction and he is gone. No need for the AFL to make a media circus out of a dirty allegation that smears all involved. No need to harp on it. Agree the perception of drug trafficking is worse than assault. Notwithstanding both Stokes and Hurley have done stupid things and both crimes are repugnant. But on a scale drug trafficking is dirtier than assault. In some cases, the criminal charge or matter may be such that an employee cannot continue to function effectively in their role without detrimental impact to the company's other employees, stakeholders or clients. Would you let someone continue in a day care centre if they are charged with offences against children? Would you let a person continue in a position of trust if the charge represented breaking that trust (eg fraud)?

No it wouldn't.The AFL wont want to inflame the issue and will leave to the conduct of the Police and the Courts. The guy has no previous history of misdemeanours and gets caught seemingly doing a stupid act. The AFL would look heavy handed to a guy a serious charge but it all honesty its a small one off amount. Stokes is hardly public enemy no 1. He's a fool. The AFL wont involve itself where it does not have to. In addition the AFLPA are already slagging the AFL(St Kilda) over its punitive action on Lovett. The AFL will want this out of the papers as much as possible and will seek to divorce itself of the matter saying its a matter for the police and Courts to The defence will claim the treatment of the defendant in the hands of the jury was unduly compromised by the punitive action of the AFL and the media hype surrounding the case which has prevented a fair trial. Its one of the processes of the law.

Its not about the AFL rights. Its the media exposure of the AFL doing such a thing and its ability to impact the conduct of the trial. Given the AFL is a media driven machine, why would it bring further attention to the matter and be alleged to have undermined the Court system and abused the players right to a fair trial (AFLPA). The AFL are smarter than that.

Stokes is on a criminal charge of trafficking and possession not consumption of drugs. While Cousins was not specfically charged with drug offences, Cousins conduct over a number of years (including booze bus jumping) it was obvious that Cousins was impacted by drugs (which he has later admitted). Cousins conduct,contacts and behaviour was well known in the West and was malignanlty tolerated by WCE (and the AFL) His behaviour was rightly determined to be bringing the game into disrepute. Cousins was a person spiralling out of control. As a game icon at the time and club captain, Cousins was bringing repeated damage to the profile of the game. Stokes at this point is just terribly stupid individual who has been pinged by the law. The AFL/GFC will not move ahead of the Courts on punishment for risk prejudicing the trial or causing undue dispute with the AFLPA all of which will end in the media. I think Stokes is finished if found guilty and there will be PR mileage for the AFL to redeem him. At 25 and not a regular in a Club like Geelong with salary cap pressures, he may be on the outer.

Footballer doing utterly stupid act and breaks law! How novel!! What a dumbass situation to put yourself in. Stokes has been charged with a criminal act. Like with Lovett, I cant see the AFL acting on this until the Court determines his fate. If they do they will get the Club to act. Geelong will suspend him indefinitely until the Court Case is decided. If found guilty Geelong would be within their contractual rights to potentially terminate the contract and the AFL will not register him. He will be doing loads of durg testing too. His situation is completely different to Cousins. Another Storm in a teacup. Paper filler for the off season.

There is a reason they are forgotten. Cheney is not fast enough and we have enough plodders. MacDonald will be a defender. Sylvia (how could I forget him) and Petterd are also in the mix. Aside from McKenzie I think the rookies will have less chance than the forgotten crew. Correct. Its a lot better to assess what is said than speculating on what is not. The interview was lightweight and breezy. Talking about Martin in the ruck would only open a discussion on the injured ruck pack. Its was not necessary for CC to focus on that in that forum. Martin will still have opportunities in the side.

Yes and if you listened to the masses then kicking to a contested situation would be the done thing. I wont worry about the masses. They are typically light years behind where the game is and is going. Coaching panels have known and schemed for the past twenty years that attack begins from your defensive line. Absolutely agree. Posters are trying to key hole players which is not what will happen. There will be alot of experimentation done in this development year with the midfield when you consider that we have Scully, Trengove, Morton, Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Strauss, Grimes, Jetta, Bennell and Maric to partner Jomes, Junior, Beamer, Davey, Green and Bruce. Have I missed anyone? There is a lot to be tested and tried in the midfield. There is certainly a best 22 role for Grimes. Lets not pidgeon hole him. Goes without saying.

Thanks Bay Riffin for the link. Great interview. CC loves a "sell". ATM PJ and Meesen who are fighting for their careers have stress foot fractures and would appear in doubt. I reckon both players had ?? in rrespect of 2011. GAWN is recovering from a knee injury and is still recouping. Jamar is commencing his pre season about know about an injury prone. The hope in Spencer should be little surprise given these circumstances. Howeever he is a LT prospect and has had an interrupted pre season. Good to see CC give compliments to Sylvia, Beamer, Frawley, Joel Mac. He did mention that they would ease the Scully's and Trengove in and that players like Strauss will be given a crack. Bring on Freo.

The artform of falling forward in a pack for a mark will certainly be scrutinised. It depends on what level of staging they want to attack. There are a variety of forms of it. Could the victim in a tribunal charge be also up for staging??

Will staging also include the ridiculous practice of dragging the ball under your fallen opponent on the umpire's blind side and holding one up call for "holding the ball"?

You could be right. I would be disappointed if that were the case. But I hope we would see him sometime this year in prep for 2011.

Too true.Too true At earliest. I would suggest 2nd half of the season for AFL. Fingers crossed.

I have just deleted a number of posts that were so low on the content scale it was not funny. Thread is closed until further notice.

I agree that at this point, Spencer and McKenzie are the likely rookies elevated for 2010 if anyone is. I also think that if Newton and Meesen had their contracts expiring in 2009 they would be gone. I think there move to the rookie list highlights the Clubs intention that they intend to spend time on others. I think Meesen is unlikely to be around in 2011. injury prone and the nicest thing I can say is that his AFL games were not as poor as some of his VFL efforts which were really poor. With Jamar and PJ out of contract, I cant see them wasting anymore time on him. Newton would really need to surprise big time to make it beyond 2010. I am not holding my breath on that one. Interesting to watch though.

Not at all. Re-read the press release. I am not dismissive at all about Harrington and his team. I probably understand the challenge more than you realise. I just think there are a number of undetermined variables which makes the exercise a complex one to accurately plot with any certainty. Typically you have your list rolling approx between 33 to 50% as there various 1,2,3 and sometimes (but rarely) 4 year contracts. Plotting 2 to 3 year out is a difficult area to judge. We also have 5 players who may be potentially off the list when their current contract expires: James McDonald, Rohan Bail, Daniel Bell, Paul Johnson(or Jamar) and Clint Bartram. We may elevate a rookie or two but if we dont subject to form etc then there could still be 5 gaps on the list.

The Club gave a fuzzy press release stating because they were from interstate. So my early questions stand as to why they did not do the same with a player like Morton or Jurrah? Glad your easily convinced though. I would havev thought JT was a walk up AFL player given the ability and leadership that he has shown. There would be too many variables in List Management for Harrington to be plotting that far ahead with any certainty.

Agree. I think alot of time has been put into Newton by the coaching panel. His issues are definitelty between the ears. Skills are there. Just not the maturity to use them them. Nothing new has been put forward. All these issues are known and have been done to death. our forward lins is still W.I.P. Miller may have limited role in that for this year only.