45HG

2nd round of the NAB cup (in two weeks) - obviously round 1 teams will go at full strength. Have heard that it doesn't get us in.

Cowan (?)

Oh god - sorry lads I totally forgot. I just need an amazingly good batsman who, indeed, can open. Will have a think today.

Thanks mate, reckon you'd have enjoyed my rant about not playing a reverse sweep when the opposition has a short 3rd woman in place.

Decent bowling by the Windies has made it tough for the Aussies to get easy runs by finding the gaps, forcing them to try and go over the top - this has resulted in a few catches to the Windies. Aussies now 6-192 off 40 overs. 250 would be good from here. Quintyne really turned the momentum: 10-1-27-3 Aussies lost 3-15 off the 5 over powerplay. Sometimes the powerplay can play with batspeople's brains and get them to do things they really shouldn't.

Aussie women have started very well in the Final. 0-36 from 6 overs thus far.

Good going - especially considering D'land is about 45% at the moment! Roughly 370% from 8 games. Would love to hear some of your reasoning!

Port look good but they're only 2 (?) players short of full strength and will definitely be up to prove themselves early under a new coach. We play them in the second round - so it'll be interesting to see what kinds of teams each club goes in with.

It's an embedded video - perhaps there's something in your settings? It was a problem for a lot of his coaching career, wasn't it. Often it seemed that the players were sent out to play - if it worked, we won but never really won well (save for some games in 98, 00 and one in 04) but if it didn't, we were totally outclassed or undone by a lack of match-day moves. 2004 elimination comes to mind.

There are no facts released yet regarding the outcome - as such, it'd be a small thread. You'll also know fairly quickly when there are official facts regarding the outcome.

I think in general football terms, the people who view our brand as tarnished (or who believe we tanked) a ruling in our favour would not absolve us of clear our name. People will generally agree that we tanked IMO. The problem is with the whole fiasco, no one really cares. It's a non-issue. It happened 4 years ago. We've moved on, the comp has moved on. I think we'll be regarded as tankers in a flimsy, disinterested fashion that won't really affect us moving forward. I'll simply be glad to have the whole mess done with. I cannot believe it's taken over 6 months go conclude. It's not even the first time it's been investigated!

Get a hold of Rob Hulse's goal for Millwall.

After 6 games, D'land followers are going at about 60% (roughly 350% over 6 games thus far). Nothing really to read from the matches themselves.

We should quit the AFL?!?

I turned on at the bit where Garry wasn't saying anything substantial to Caro / what have I missed?

Pretty sure that makes them the Fremantle of Victoria.

You're not allowed to talk about other sides, sorry mate.

The only problem with a long time between picks is that it's impossible to know how long you actually have. If you've just had a pick and its ten hours between, your next pick might be 350 hours away or it could be less than an hour away. I think it needs to be short and sharp.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

By the time Titan finishing trawling the rankings, Watto will be coaching...or commentating...

Cop that, Caro! Tough to defend her after reading that I'd have thought. Interesting that he mentions it forms none of what the MFC have put to the AFL - something I was intrigued by and wrote as much about last night. "Unofficial defence" indeed. Well done, Don.

Some may have noticed that I like to talk about other clubs/games rather than focusing purely on the Mighty Red and Blue. If you don't like that, that's fine, you don't have to read these threads I produce. I love talking about footy in general and had a sneaky thought that this year, before each round, I'd run a poll on who we think will win the games over the weekend and have a bit of a chat about the rest of the AFL. Obviously the NAB cup isn't amazing, but I'll gauge interest and see if it's worth pursuing. I'll just put this weekend's games up. Essentially, I envisage these threads as being like a tipping without the scoresheet type endeavour and a place to discuss the rest of the footballing world. My view: Game of the Week West Coast v Fremantle Interesting Game of the Week Essendon v Collingwood/Western Bulldogs Toughest to Pick Port Adelaide v St Kilda Upset of the Week Geelong to go over to the west and roll both the home sides who, given their schedule for round one (being a week after the NAB cup GF may not have their heads even near wanting to win)

I thought that we tanked in the same way that I thought other clubs tanked. I guess, seeing as I can't use that as an excuse, that the goalposts of the conversation have changed. Also, I think it's more than indignation of people responding to someone saying we tanked - it's the manner that some of the journalists, one in particular, are going about it.

It really has become a journalist tactic - speculate and then quote your speculation as fact. Murky evidence is right Caro. How is that our unofficial defence? Because she says so? I reckon our defence has been that we did nothing wrong in terms of what can be proved by the laws of the game. When was it an "excuse" that players and officials were intimidated? It has nothing to do with tanking and everything to do with a relevant remark over the investigation process. Ridiculous. How investigators gather "information" is very relevant. I also notice her using the term "vault" for the room - I see she's backed away from using the term as a description for the nickname of the meeting. Not that she's taken back that statement. Her article smacks of unfinished sentences and trains of thought that end before reaching logical conclusions. She draws out inferences from little. Her continued (incorrect) fascination with Mclardy defending the players is also baffling. Surely, a chief football writer would be aware that our players have indeed been accused of it and she is being disingenuous by taking a swipe at him over his comment at a club function. She bases a lot of what she says on pure conjecture; "it is clear now that not everyone at the club is behind that fight-at-all-costs mentality." Clear how? Who is not behind it? Where did this "information" come from? It's so strange to read because it seems as though all the facts that she alludes to are being produced by her alone. No quotes it references to people, just re-hashed criticism of the club and certain individuals. I'm glad Caro mentioned being childish - she'd be able to recognize the characteristic in her continued attacks.

Didn't she say the same thing on last week's footy classified? And before?