deanox

With Toumpas off, Garland injured and Fitz struggling, and are serially down on rotations and don't expect to win. I hoe we can keep it less than 20, a respectable result. Nb Byrnes has been poor tonight, he has fumbled at times when clean possession probable would have resulted in shots at goal.

50 50 decisions have stopped going our way. I think we won the quarter on the field but only just on the score board.

No free to dawes?

Advantage where?

stiff. Easy goal the other way. If we cutoffs snare another one before 3/4 time that'd be great.

That was a push against Garland earlier.

The problem with the bagging Toumpas isn't "bagging Toumpas". He has been poor, we all know it. The vitriol, hate and derision is uncalled for. Last week he was fantastic for us. A poor half and he is the worst player ever.

Loose players through the midfield soars we aren't getting back when we lose possession.

We have let them kick easy goals this quarter. Loose outside players getting away around packs.

So much hang time.

Terlich gets way to many goals kicked on him.

Pity we let it out so easy.

Great passage of play. Kept possession for ages with uncontested marks. Waited for an option up the ground and swing forward. Only scored a behind (rushed) but my favourite part of the season so far. We controlled the ball and the game.

Stays say we are behind every where. Less kicks, hand balls, contested and uncontested possessions, clearances, marks, i50s. We are winning the free kicks 9 to 4? Also more marks in 50, and better disposal efficiency. Anyone able to explain the above? Are we doing something right or are we riding the free kicks and converting opportunities?

Would love a pm as well, no foxtel tonight.

What's scary? The last year we played in a grand final, the following movies were released: Gladiator, Scary Movie (1) and mission impossible.

correct that his foot isn't right, that is a given that he isn't currently playing! But a claim of no progress for 12 months is deliberate ignorance because from the information that IS available that isn't correct. I've already said I'd like the club to give a more detailed update of what IS going on. He may not come back, possible that he will have ongoing irritation throughout his career, but at the moment it appears that they are waiting on an injury/irritation to settle completely before moving forward and it is indefinite how long that will take.

Old Dee and Mono, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what leadership really means. (On re read, I'm not sure if Mono disagrees or was just taking the [censored]!) I think Jones would be a better captain than Moloney bit neither are/were ideal leaders. Moloney thought he was a leader, and goods leadership style was "dictator". He may have directed but didn't do the hard yards himself, didn't do the thinking and want willing to listen to others. The old adage "to lead you must serve" type thing is beyond Moloneys understanding. On field leadership is important but that doesn't make a captain of the club in my opinion. Claiming it is the most important part is like saying the best worker should be boss. Clearly that is not the case; leadership is a different skill set. Jones' behaviour was too unassuming to be the captain we needed to help set the culture of the club. We need to set a culture of development and hard work, and while he may epitomise this, Jones' style was just to go about his business quietly and unobtrusively on his own. I'd go so far as to describe him as almost shy, both on and off the field. Even on field he doesn't fly the flag, he doesn't get fired up, he just does his thing, workman like. Regardless of all of this Grimes has repeatedly, under different coaches, won the club leadership award despite not playing much during that time. And given that all reports from inside the club suggest Trengove and Grimes could not be sold when it came to leadership. These two facts alone indicate that the Trengove appointment was for the right reasons. Was he ready to take on the burden of captaincy? Probably not. Has it impacted him? Possibly. Has it been the sole contributor to his poor form? No. Was he the best option available? Pretty clearly yes. Is he the right captain moving forward? Unsure, as Jones and Garland have stepped up and Dawes has been recruited.

How does this article get through qa: Demetriou seeks Demons boss for long haul Surely someone reads the article and says "what are your sources for this, did you talk to David Neitz?" A quick Google search, or a check of the MFC website would have revealed it as a fallacy. http://m.afl.com.au/news/2013-07-19/neitz-not-the-ticket-to-demon-success How lazy is this? I'd suggest Neitz should be demanding a retraction.

I'm not sure that's the reason he wasn't made captain, I think it is more likely related to his lack of leadership around the club. Yeah he may be our best player but how often do you see him directing traffic on field? Great player doesn't mean mean he is the type of person to direct others, to demand standards are met, or to encourage and lead others. From reports inside the club he had stepped up dramatically in that area in the past 6 months. Being able to lead on field through actions is but one aspect of being captain. I all hoped Grimes and Trengove would step up on field, Grimes certainly has and Trengove has struggled. Just because we can't see leadership in 2 hours on a weekend doesn't mean that person isn't a leader.

There hasn't been a complete lack of progress. He recovered from the original dislocation sufficiently to be able to train and play. He has since had the screw removed and has inflammation and irritation that hasn't settled sufficiently. While it is related to the surgery, as far as I can tell this is now a completely different "injury" than the original one and ha only been going on for 12 weeks, not 12 months.

what about that gives you grave doubts? I can only assume it is the uncertainty. What I am suggesting is they give what little info they have; explain the actual problem and the prognosis, even if the prognosis is just "we need to wait til it settles down before he does anything".

I'd like to see the club give a true update on his progress. It is clearly a different injury than any other cater ending foot injuries we've seen at other clubs. That he has come back once indicates that the risks usually associated with those injuries aren't occurring. But a genuine update would be appreciated.

It could get messy of any s2 listed drugs are listed on the waivers.

From the info provided by ferddadee above it seems pretty clear that unless Essendon show that it wasn't on a banned list or that asada told them it wasn't then at the very least Jobe Watson is in trouble. The "you can't actual prove it was injected" defence may hold up in some cases but not Watson's. He admitted he thought it was AOD that was being injected. My reading of the above is that attempted use is prohibited. If he thought he was using it but the doctors have something else that is a breach of this rule, is it not?