dieter

Salem was the unlucky one in my votes. I loved Tom Macdonald's game: presence, authority, fierce contest. We're a better side when he plays.

I thought Melkshan's game against the Bombers was outstanding. I like his hardness and true grit.

6: Gawn 5: Hibberd 4: Jetta 3: Melksham 2: Fritsch 1: T.McDonald

What's Dean terlich up to these days? I liked him as a footballer....

This sounds like the noises from a lunatic asylum...

he's had a molto tuffo run....

I'm an ex Postie. I hate dogs.

Is Tossing still a sport north of ALBURY?

He is the great great grandson of the great German composer Richard Wagner who migrated to Queensland because he was sick of dealing with princes. He wanted to serve a queen.

I guess you see what you want to see. I see him being there, waiting, Tunbridge, Vagg like...

Don't agree about Garlett at all. You try playing his role when the ball keeps being bombed long with no-one to burst or bust packs. Add that presence and Garlett becomes a wiz. How dare you question his 'work'.

Too much serial black gloom on this thread. It's obvious that the absence of T.Mac and Viney has seriously affected the balance of the mid field and the whole structure of the forward line. Once you have balance and structure in place the likes of Garlett, Harmes, Neal Bullen and Melksham are able to play their natural games. That semblance of balance resulted in Melbourne missing the 8 last year by .5 of a % point, despite the absence of Gawn, Hogan, Jones and Viney. It would seem, as well, that the coaches box is a wee bit behind the 8 ball with its instructions about long bombs and lowering of the eyes. Either that or the players just don't listen or they feel way too pressured to respond properly. I had a phone call today from a bloke whose wine I sell. He was on North's List during the Barassi era. He said the coach is not up to it. He says, by the way, the same about the current North coach. I bet a thousand dollars that Richmond fans - and the media - said for years Hardwick wasn't up to it. I bet another thousand that for the first couple of years Bomber Thomson wasn't up to it. I also know Kennett wanted to sack Clarkson in 2010. There are a lot of 'wise and foolish virgins' - as the Parable goes, on this site. Also, to those who feel that because they follow a footy club that it 'owes' them ultimate success have been reading too much Ayn Rand.

And this: Eight reasons why the latest Syria chemical weapons attack allegations are almost certainly complete nonsense April 8, 2018 By Stephen Gowans There is much ambiguity surrounding the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, said to have taken place late Saturday, but there are a few matters that are clear. First, the reports are “unverified”, according to The Wall Street Journal [1] and British Foreign Office [2] and are unconfirmed, according to the US State Department [3]. What’s more, The New York Times noted that it “was not possible to independently verify the reports,” [4] while The Associated Press added that “the reports could not be independently verified.” [5] Second, according to The Wall Street Journal, it isn’t “clear who carried out the attack” [6] assuming even that one was carried out. Third, the “unverified photos and videos” [7] which form the body of (unverified) evidence, were produced by two groups which have an interest in fabricating atrocities to draw the United States more deeply into the Syrian conflict. Both groups, the White Helmets and Syrian American Medical Society, are funded by Western governments [8], which openly seek regime change in Syria and therefore have an interest in producing a humanitarian pretext to justify stepping up their intervention in the country. The Western government-funded White Helmets and Syrian American Medical Society are allied with anti-government jihadists and are active only “in opposition-controlled areas.” [9] They, too, are clearly interested parties. Fourth, The New York Times indirectly revealed a possible motivation for the two groups to bring forward fabricated atrocity stories. “A new confirmed chemical attack in Syria,” the newspaper noted, “would pose a dilemma for President Trump, who … recently said he wants to get the United States out of Syria.” [10] Trump’s recent musings about ending the US military occupation of nearly one-third of Syrian territory, including the country’s richest oil fields, was swiftly met by Pentagon opposition, led by US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. The US president reluctantly accepted a continued occupation, so long as it ends in a matter of months rather than years. Fabricating an atrocity would pressure Trump to maintain the US occupation indefinitely and possibly escalate US military intervention in Syria, much to the pleasure of Islamist insurgents, their White Helmet and Syrian American Medical Society allies, and US war planners. If that is the intention, the maneuver appears to have met with success. Trump reacted on Twitter to the unverified (and unverifiable) reports, by dehumanizing Syrian president Bashar al-Assad as an “animal,” who the US president said was responsible for a “humanitarian disaster for no reason whatsoever.” That the US State Department acknowledged that the reports were unconfirmed failed to restrain the “shoot-from-the-hip” Trump. Fifth, a chemical attack by the Syrian government would be manifestly self-defeating, and therefore would seem to be highly unlikely. The Syrian Arab Army is on the cusp of an all but inevitable victory in Eastern Ghouta. Why would it cancel its gains by handing the United States a pretext to continue its military intervention in Syria, in the aftermath of Trump signalling his intention to withdraw US troops? Sixth, it is difficult to conceive of any military benefit to the Syrian Arab Army of deploying chemical weapons. The Syrian military has more lethal conventional ways of killing than using chemical agents, whose effects are unpredictable and typically small scale. In all the alleged chemical attack incidents in Syria, the claimed number of victims is always smaller than that which could easily be produced by air strikes and artillery. Why, then, would the Syrian government use relatively ineffective chemical weapons, creating a pretext for continued US intervention, when it could use more deadly conventional weapons, without a crossing a red line? Seventh, much of the discourse about chemical weapons in Syria implicitly assumes the Syrian government has them, despite the country cooperating with the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons to eliminate them years ago. Finally, allegations of chemical weapons use are routinely made against the Syrian government, and while, through repetition, have been transfigured into received truths, have all proved to be unverified. Jim Mattis acknowledged this at a February 2 news conference. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but neither is it evidence of guilt. The complete lack of evidence, along with a political context that favors the production of spurious allegations, suggests that the latest chemical weapons claims are—like all that have preceded them—dubious at best.

