Gator

I couldn't disagree more. It would be a hopeless structure. I also said you can't have the kicking skills of the McDonalds and Frost together coming out of the backline. Let's not keep going around in circles. Clearly our footy views are polar opposite.

You put an argument, but I gave it short shrift. You said, "A back six of Hibberd, Jetta, Frost, the McDonalds, and Lever looks pretty damn good." I don't see a back 6 that includes 194cm, 194cm, 195cm and 197cm. It's way too tall. I don't see a back 6 with the McDonalds and Frost by themselves let alone them with the acquisition of Lever. It would be diabolical. And wouldn't happen. The McDonalds and Frost are suspect kicks under pressure. Imo, you can't have the three of them in the back-line together. Kicking in the back half is super important. I can see a back 6 that includes Hibberd, Hunt, Jetta, the McDonalds and Lever. That works for me. We often play a 7 man defence, so fitting Smith in would also work. If and I know it's a big if and probably unlikely, but if Lever came to the club I see Frost as the logical player to make way. Hunt and Smith, who is just as fast, more than make up for what Frost brings to the table.

No worries. I like to argue logically and dispassionately and I realise that's a bridge too far for most supporters. Thankfully, our list management committee will work through scenarios like me and not like you. Btw, there is room for sentiment, but for a player like Frost, who is already at his second club, and with obvious deficiencies in his game, he becomes expendable for the greater good. As for Smith becoming a mid ? I haven't seen enough, but on early viewings I don't agree. He's never trained as a mid and he's been developed as a back. He's getting into the 22 as a back. It's nothing more than wishful thinking to assume he'll become a mid. When I was at a supporters forum with Brendan McCartney in October 2016 he was asked for his best longterm team. He slotted Joel Smith into a back pocket. They rate him highly as a courageous and fast line breaking defender. As for Jones ? Perhaps you're not as keen, because you're a hoarder. It's easier to pass on Jones if you don't want to give up what you've got. But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what you or I think, what if the club is keen on Jones ? What if the club is keen on Lever ? How do YOU get those deals done ?

I don't see it at all.

How about in attempt to win a flag and build a dynasty ? So you think all of Hibberd, Jetta, Hunt, Frost, Joel Smith, the McDonalds, and Lever can all play in the same side ? All play their best footy in defence. All are best behind the ball, which is an easier position to play. And all won't fit. Also, how do you plan on securing both Lever and Jones if it was feasible to do so. It's a hypothetical, but one the club would love to be in a position to enact. Hogan, Weideman, and Watts are the future in the forward-line. Trying to convert Tom into a forward is unnecessary and not his best position. And he won't be needed there.

Tom isn't going to be a key forward long-term. He's done OK, but he's not a natural forward and will revert to defence in 2018 and beyond. Lever is still physically developing as a 21 year old defender, but he's 195cms. He's brilliant at intercept marking and his best position is in defence. He'd be the general in defence, wherever he plays, for a decade. Trying to turn him into a mid isn't going to happen. Yes, injuries occur, but assuming they're all fit and firing they're not all going to be in the best 22. If one has very good value and could be used in a trade you do the deal to get a player like Lever. If there's a possibility to land both he and Jones something has to fall from the tree. Adelaide and Sydney will want very good compensation, so what would you propose ? Frost would go a long way to securing Jones, which allows first round pick/s to secure Lever.

I know, which is why he has value. No point stockpiling what you have an abundance of. If it looked like we were Lever's preferred club should he decide he wants to shift back to Victoria then all of Tom McDonald, Oscar McDonald, Frost, Lever, and Joel Smith is at least one too many and potentially two. And I don't see the McDonalds being split up. So what is your solution if we were a chance to secure Lever ?

