titan_uranus

The decision not to charge over AOD 9604 has been discussed previously - at the time of the alleged use of AOD 9604, ASADA couldn't be sure that it was a prohibited substance (because of inconsistencies with WADA's information). See here.

I always felt that there was a very good case for the players, irrespective of my feelings of disgust towards Hird and the EFC, which remain as strong as ever. Unless and until the reasons are released we won't know exactly how it was that ASADA couldn't make out the charges, and I presume a bit will turn on how the Tribunal perceived the burden of 'comfortable satisfaction', but the case was always going to be hard and I don't think ASADA has, across the last two years, done the best it could (not entirely its fault though). It should always be remembered though that the charges were against the players, not Hird or the club. The finding is that the players, not Hird or the club, are not guilty. It does nothing to detract from Hird and the club's failings and culpability.

It's quite incredible how amazing Starc is at ODI cricket. At times completely unplayable, both at the top of the innings and at the death. Has to be the number 1 ODI bowler in the world right now. Yet put him in whites with a red ball and he loses his sh*t completely - can't hold a line or length, doesn't have any menace at all.

Weird call from Voges for WA to keep batting in the morning. Wasted 8 overs. Were they that worried about 280-odd? At any rate, they should have been setting us something achievable to encourage us to go for it - a loss = a draw for them. Bad tactics (IMO they should even have declared last night, set us 250 but had a go at us last night before stumps).

What a ripping game. SA got a bit thrown off by the rain, but NZ dropped four catches which I thought was going to doom them. Full credit to them for chasing it down under huge pressure. Let's hope it's the NZ v Aus game we've all been hoping for.

Then your expectations of where we should be are grossly inflated. To be honest, I do think it's fair to query Roos - I don't think it's healthy to just assume that everything he does must automatically be correct. But any querying of Roos has to be done in context. It's also kind of ironic that the main criticism of Roos, at least in this thread anyway, is our lack of attack and scoring, which to a lot people has been a clear sign from us this pre-season. It's obviously not working out for us 100% of the time, but the intent has been there, certainly more than I saw during the second half of last year.

Couldn't have been worse timing for Viney, for it to lead to the winning goal, but at the very least it got talked up a bit and maybe will reinforce the broader point, which is that kicks like that are not good and, no matter what time of game, should be avoided. Whether it's Cross not calling for it, or those around him encouraging him to kick down the line, or Viney having the understanding to not kick across goal, maybe at least it'll be focused on during training before Round 1.

They only had four top up players apparently, so they weren't the total rabble I thought they were. Nonetheless, though I haven't seen any of the game, I'm embarrassed. I'm f**king sick of being embarrassed.

No I'm not - the point of my post was to say that you can take Ablett and O'Meara out of Gold Coast and we're still going to have a good opponent in Round 1, whereas we took those players out of the Saints last year and were faced with a rubbish side (and lost). In other words, it won't be as despicable for us to go down in Round 1 even if Ablett etc. don't play.

Difference between GC this year and St Kilda last year is that GC without a few key players is worse off, sure, but still a quite decent side. I'll forever consider that loss to St Kilda as one of the worst losses we've had through this prolonged period of despair.

I haven't seen the game so I'm just going to tell myself that when the game was up for grabs (first half) we were dominant and showed that we are going to be a much better side this year, and once we had done the job, we took the foot off the pedal and preserved players during the second half. I like the sound of that a lot more than what I think the truth is.

6 goals in the NAB Challenge...no one should care (Melbourne, Geelong or other). But if Geelong wins the Grand Final this year and Clark dominates for them, that's going to be difficult for me to watch. I'd love to pretend like it won't be and that it's 'just football', but it's going to hurt if it happens. So I hope it doesn't. I don't believe it's as simple as the phrase 'change of scenery' sounds. What exactly was it about the MFC that made it a good idea to leave? I understand that in some circumstances it might be a good idea, but surely in other circumstances your 'environment' is something you should go back to, or hold on to?

Good game that. I wonder how much closer they could have gone if Chandimal hadn't pulled his hamstring. Our knock-out games will be at Adelaide, Sydney and Melbourne - the first two of those will likely be slower pitches on which a spinner will be useful. Doherty didn't do anything yesterday to suggest he is worthy of being selected in those games though. We're pretty much better off playing Cummins or Hazlewood as a third paceman and using Maxwell, and Smith and/or Clarke for back up. If Watson's going to hold his spot over Marsh he's most likely to do it batting at 5 or 6 rather than 3. He's a better batsman than Marsh but a worse bowler so the runs are the critical component.

Deserves weeks, I'd say minimum 3. He doesn't contest the ball at all - he runs past it, eyes only on Buntine. He extends his elbow through the block too (instead of tucking his arm in). I'm sure the MRP can find a way to make this 0 weeks or 8 weeks if they want, I have no idea what actually will happen, but he definitely deserves to be suspended.

Watson's back. So what was the point of dropping him?