It ought to occur to you that the USa which lied to the world before invading Vietnam, Iraq in 1991 and Iraq in 2004 ought to be the last ones to do moralistic 'slapping'. Also, you need to know that none of the allegations about Assad's use of chemical weapons have been authenticated by an independent source. The allegations have always come from so-called rebels or bogus dudes like 'The White Helmets'. Most of the so-called rebels are financed, armed - with chemical weapons - by Saudi Arabia with most of the weapons origination in either the USA or the so-called Nato countries. The White Helmets also were established by an ex SAS officer and they are financed by Britain and the USA. I urge you - if you are at all interested, and you, like me and everybody else ought to be - I urge to start your investigation with an article by a USA PUlitzer Prize winning journalist called Seymour Hersh. Hersh was the man who exposed the My Lai crimes. There is an article - available on the internet - published by the London Review of Books in about 2014 about the 2013 chemical weapon attack.https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line There is also an article published by Hersh in Der Welt late last year about last year's April so-called attack https://www.welt.de › Politik › Ausland. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/.../ron_paul_seymour_hersh_report... Then you may wish to watch a BBC interview with the ex British Ambassador to Syria earlier this month - his surname is Peter Ford https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j_Z1f84Ps8 Then perhaps, check out Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley, both independent journalists who are actually based in Syria. No other Western Journalist is. And this becomes important when you consider that most of the charges against Assad emanate from so-called rebels who are paid by the USA and Britain and Nato, purpose to overthrow Assad. Which brings me back to my first question: after the warmongering history of the USA and the number of times they've been caught out lying, why would you believe anything that comes from that source. Think about it....

In NZ they'd be saying, He's taking the puss, Bro. Relax... I recognize a kindred lunatic...

Richmond supporters have been more or less in the same good ship lollipop...

I'll just throw this amongst the pidgeons who are flucking off: MATT Burgan looks at the stories, stats and surprises in his weekly column. Summary Yep, Sunday was a shocker, no question. But let’s not throw the toys out of the cot. It was far from the end of the world – or the season for that matter. Remember, Melbourne wasn’t playing an average team. It came up against an opponent that has made the finals all but twice since 2006. It’s also worth noting that a certain side that went down to St Kilda by 67 points in round 16 last year – the same margin Melbourne lost to against the Hawks on Sunday – ended up winning the flag. And for the record, Richmond was smashed by the Crows to the tune of 76 points in round six last year.

I was there that day too. I swear it was at the Glenferrie Road end, and I swear it was barry Bourke who fell on Hudson's leg and 'rooned' him.... I also swear Hudson had kicked 26 goals up till then.....It seemed like it anyhow....

I don't need Polonium: my wife is Polish... As the Tea Shirt logo says: Pray for me, My wife is Polish

Yep, my missus reckons I take too many Panadol Osteo for my arthritis, and apart from that, I'm addicted to Glucosamine, Mega B, and Reaptan Alright, I drink wine, but only after 5.30 PM. What is this an AA meeting or what??

I'd pay no more than 10% as a tip... That's about as much as Flash and me know about Greyhounds, unless, of course, it's a bus...

Psychic or no, Voges, no cash in bank equals no cash in wallet. I had intended to rob a servo that morning but all of the Casey Servos had been cleaned out by the early birds...

No. I've discovered that you can't summons Flash. He appears at his/her own choosing. A direct question is ignored. A bit like the I Ching...

This is just for the record, folks. Last year, when Jesse Hogan went down with his hammy I had a flash that morning that Jesse would be hurt that day. Sunday morning another flash came: Hawthorn would beat us by 10 goals. As you know, Flash was wrong. It was eleven goals. Yes, I know some of you think I'm psycho, but in reality, I'm also very psychic. Just thought, on what will be a week of gloom and dark weather, a gloom overshadowed by the lunatic shenanigans of the most dangerous man who has ever been the Pres - and he has a lot of competition on that front - I'd share that with youse all, hopefully to make you consider that there is more to life than the MFC. Become a Psychic, I say unto you, you will be healed.

The best show that could possibly come out of the USA is called 'No Show'.