There is, of course, the question of what to do with the McDonalds and Frost if we were lucky enough to recruit Lever. My guess is that Frost would be traded. Oscar is developing well and at 197cms he has a tonne of physical development left. Splitting up the brothers is also problematic. This isn't to say I don't rate Frost's speed, but he's not as good a defender as Tom and is more easily replaceable. Joel Smith for one is as fast as Frost and at 191cm he's only 3cms shorter than Frost, who doesn't play overly tall anyway. Frost doesn't have to be involved in a Lever trade, but he could be involved to secure Jones. Frost has lived in Sydney once when he was with GWS and his line breaking speed on the SCG would be a weapon. Grundy is getting on (31), Laidlaw no longer gets a game and is short at 190cm, Michael Talia is finished, and Allir Allir has stalled. Melican looks a player, but that's about it in the key position defender stakes. The Swans are crying out for another tall defender. Frost has Leverage.

We don't always see eye to eye, but I read Binman's post a couple of times and could only conclude he quoted the wrong poster. It made no sense whatsoever.

As your position is shifting so is mine. Not about Lever, but about who perhaps is gettable and can provide some outside pace and be that connector we're presently missing. I think Lever is perfect for us in that he is going to be the best key defender in the competition for a decade. I worry about the NQR McDonalds and the NQR Frost. All three have some great attributes, and Oscar has come on in leaps and bounds, but the opportunity to get a player like Lever doesn't come along often. But where I've shifted is on Kelly. As good as he's going to be I don't see how we can get both he and Lever, such is the expense. My compromise is Zac Jones and I know I'm late to the party. It's taken longer for me to warm to him than others. Not being the most sentimental supporter I suspect my resistance was borne out of a desire to make good decisions and not allow any family connection to influence good policy. But in doing so I've probably marked him harder than I should. I still think he has plenty to work on, but his performance last week reinforced the view he's exactly the type we need running the lines. And I'm guessing he'll probably cost approx. $300-400K pa less than Kelly. So it's a more doable solution for a result that won't be the same, but still very good. They could obviously both resist moves back to Melbourne, however, Lever has recently discussed it as being a "life decision" on 5AA. the fact he's put off re-signing gives some hope. Jones would know that if he ever wants to play with his Brother he must come back next year. If he commits to the Swans for another 3 years the time will have probably passed. The general consensus is that he'll probably stay at the Swans, but once again, the fact he hasn't re-signed gives hope. He's a Mornington Peninsula boy who's never known Sydney and he's close to Nathan, so I think there must be some pull to come back home. Who knows if it's enough. Lever and Jones in the off-season would allow us to seriously challenge in 2017.

Yeah, Dad looked interesting with the hand tatts. Whatever it takes.

Jeez Lever is good.

I've been surprised by his lack of physicality inside the contest.

He's playing a more outside role and knew coming here we had far more inside grunt. That said, there's heavy lifting and barely lifting.

$850K for Lever spread out over 4 years is fine. He's a bona fide star in the making and with him in defence, Gawn in ruck, Hogan CHF and our building midfield we'd be a force to be reckoned with. Oscar, Tom, and Frost are a NQR defensive unit. Getting Lever would be a huge fillip. Yes, it would shake the tree and the above named 3 plus Lever don't fit, but Lever is comfortably better than all 3 of them. If you could get it done you would.

I've previously read that there's no scientific evidence that mental disorders are caused by a "chemical imbalance in the brain". So I did a quick search and found two articles that suggest this to be true. http://www.peteearley.com/2015/01/30/mental-illnesses-caused-chemical-imbalances/ http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/blogs/nuances-narratives-chemical-imbalance-debate The second link quotes research done by the American Psychiatric Association.

One and the same I would have thought.

I take it no-one is arguing the merits of the actual thread, i.e. transgenderism is a mental disorder ? When it comes to intellect the left are a vacuum. They're ONLY interested in how things make them "feel".

You needn't have bothered. And I shouldn't have expected more.

