Mazer Rackham

Thank you to our intrepid training watchers for the excellent reports.

I don't have strong feelings about retired-footballer Garry either way. Tremendous player, brought many joyful moments on field ... I do think he is quite succinct as a footy analyst, can make his point in a few words (compare this to Dermott for example) ... but in answer to the OP's question, I can think of two reasons why he is on the nose for some. First, his "will he or won't he" miniseries about becoming the MFC coach when it was obvious the whole time he wouldn't. That got a lot of people off side. And his anodyne performances on TV when confronted with any kind of controversy or challenge. Whether it's Sam Newman acting the goat, or Caro going off about something, Garry can't seem to put his own stamp on matters. You can almost see him thinking "what course of action will least offend Eddie?"

Margaret Wenham is not an Essendon supporter Correct. She is a cynical purveyor of clickbait. Ad revenue forecasts must be down at News Ltd.

I recall the heady days when Kerry Packer was hauled before the senate to be hung drawn and quartered over his media practices. I reckon some of those parliamentarians might still suffer nervous tics when they hear the word "Packer". Reminded of that for some reason.

Or he may have seen the CAS report. Lots of people have had their mind changed after seeing factual information unadulterated by fanboy media and fanboy CEOs. He has been duped. The media went rogue. And Senator Di Natale needs to self report to the estimates committee.

Why? Does it like being soaked in (shudder) Budweiser?

I reckon WJ is on the money. This is a gambit to set up the next manoeuvre, which is to sue the club and the AFL. "We did everything we possibly could to clear our names. Including appealing to the Swiss high court, the UN and the ministry of magic. The only course left to us is to seek compensation for our damaged reputations, in the form of $$$$$$. Now cough up." No injunction? I don't think the lawyers genuinely believe there is much chance of success. An injunction would put the cat among the pigeons if (when) the appeal fails. I think EFC and AFL are going along with it as there is only upside for them ... if the appeal gets up, they can forever and a day crow about the snow white innocence of the players. Dunno about the players ... they may actually believe there is a substantive chance of this appeal getting up. I would say "get used to disappointment" but they're well versed in that already.

They've thumbed their nose at the AFL, the other clubs, supporters everywhere, their own players ... and the AFL has stood by and given tacit encouragement. All they did was fine them for "not" doping (which was all about their own brand management). It still stuns me that the AFL were quite happy to sweep it under the carpet. One of their clubs dopes up en masse and they were going to hide it and let them off scot free. If not for the ACC we would never have known. The AFL should self-report for bringing the game into disrepute.

The AOD-9604 was later clarified by WADA to be banned, and always was banned. How ASADA managed to get into a situation where they decided not to go after EFC for AOD, we will never know. Something to do with previous advice (to whom and when was never clear) that it was OK to take. But EFC dodged a bullet for sure.

Dawes! I'll bet he was playing basketball at training.

This worries me ... Hogan's jumper looks a lot more purple then the others ... more "Docker" purple ... and why's he the only one wearing zinc cream ... only place I can think of where you need zinc cream is WA or Qld.

The Gawn Yawn. Gave Tom that lightbulb moment where he thought, if that's what being at an AFL club is like, then I'm packing my bags to go off to another AFL club that I've already got a handshake agreement with. There was a time when the "big 4" (the once-was version that included Carlton and Essendon) all played each other twice per year in "blockbusters", and lesser clubs were making noise about not getting opportunities to play these big drawing clubs ... and we decided to be proactive, not whinge, and create our own "blockbuster". What more natural rivalry could there be than between Melbourne (the city) and Sydney (the city). So Demons v. Swans it was. A marquee match every season, played at night, on free to air TV. Build it up over time into a rivalry and a big drawing match. Next thing you know Collingwood are playing Sydney in a marquee match, played at night, on free to air TV. And we're back in twilight on Sundays. Liberty, egality, fraternity! (and the guillotine!)

I went to a training session last year and about 30 seconds after I got there, Pedo did his ankle, or was it his knee. The forwards were doing some light marking practice and Pedo went up by himself, came down awkwardly, and that was his season. Can happen to anyone anytime. It's just bad luck. Yes, more likely to happen if everyone's hammer and tongs at it, but no matter what you do, you will cop some injuries at training. Rather it be when the boys are going at it hammer and tongs. Let's see them make hammer and tongs a normal practice. I don't want their first time to be when they're getting ready to go up against Hawthorn or Freo. I think Tommy's attitude is more revealing than JV's. "Hey man, what are you doing???" (said in slightly hysterical tones) Everyone knows JV is hard at it. Let them all be hard at it, all the time. Not in terms of throwing themselves at the ball like madmen, but in terms of being determined and unforgiving to the opposition.

Great stuff. Thanks Coup.

Agree. The guy is unhinged. I don't know why they take him on on bigfooty. It doesn't do their cause any good, and can't be healthy for him.

