I'va Worn Smith

Are Trac, Viney and Nibbler OK? Few possessions and when they have, never clean possessions.

No doubt. But then we all have to face reality at some stage. Like I said in my original post, we have not had a true home since 1964. A rather long time, I would have thought. In today's competitive AFL world, you must take the most realistic option. Even when it may not be your first choice.

Our footy club has not had a 'true' home since 1964. Accordingly, I cannot understand any negativity directed toward this proposal. Caulfield is a central location, close to public transport and for the first time in a long time, will house both our administrative and football departments in the same facility. How on earth can that be seen as negative?

My major concern.

The AFL need to understand that NEITHER the MRO or Tribunals are Courts of Law. Therefore, they cannot rely on precedent or "priors". Nor can they rely on a change of policy. Each incident can only be examined under CURRENT AFL rules and not ones the AFL want to bring in as a knee jerk reaction. The AFL needs to get its house in order and not be a 'law' unto itself.

I love my footy club. Farrk the critics. I just love 'em

The (Duke of) Windsor. A star in the making. Yes, I know. Not 3 words, but geez this young kid is impressive.

Devastating news. The Norm Smith curse is well and truly back. Best for Angus I suppose, but the AFL will now be quivering through their lack of duty of care. There is ample precedent on concussion injuries. The AFL were warned.

Absolutely spot on. A series of unfortunate facts that many doomsayers either ignore or choose to forget. (see Kane Kornes). With a bit of luck with injury this year and the new blood, I reckon we will be OK.

Think about this for just one minute. Gus may never play football again. He may, but what if he doesn't???? FU AFL.

Lawyers, guns and money. If not now, they will queue up in the not too distant future. The AFL have just made a rod for their own collective backs. Shocking result.

On talkback radio today some of the nuffies were blaming Gus for not baulking or trying to evade Maynard. Just about says it all really. Let's not forget the ramifications of any decision made in this case. Massive really.

If the Tribunal finds in Maynard's favour, the AFL better leverage up their legal advice, because this has an undeniable potential to become very litigious down the track. In my many years of watching footy, I have never seem anything like what Maynard did and those that say it was a footy act are kidding themselves.

Cripps got off on a legal technicality. After that, the AFL quickly moved to change the laws of the game.

I don't often agree with Caroline Wilson, but on Offsiders this morning she accurately made reference to the AFL's hyper sensitivity to head injuries. We know the AFL already has a war chest put aside as a contingency for possible litigation. Interestingly, just after the "expert" commentators were discussing the pros and cons of the Maynard incident, channel 7 went to a promo on John Platten, for a news story they're doing on him and his CTE. I suspect this will be the context in which the Tribunal will examine the Maynard case.