titan_uranus

Argh. Damn it. That's bad. Let's just hope they fix it first time and this doesn't become a recurring problem. On the flipside, that means Valenti must be in line for a promotion to the senior list.

If the weather tomorrow's anything like today: 42,000 If the weather's good for footy: 55,000

I wish the AFL would clarify things. Look how many theories as to how this works have been thrown up just by Demonlanders. No one really knows what's going on.

Amazing how perceptions of one player (Garland) can change so dramatically in a few months.

Just noticed: Martin at FF. There's something new. Some posters here will be happy to see that. Edit: And Cheney in the middle. And Johnson at CHB.

Garland has a foot injury, Buckley the dreaded groin.

Another 2 injuries... the list just keeps on growing.

Sure, but at least he did it. Also, has anyone mentioned that he's 'bringing back the demon'? That's another thing that can be added to 45's list.

Whoa. I never knew that. Thanks r&b&t I like it.

In my personal opinion, moving him into the midfield is the reason why he seems to have stagnated. Certainly doesn't have the influence on games that he could be having. 100% agree.

This is true. Always fun to tune in to the radio and listen to Malthouse's newest excuse after a loss.

Strauss is injured. And you won't see Davey being dropped. That would be counterproductive IMO. He's one of the few players on our list that has game-winning potential. Not to mention that he wasn't the worst player last week. Agree. If Newton can't dominate at Casey level he'll never be any good at AFL level. But more importantly, I want to know that they're both putting in sustained, four quarter efforts every time they play for Casey. No point promoting them to Melbourne if they're not giving their all for Casey.

Got rid of the abhorrent silver clash guernsey (I think that happened under Stynes, but correct me if wrong) Listened to fans and created a predominantly red jumper instead (even if it seems as though we'll be wearing the white one more often)

He didn't even say that. He said that, if, in the future, a new team was considered, Tasmania would lead the race for that new license. It means that there's no commitment to Tasmania until the AFL formally decides on a new license. He also reaffirmed the AFL's stance: expansion will first take place into NRL areas.

Isn't Bellerive Oval in Hobart? You got the list pretty right there though. Maybe Hobart above Melbourne. But defintely Sydney and Brisbane are top 2, and Perth is bottom. You piqued my interest HT. Here's the data for matches since 1995: SCG: Only 1 draw since 1995 (vs India 2004), 14 results in same period MCG: Only 1 draw since 1995 (vs Sth Africa 1997), 12 results in same period Adelaide: 2 draws since 1995, 12 results in same period Perth: 2 draws since 1995, 11 results in same period Gabba: 3 draws since 1995, 10 results in same period Hobart: 2 draws in its 8 matches since 1989

Alpha33 posted it here: Injury list ahead of Round 2

Why? What's with people saying Frawley goes? I thought he was one of our best against the Roos.

Kind of funny to see how many people got fooled (though I probably would have as well).

Sounds like good news, but I'd like to know the specifics.

Well it's 10.45: anyone know anything? They're doing golf on SEN at the moment.

First thought was: April Fool's Day. But I am going to place my faith in the number of people here who seem to think it's legit. Please let it be so.

Robbo's flaws might be a problem to a decent team, but to Melbourne, it's his assets that we so desperately need (that is, his marking and goal-kicking ability).

It's only when they're doing well and their supporters are turning around and trying to gloat in your face. But you don't get too much of that in the MCC. Concentrating on the game makes putting up with the pies supporters much easier.

Yeah, it was ingenious wasn't it... Look, the way I see it, a mistake was made that shouldn't have been made, and that, coupled with the many other mistakes this paper makes, is a reflection on the declining standard of The Age. The article may have been insightful, but to make an error like that, considering that the journalist is embedded with the club and that the newspaper is our sponsor, well, it detracts from the piece.

Have a look at the size of your original post: and you reprimand me for 'clogging up a footy forum'. You're right: who cares about the mistake in the paper. But if you can't see that The Age is on the decline, you're missing something.