Timothy Reddan-A'Blew

I'm not sure if this is what you meant Mr Leg, but I wasn't meaning to criticise the thread. It was just my ham-fisted way of pointing out the huge milestones that were approaching (and, I guess, the human nature that kicks in when milestone opportunities present themselves!) Nothing but respect (and fascination!) for the threadies here.

Totally off topic, What You Will, but your profile photo is EXACTLY the one I wanted to load for myself but I can't work out how to do it (the photo explaining why, btw!) How did you do it?? Meanwhile, everyone, keep the longsleever candidates coming. And are there any who had the red cuffs? (Did the red cuffs survive into the post-wool era?)

...And by the way, are its regulars jockeying to become the 20,000th poster, shuffling in the queue to win the choccies? And will it be on the nice round 800th page? Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen (and posters)

A while since I've looked in on this thread. How on EARTH did it become a FOOTBALL thread - AND in real time!? Aghast I am!

(Good luck, RBF. Hope you get an answer to your OP. But meanwhile...) Pop quiz: Who has worn the long sleeves in the post-wool period (which is when, btw?). Let me start with (at least on occasions): Paul Hopgood? Jeff Farmer? Cam Bruce? David Cordner?....

Impossible to measure and record but the degree of clangerness correlates directly with the force and emotion with which faces of supporters are buried in hands. I've been pulled up elsewhere for mentioning this weakness of Tom's (though acknowledging his many offsetting plusses) but his clangers do have a high Facebury score....

Nice sentiments, with which - of course - I can but agree, Mr Barrie-Vagg! On topic, ditto re all the love for Bernie. And the sentiments re Jeffie. Both are in the 'bring-people-to-games' class, I reckon.

Didn't see / haven't seen the game yet (away, and no access).Sounds like it will need the passing of either a few days or a few reds, or both (though if the first happens, the second will have been more than a few. However, just wanted to say I'm looking forward to the OP of this weekly thread being something reflecting good and sustained winning, as opposed to the here-we-go-again-it's-spleen-venting-time "Fire away". What will that new and improved OP say, and what sort of sustained performance will allow it to happen?

There's usually someone who congratulates a first poster when their post is a goodie. Allow me to jump in: Well done and welcome PD.

In that famous year, 1987; Robin White??? Not on my radar - had to Google him. 30 games after playing for SA in '84, but Rd 15, '87 was his last game. Can't even remember him in night series win in April. Anyway... No pressure, Christian. Really.

Nice one, D And it makes me realise that here is another thing we could tick off that hoodoo/record list thingy sometime soon, once climate change has removed the excuse for this unwonted stereotype! And, more directly at this thread's topic, the mods picked a fine day to come down hard (geddit?) on explicit bodily reactions...

Any time we get back a player who this club has decided it at least wants, and hopefully needs (regardless of what we might think), it's a great thing. So welcome back to another one! The "I want to be a part of this" comment, coming from someone like Jake appears to be, suggests there is a very clear view in the players' minds that there is a very tangible "this". Excellent. As to Jake's role, the 'threatening/handful-resting-forward' is great to contemplate. However, what do we think of Jake's marking and his mobility (to the extent that a 'resting forward' of that type needs to be mobile)? In marking, Max clearly has the 'goods' now, including in the forward 50 as Sunday demonstrated, but does Jake yet? If not, can he achieve it? Can it be taught? Even that mark he took to goal at Kardinia Park last year - suggesting he might suit the role - was far from convincing!

A Robbiereference, I'm guessing, Barnee So how about 39,287 (numberplate thread refers)? But make sure we don't get stuck at 39,186.

And while I'm at it about what annoys me about the media, do they do this deliberately?: Given the bolded excerpt in the article, the photo in today's Age of Viney and Rance gives a clear impression that this was the initial contact and so appears to put fist, neck and head 'in the frame' (so to speak!) for the contact from which Jack was 'let off'. This still is not the original contact; it is the follow-up grab a few seconds later, which had no force at all. The fist is the bunched grab, and there was not even a jumper-punch. Grrrr!