In view of @TGR's thread on the main board re Sam Newman's unsavoury comments I thought I'd start a thread on the appropriate Demonland platform. Newman's comments aside, which don't help anyone, the Left's current dealing with this issue doesn't help anyone according to Dr Paul McHugh, a John Hopkins Psychiatrist, least of all those with this affliction. According to Dr McHugh, transgenderism, or gender dysphoria, is a "mental disorder" and should be treated as such. He states, "transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder. "The pro-transgender advocates do not want to know, said McHugh, that studies show between 70% and 80% of children who express transgender feelings “spontaneously lose those feelings” over time. Also, for those who had sexual reassignment surgery, most said they were “satisfied” with the operation “but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery.” “’Sex change’ is biologically impossible,” said McHugh. “People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.” He also warns, "that there are “misguided doctors” who, working with very young children who seem to imitate the opposite sex, will administer “puberty-delaying hormones to render later sex-change surgeries less onerous – even though the drugs stunt the children’s growth and risk causing sterility.” The pro-transgender advocates do not want to know, said McHugh, that studies show between 70% and 80% of children who express transgender feelings “spontaneously lose those feelings” over time. Also, for those who had sexual reassignment surgery, most said they were “satisfied” with the operation “but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery.” The idea that one’s sexuality is a feeling and not a biological fact “is doing much damage to families, adolescents, and children and should be confronted as an opinion without biological foundation wherever it emerges,” said Dr. McHugh in his article, Transgenderism: A Pathogenic Meme. He goes on, “Think, for example, of the parents whom no one—not doctors, schools, nor even churches—will help to rescue their children from these strange notions of being transgendered and the problematic lives these notions herald." They rarely find therapists who are willing to help them “work out their conflicts and correct their assumptions,” said McHugh. “Rather, they and their families find only ‘gender counselors’ who encourage them in their sexual misassumptions.” In recent years, though, the notion that one’s sex is fluid has flooded the culture. It is “reflected everywhere in the media, the theater, the classroom, and in many medical clinics,” said McHugh. When “the tumult and shouting dies,” McHugh continued, “it proves not easy nor wise to live in a counterfeit sexual garb. The most thorough follow-up of sex-reassigned people—extending over 30 years and conducted in Sweden, where the culture is strongly supportive of the transgendered—documents their lifelong mental unrest.” “Ten to 15 years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to 20 times that of comparable peers,” said McHugh. So, my question is, is this "enlightened" thinking, this almost encouragement of transgenderism ? Does it actually help those who have these feelings. The studies in Sweden are poignant because they're conducted 10-15 years after reassignment. Are those with gender dysphoria getting the treatment they should, or are they precluded from the right treatment due to society's quest to make transgenderism appear normal and those who question it just backward bigots and intolerant of others who are different ? It appears to me that the LGBT movement has become so powerful that any debate re transgenderism has been shut down and those that could have successful treatment to help cure this disorder are now pawns in a movement and may find it difficult to have treatment that could actually heal them. Are they encouraged to get psychological treatment, or are their families merely encouraged to accept them for who they are ? Newman's comments are insensitive whichever way you look at it, but it appears to me that discussion re this topic isn't encouraged and many with this disorder are poorer for it. Btw, it's in the nature of the Left to discredit anyone who disagrees with their notions, so no doubt some will madly google Dr McHugh in order to discredit him. Dr McHugh was head psychiatrist at John Hopkins Hospital for 26 years, and he's the author of 6 books and 125 peer reviewed articles.

You liked the post over an hour ago and have taken this long to come up with a lame response. I'm interested in debating people who are well read on AGW not just ill-informed leftist loonies supporting their side, i.e. not you. Welcome to ignore. I should have done it a while back, as your offerings are some of the most low brow I've seen, even for poorly bred hicks. Btw, I'm sure you're well-meaning, I just don't have time for idiots.

You really are thick. Breitbart are reporting the latest views of this well-known climate alarmist, they're not the source. I don't know how you manage to breathe and type at the same time. Thick as a brick.

Nothing new, of course. This hoax is costing our country billions For nothing. Except ridiculous power costs that make poor people cold and businesses either leave or go broke. Even leading alarmist Ben Santer, lead author of a paper in Nature Geoscience, now admits the world isn't warming as predicted by global warming models. Even Michael Mann, who produced the infamous hockey stick, has put his name to this paper. From the abstract: The problem is the models on which the global warming scare is based were simply wrong: James Delingpole describes Santer's colorful history in the climate wars since he was outed in the Climategate scandal. Sceptical scientists identified this problem years ago: