ManDee

Provocateur.

Saty I implied that you were bad tempered and argumentative. At no time have I ever commented on let alone thought about the appropriateness of your wedding tackle. I will now have nightmares thanks to you.

Stigga I think you can have your opinion and share it providing that you do not break the rules of the site and remain relatively politically correct. Warning :- TDI is a stroppy old pryk that provides fantastic coverage of training. He is also known to bite. I actually like most of his reports. In my opinion feel free to share your opinions.

OD the first reports I read stated that they had chosen not to name the players. AFL.com & The Age. They also did not mention a request for a suppression order. I now note that the Age mentions the request for a suppression order. But surely that is a request, is that legally binding? From The Age The player has requested his name be suppressed during the Supreme Court trial. Fairfax Media understands that any proceedings would be about health and safety, not football. It is understood that the case is connected to the Essendon supplements regime but the player does not have an infraction notice.

O50, do the players have that right? I am not so sure. I think a media outlet will get a rush of blood and let is slip, in the public interest.

There is a certain fascination with blood sports. And Essendon's exsanguination is particularly appealing.

Bugger Brains what about Lady Penelope? No I don't mean bugger Brains in the way you lot are thinking.

Not digital, broken is broken.

Sue, it's good to know that with the rewriting of history comes the rewriting of dictionaries, reveal now means obscure at least according to Hird & Co.

Dishonesty and disloyalty.

H22, I think the opposite, I think he will be guilty or suing everyone.

One of the best examples of sabre rattling I have seen for some time. Well done WADA, excellent timing.

A bit awkward at times, took a while to work out where my feet were. The best bit was bumping into old school friends. WTF happened to you?

No, I was just a late developer. Not even shaving at 19.

At 17 I was 163cm and 80kg. At 20 I was 185cm and 85kg. Some people develop late.

Not bad but he had his money on the Dees. That will be the end of using live bait at the Whitten oval.

They made another bet at half time that the Doggies would lose by let than 10 points.

Interesting, upper case i's are undotted.

Sorry HT cannot go with the "vibe" defence. I am more a Dennis Denuto Mabo kind of guy, (as seen on TV)

Viv Michie 22 4 0 4 1 3 100 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 21 26 1Sam Frost 17 3 4 7 4 3 42.9 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 100 76 28 12 50 12 11 5 9 0 8 8 9 11 100 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 4 3 42.9 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 100 4 7 4 3 42.9 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 12 0 0 WTF ???????????????????????????? Some context please.

Pet hate. Sth Africa won by 9 wickets. How are wickets relevant in 1 day cricket? Surely they won within 18 overs. You can lose more wickets and win. You could score 9 for 200 and win against a side 1 for 199 is that a win by 1 wicket even though you lost 8 more wickets? Any mention of wickets when defining a victory in one day matches is anathema. Edit: You can win by runs - if they fall short chasing. Or you can win with balls remaining if successful in run chase or you can win on the last ball. You cannot win by wickets.

Anyone know how Essendon are fairing with salary cap breaching? Surely the AFL must have given them permission to pay overs and also extra players on list. Other clubs would be very interested in this I would imagine. The AFL has bent over backwards to help the cheats and yet the EFC keep blaming them.

If I engage staff that systematically breaks the law and I have no system in place to ensure ethical & legal practices are maintained, I am ultimately responsible. If my staff makes mistakes, I pay for the rectification. If my systems do not monitor that staff follow procedures and problems arise I am still responsible. If I discover my staff have made an error, I notify the affected person/company and discuss rectification immediately. EFC have a lesson or two to learn in ethics and legal responsibility. Or they chose to cheat and lie and the lessons would be wasted. Either way they are guilty.

At some levels I hope they were lied to and deceived. This adds to the guilt of the club.

Why not a mirror?