Boss, I certainly agree with you that the particular link/reference to his religion by the poster was not on. However, The Age, having said "Rance, a Jehovah's Witness,..." then reports that Rance "...said his action went against his faith...". So technically Rance brought at least his faith into the broader 'incident' (the original act plus its follow-ups). Note - and this annoys me about the media - it was the paper that 'cleverly' brought in his particular religion and made it seem Rance said something he did not evidently say.

Seeing it live and up close, Gus looked to be held for an eternity. Seeing the replay..nah! Woohoo!

[In this my 170th-odd post, I for the first time enter the 'he said, he said' game beloved of Demonland. I do so with trepidation! Be kind Mr Conditioning ] Having sat close to Tom's kicking blemishes on Sunday night, it's hard to argue they don't happen! I'd hoped I'd conveyed that I was only using the comparison to question the degree of markdown of Jack on here. I did go on to suggest Tom's total package distinguished him from Jack (for example, his night - again - of inspiring intercept marking), as I did with H, for my 'awareness' comparison (H may get caught 'unawares' but it is more likely to happen in a take-the-game-on moment than Jack would have). [Do I pass muster?]

A bit of a spin on what others have already analysed: Next week almost seems like an 8-point game. If we win, you could think the return match in Rd 17 at the same venue becomes similarly winable, with possibly the reverse being the case if we lose. In the 'win-win' case, of the other 14 rounds remaining we should believe Brisbane at the 'G, Port in Alice Springs, the QB game, the Suns at the 'G, Freo in Darwin if they are sufficiently demoralised by then, and Carlton at the 'G are wins, That's 11 wins (current 3 + 2xSaints + those 6), with 9 other games then left to prognosticate on: Suns on The Coast, Dogs, Hawks (twice!!) and Crows at the 'G, Swans at the other 'G, the other Coast in the west, Port in Adelaide and Geelong at Kardinia Park. Could 13 wins squeeze us in? Port in Adelaide seems the most possible of these (we ran them very close there last year), or maybe one of the Suns, Dogs or Adelaide games (we have no particular hoodoos with any of them). Should we only get one of those 4, what a game Rd 23 might be! Combine the memories of Kardinia Park last year and the role it played in the last round of '87! Be still my beating heart (it certainly will be beating fast on 26 or 27 or 28 August "TBC" if this scenario eventuates!)

(p.s. In my suicidal post above there would likely be a roll of Roosy and certainly no role for him)

The elephant in the room(?): the success of succession plans upon the occurrence of unexpected degrees of success, imminently or actually (the 'black-and-white' experience circa 2010?) (I may just have committed the Demonland equivalet of harikiri with this post? Even if only by comparing Malthouse (ptui!) and Roosy)

I'm not sure Jack deserves to be marked down so severely for awareness (earlier post), or foot skills (above), relative to his backline colleagues - H or TMac anyone? It might be in the totality of their respective packages that Jack falls a bit behind. Watching last night's game, for example, I think Jack and Nev are more direct competitors for a spot. As to a role if he doesn't make it back, for mine he has a bit of what GWS took Junior on for. Regarding others mentioned on this thread, JKH does look a little bit unable to 'get into it' at Casey, from my (limited) observation pre-hammy, and (per my comment on another thread) I think Max K can/should be our Joe Daniher when (if?!) he gets the tank (as Moon also observed), and assertiveness to the Max G level. In these senses I think he could be the Pedo successor.

And do we also attach some importance to our defeat of them (and at Etihad) in the Challenge (the actual last time we met)?

Three down to two. Tick. (*) Now, will he decide not to come back? My "Bye" still stands. (* although the 'coward punch' - from behind / no warning - discussion is compelling. I've also been thinking of Phil Hughes's injury, given the part of the head and the pointiness of elbows)

Attack (and, to be fair, accuracy!) has arrived! We are the second highest scoring team, only 3 goals shy of the ladder leaders. And our percentage attests to us not having sacrificed too much of the earlier construction of a defence system.

Uh-oh! Here we go! (Nobody expects the Monty Python quoting. Amongst our quotes are...)