Yes, it certainly has some legs. Bearing in mind that this is the off season and as soon as a footy is kicked in anger all (most) attention will be on that. But this is the damage that EFC have done to the game. This is bringing the game into disrepute. When even followers of the game are disgusted and offended. While EFC supporters are grappling with their 5 stages of grief, the rest of us are grappling with the 12 stages of disgust and offence. Stage 3, posting to the internet, is the longest stage.

With outrage and disgust, a certain amount of relief that they got caught, some schadenfreude, and contempt for the AwFuL.

Here's some Gil related content for those not hankering for ancient ciggy ads or bashing saturation gambling ads (although the latter is always tempting ...) When your only tool is hammer, all problems look like a nail. So it is with Gil. Everything has to be solved with a deal. Decisions seem to be impossible unless they're ones that please all parties. It was our dear old Gil who came up with the concept of "not" punishing us for tanking. And giving us a totally unrelated fine for not making our beds and keeping our sock drawers tidy.The Dealmaker at his finest. When ASADA hands you an interim report which is damning of of one of your clubs, do you follow the ADV rules that you signed up for and bring the hammer down on them? No, you make a deal. And let them negotiate their own punishment and a carefully worded agreement allowing them to claim they were never done for doping. When your Brownlow medallist is sent down the river for doping, do you make the obvious decision to strip the medal, however regretfully? No, you give him time to let him talk his way out of it. I fully expect Gil to throw this open to the clubs for comment and input. When some of your clubs lose players because they doped while at another club, and ask for top-ups, do you make a decision? No, you canvas the other clubs to see what they think and work your outcome around that. (Remind me why the AFL commission was invented in the first place?) When one of your marquee clubs is sent down the river for doping, do you make an instant decision to let them top-up? Funnily enough, yes you do! Because otherwise could compromise a bigger deal you've made ... the TV rights deal. Vlad hung around too long, but he was never afraid to make a decision. The game has got a sour taste about it currently, and strong decisions are needed, not trying to please everyone or playing favourites for "legacy clubs". Adrian Anderson, for all the flak he's copped, at least got out with his integrity intact. History may judge him more kindly than we at MFC do.

Are we to believe that in the many previous cases before CAS, affecting many athletes with everything to lose, and all the money (and therefore lawyers) at their disposal, no-one has thought of this line of attack before? I can't see it flying on that basis alone. (Or maybe Aussie lawyers are just that awesome, just like Aussie athletes are awesomely non-cheating.)

Yeah, Johnny Walkley. And those tea leaves are really cigarette ash.

This latest chapter in the rollicking adventure brings to mind the gulf between "sport" and "business". Over the decades we have seen multiple occasions where hard nosed business minds have come in to a football club and said, we're going to run this like a business. Straighten the joint out. A proper business, no more amateur hour. Examples: Ranald McDonald and his New Magpies. Rod Butterss at St Kilda. Most of the traditional clubs has endured this at some stage. On every occasion, they come up short. They run into the realisation that it's not just a business. It's way more than that. They're not simply dealing with cashflows and inventories and sales forecasts and logistics. There's emotion involved. There's the investment of nervous energy, delight, dismay, tears, desposited by supporters over many years. In practical terms, that translates into grown men and women behaving irrationally. (Just read the postings on any fan forum.) As if they've still got posters of Hudson, McKenna, Barker, etc, on their bedroom walls. How else to explain the unwavering support for James Hird when all the rest of the football world could see that he was damaging his club by hanging around. We see it in the curious decision making of the Essendon coterie, sponsors, insurers. We see it in Gordon's exploration of this appeal. Chip. Holmes. Various "sports lawyers" and other "experts". The list goes on. It also appears in the hand waving and incoherence of Robbo. (Although that could also have a simpler explanation.)

Scene overheard in Zurich's finest restaurant. Australian lawyer: "What a shame, eh? Real pity. I thought we had a good case. God, this lobster is amazing." Other Australian lawyer: "You did?" Australian lawyer: "No, not really. Another bottle of Grange?" Third Australian lawyer: "Don't mind if I do. Hey, are we billing this to the client?" Australian lawyer & Other Australian lawyer: *withering looks* Third Australian lawyer: "... Sorry."

The entertainment keeps rolling on. Will it never end? I'm starting to hope they get their injunction and have to start their suspension all over again! And that Jobe gets to keep his medal only to have the AFL rip it off him months later due to public outcry.

It's almost like Robbo has been given countermanding orders from the higher-ups at News to fly the flag for Essendon again. Reminds me of science fiction movies where a robot is given contradictory instructions. "Jobe must hand it b-- must hand it b--... CANNOT OVERRIDE PRIME OBJECTIVE ... Jobe must keep medal. Jobe must keep medal. Jobe must hand it b--- *sparks fly everywhere* *smoke* *explosion*

Maybe not so much "street smarts" as "rat cunning". I reckon he knows exactly what he's doing, which is throwing sand in everyone's eyes to get them confused and running around in circles. Someone may then let slip something which he can use to his advantage. (EG "I never said that! I said this ... oops.") I reckon he also is not interested in going anywhere near a court, he wants "the oppo" (doesn't matter who it turns out to be) to cave in and make a settlement.