Carlton has a rubbish list, I don't see them genuinely threatening the 8. Richmond's list has overperformed two years in a row; I don't rate it but if they can do it two years in a row why not a third I guess. Collingwood, Adelaide and West Coast are all hard to read, not sure where they end up. Brisbane and Gold Coast climb IMO. Both are better than their 2014 versions. Hawthorn, Port, Sydney and Fremantle continue to be the premier sides in the competition. Geelong's still a top 8 side but I don't think they can realistically win the flag. North will be top 8 again as well I think. At the other end, the only club I am confident, before the year starts, of us being better than is St Kilda. In saying that, I think we have the potential to finish in front of the Dogs, GWS and Carlton, and maybe some of Collingwood/Adelaide/WC/Richmond if their years go as bad as is possible for them. As for Essendon, who the hell knows. If you take the off-field stuff out of the equation and just look at their on-field capability I think they're a good finals-bound side. But with the off-field stuff in play, it's a totally different story.

We play Sri Lanka on Sunday (Afghanistan on Wednesday in between). Sri Lanka's win over England means they are our threat to second place in our pool. If we lose to them we'll draw South Africa in the quarters and NZ in the semis (in NZ), which IMO is game over. Must-win game this weekend, then.

Remarkable really. Both have super-aggressive openers (Finch/Warner had us 0/30 off two overs, Guptill/McCullum had them 0/40 off four overs), both have iffy middle orders which failed (Maxwell, Marsh and Clarke still getting match practice, vs Elliott, Anderson and Ronchi), both have lower order batsmen who can bat but failed (Johnson and Starc for us, Milne and Southee for them). Both also have possibly the two best ODI pace attacks in the game. McCullum's early hitting and Williamson's steady hand were the differences - we didn't have one batsman who could hold an end and score steady runs (could have been Watson but he threw it away) and McCullum lasted longer than Finch did.

Just watched the wickets video. Finch, Warner and Smith were beaten by great deliveries. Watson threw it away off a half-tracker (standard Watson), Clarke hit in the air when they had short extra cover and a short point in place (i.e. poor decision-making), Maxwell and Marsh simply didn't move their feet. Good bowling, but poor batting too.

Depends how you measure 'pass' or 'fail'. 8 wins generally sounds good, but if the 14 losses are all non-competitive thrashings, does it mean much? Given our fixture's rather easy, it's quite possible for us to find 8 winnable games against weaker sides but against the remainder of the competition not go anywhere. Similarly, we may end up with 6 wins but have few (or no) beltings. I don't think a 'pass mark' can be set pre-season - I think we have to view the season in its entirety and after that we can review it and judge whether we think it was a good year or a bad one. That's not to say we shouldn't set ourselves goals, and lofty(-ish) ones at that.

What does 'danniherish' mean? I agree with you (I think) though - Warner and Finch usually give us a solid platform but Watson is hopeless (drop him already), Maxwell is too hot and cold, M Marsh is still learning and Clarke is out of form. NZ has the best bowling line up in the world and we got found out. We're also now pretty much certain to finish below NZ which means if we draw them for a semi-final we have to go back to NZ. Only way we might beat them is in the final here at the MCG where NZ pretty much never plays (100,000 would be a massive difference for them). Also, is McCullum the most aggressive captain there's ever been (both with bat in hand and when fielding)?

8/26. Wow. I still don't rate Maxwell as a batsman. I know he has shots but they only seem to appear when we're in front. I'd personally have a lot more faith in seeing Bailey walk out at 6. He's holding that spot because he can bowl spin I guess. Being 9 down puts us pretty much out of the game but they've used up Boult and Vettori and Southee only has one over left. They've gone for the kill but if Haddin and Cummins can just hold in, they have to use Milne (their third-string paceman), and then Anderson (iffy bowler) and maybe Elliott to do some overs (worse than Anderson). With that kind of bowling the chance is there to score some runs and push the score to 200. NZ had trouble chasing Scotland's 170-odd so there's no guarantee they're going to breeze their way to 200 if we can get there. Edit: of course, Haddin gets out to Anderson's second ball. 151. Terrible performance really. Have to knock McCullum and Williamson off early, but even then I don't think we're any chance at all.

Missing the court hearing is one thing. It's possible that in moving house he didn't get the summons or something like that (having said that, you can search for your name on the court's website and it tells you when your hearing is so it's not really an excuse). Not telling the club about the charge is another level of stupidity, though. This is his new start, his second chance at his career. I'd have thought he'd have told before, or right on, signing that he had this coming up. Pretty poor stuff. Not a great first impression.

Agreed. What brings people to the footy is the footy. What brings people to any sport, really, is the sport, and if people are coming to watch the pre-match entertainment then they're not engaging with the sport which defeats the purpose.

Thanks to all those who have provided reports and summaries. Intra-club matches aren't the best indicator of what's to come but it's undeniably exciting to hear positive reports about players like Garlett, Salem, Hogan and Toumpas. Agreed, and it's even less likely to happen to you the older you get. This is Grimes' 8th pre-season. Granted, he hasn't been fit to participate in all of them, but at this point in time I don't think we should be expecting about-faces in his game over one summer. He is what he is, I think, and what he is to me is no longer best 22.