grazman

Not really, but I'd be hoping one of he or Briggs/Flynn (from GWS) is brought in. We need someone that's had senior exposure and can handle themselves (all three have shown something). I know Lobb is likely to leave Freo, but he and Jacko aren't like for like. Lobb was recruited to play forward and he doesn't like playing ruck. Jacko is a ruckman/mid. Meek wouldn't be thrilled about the prospect and would have to consider his options.

But we do hold some cards. He's wanted by both WA clubs to start with. He might have a preference about which one he goes to(and that is only conjecture at this stage), but if he really wants to go back to Perth and he loves our club as he has consistently said he does, then he'll be open to going to the club that can get the deal done.

I hope not, Bedford's pace is important for our forward line functioning. People need to see him (1 goal from 8 disposals) in the same light as Kozzie (1 goal from 7 disposals) and Spargs (1 behind from 12 disposals), it's the pressure that he brings that's important and the repeat opportunities at goal that creates for our other forwards/mids. We aren't going to get that with Weid or Brown.

He's not a free agent, so if he wants to go then he has to rely on a suitable trade being arranged. The advantage we have is that there will be interest from both WA clubs who will probably have similar offers on the table should that be his decision.

Flynn or Briggs could potentially be gettable with Preuss the preferred#1 at GWS. I like both as AFL ready rucks and find it hard to split them (GWS seem to have Flynn marginally ahead) but the issue is if Dogga stays it will be really hard to attract one of them (probably Briggs) to be third banana. Preuss saw the writing on the wall when Dogga was recruited and left. If Dogga leaves then it makes us a more attractive option.

I’m not saying he would come to us per se just referring to the idea he would stay in Brisbane to play with a flag contender

He might be having second thoughts after Thursday night.

The older I get the fuzzier my memory gets Pates, but I definitely remember in the 90s (when they had the old school stretchers rather than the motorised carts) that when they ran on with a stretcher the game was stopped. There were a few games where there was some commentary around some clubs gaming the system to stop momentum. As a result the AFL introduced a rule that when the stretcher came on the player had to leave the ground on the stretcher. After this my memory isn't as clear as I can't remember exactly, but I'm inclined to think, the player that got onto the stretcher wasn't allowed back onto the ground (maybe less to do with machismo and more to do with wanting to get back out there).

It used to be that as soon as you brought a stretcher on the field play stopped immediately, then the AFL made an edict that the player had to get onto the stretcher to stop clubs 'gaming' the system. I think in this case given the hit and it was clear Prestia was going to have a concussion test, Richmond should have called for the stretcher straight away.

To defend King he never said he will get 5-6 weeks, he said he 'should' get 5-6 weeks if the AFL are serious about providing an effective deterrent for these kind of actions. I think he is as cynical as the rest of us plebs when it comes to the consistency of the tribunal.

I think the most important thing to remember here is the boy plays for the filfth, ipso facto, he's brought the game into disrepute regardless of whether he put money into the church collection plate or not.

You mean the short-lived Caracella clause. I think that's dead.

Yeah nah, Even if we called his name out GWS were always taking him as an Academy player.

Except West Coast have to use a first round pick this year. It's highly likely that they will split their early pick for two first round picks and we would only get one of them.

Some of them are banned by WADA/ASADA though - Amphetamines (including Meth) and Cocaine for example. If you cast your mind back to the whole Essendrug gate scandal. ASADA certainly had an issue with the AFLs drug policy.

Nathan Buckley said something very similar a few weeks ago in reference to this. It's clearly enough of an issue at clubs for a former coach to mention this unprompted on a national telecast. It begs the question whether players are using mental health as a smokescreen to avoid the three strikes policy?

Lachie Hunter and Tom Liberatore like the above post!

If Dogga does go home this year it almost has to be West Coast. I can see West Coast keeping Nic Nat on for an extra year as a recruitment incentive to get him. I don't think there's any doubt they will make him a massive offer and one far in excess of what we can. The issue with Freo is salary cap. Lobb might be leaving at the end of the year due to TPP pressure (they tried to manoeuvre him out last year). I'm not sure that the Cerra for Jackson trade was ever a live option, because although Cerra would have come to us there's no visibility on whether Dogga would have gone to Freo or that they could have fitted him into their TPP.

Is his salary included in the soft-cap?

I count 8 players that have been the subject of H&S protocols so far this season. I'm assuming with the changes to close-contacts no longer needing to isolate since 20th April that means that Lever, Viney, Petty, Pickett, Jackson and Sparrow have all had Covid. I'm not sure whether BBB and Joel Smith have or were Close contacts. Unfortunately people can get Covid twice but I think it would be highly unlikely that players who get it during the season would get it again so soon before the season concluded. In short players that miss now with Covid are unlikely to find themselves missing again during the season (which might be pretty significant come finals time - just after winter when it's predicted Covid will spike again) I know from one news article that in January about 50 AFL players had Covid and we were certainly one of the clubs affected according to the rumours. Does anybody what players had Covid during the preseason?

obviously something the betting company's should be right into!😜

Us vs the Dogs 17- 30 free kicks Swans vs the Dogs 14-31 free kicks. No mention of the lop sided count in the media re us, but against the Swans it's grounds for a Royal Commission according to the Sydney Press. At least it's now getting attention.

I haven't read all 15 pages of the thread, so I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet in relation to Morris being recorded without his knowledge or consent. Each jurisdiction is different, but most require both parties to consent to a conversation being recorded unless there are very specific circumstances involved (threats etc). I imagine the issue Foxtel will have if they want to dismiss Morris is whether they can use any of the information that has been publicly made available if it was obtained 'illegally' in the first place. This is very different to people uploading inappropriate material to social media where there's a tacit permission to make that publicly available .

Not sure what the criticism of Cummins’ decision making in regards to the declaration in Karachi, seems to have called it perfectly.

Harmes named on the HBF … discuss!