BoBo

Yeah great call about Dusty. The pressure isn’t off the charts and like you said, 3 years ago he would probably have 2 goals and 3 goal assists by now and Richmond is up by 30.

Both defences winning and skills not really on point. Given it’s round 1, not much can be taken going further into the season. Feels like this is an ‘in context’ game. Have to wait to see what the rest of the round has to show to gauge how good/bad this is.

Absolutely! He consistently makes something out of nothing. Freak level of skill.

Glad someone else saw it, haha He did come back over the mark in his actual arc so I wonder if the ‘natural arc’ saved him from it being play on…

Felt like they had it in their forward half for 80% of the time.

Wait, he missed anyway but the umpire didn’t bring back dusty in line with the mark???? So players can choose their own line of goal now?

Oh great, I’ll give that a watch. Thanks!

I heard an interview years ago (Maybe 10ish years?) of a recently retired Rugby player (he wasn't a big name at all and I don't even remember which code he played) that was about 30. The reason he had to retire was because of 'concussion related injuries'. I can only assume this was further to the extreme end of concussion induced brain injuries, but this guy had short term memory issues to the extent where his wife would make sure his house keys went into the same bowl in the hallway of their house everyday. And everyday he would struggle to be able to find them. I *think* he said he had a short term memory of a couple minutes? So effectively analogous to early stages of dementia in terms of short term memory loss. He'd also have dramatic mood swings and struggled with emotional regulation and was quick to anger which wasn't really a part of his personality years before. Because of all of this he wasn't able to work and in a lot of ways could only function with his wife's assistance. It was really eye opening because it made me think of all the Rugby/AFL players that had to retire because of concussion related brain injuries and what exactly their day to day lives were like.

Oooooft, May being out really disrupts not only the backline but the whole team set up. Max and Grundy are going to have to spend a lot more time down back I feel. I was 60/40 that we'd get up and now I think I'm 50/50. Gonna be a tough game. Edit: Probably sounded more negative than I intended, still got a great team on the park and you're right, a win will be a big boost in confidence. Look forward to see what the incoming players can do!

I have no idea what the outcome of this will be, but anything that increases the AFL's caution towards head knocks is a good thing. Danny Frawley and Shane Tuck offer two glimpses into what chronic traumatic encephalopathy can lead too. Sounds like a pretty awful condition to live with.

Either: Grabbing some food (beers) heading down to the botanical gardens to sit amongst the flora and fauna with my sister and father. Then moseying on down to the G about 7 and yelling for a couple hours. Or Have some mates round for a menagerie of bbq'd food, beers and smoke breaks on my balcony. Can't bloody wait!

This is going to be a very interesting game. The new ins for the dogs definitely make them more dangerous, but Grundy/Maxy look fit, healthy and between those two dropping back and forward, I feel an ultra tall dogs forward line is negated somewhat. We're going to have to handle their talls but vice versa, Grundy and Max both hanging around the forward line will be a nightmare for the doggies to deal with. Could be a shoot out. I reckon they'll be a handful and it will be close but Dees by 11 points in the end.

I’m a bit skeptical of Ross Lyon. He has walked into two clubs with very good lists after a lot of the development work had already been done and taken them to arguably their potential (which didn’t win a flag). Then he left two clubs after they started a downward turn and there wasn’t much young talent ready to step up after him. He can absolutely get the best out of a good/great list, but there’s not much evidence that he can take a mediocre list and develop it into a premiership team for future years. A two club coach that hasn’t won a premiership even after being hand fed very strong lists. Hmmmm.

You’re speaking my language Binman. Aventine is a great album.

Brett Rattens win percentage as coach is 50.82. Paul Roos is 51.19. John Worsfolds is 51.08. Michael Voss’ is 41.80. 🧐

Whoah Lost the players that badly?

An Aldous Harding mention in an AFL thread. What a time to be alive.

We can absolutely do it next year. Hunter replacing hunt is a huge upgrade. Grundy replacing Jackson is (on current abilities) also a huge upgrade. I got sucked into the ‘what’s happened to Grundy?’ in the midst of his form decline after his big deal… but even after his decline, he’s still easily in the top 5 ruckman in the game. Schache is a like for like for Weed but is more versatile in my opinion. If anything he’s also an upgrade. I feel personnel wise, we have only strengthened the team. Make some tactical tweaks, get back to the selfless 2021 style (I felt like at times this year we had players go for glory instead of the best thing for the team) and bring back in T-Mac to bolster the forward line. I believe wholeheartedly that our best still beats everyone else’s. Just got to get the recipe right with what we have to make that happen. Good as gold.

Ok no worries, thanks for the comment Bitter. I do try to avoid generalisations and sincerely take on advice to avoid generalisations when I’m explicitly or implicitly making generalisations which I’ll own up too. Always open to that, I don’t know everything (or really anything truth be told). I’m asking Mullet to justify his overtly generalised comment in account of the specific claims (not general claims which you’ve stated for me to keep away from) made in the article that ‘those statements apply for any student’. Given that: Indigenous kids being ‘banned’ from speaking their home language seems pretty strange considering I’d hazard a guess that people from Italy, Spain, Indonesia, China, Nigeria, French Canada etc. etc. etc. probably aren’t being told the same thing. So that’s weird considering they live here and unless speaking a language apart from Australian English is outlawed, that’s a strange thing to ‘ban’. I also wonder how many non-indigenous, economically wealthy (considering it’s a boarding school) people were told their family of origin was a ‘dead loss’ and that the school family that mentored them was their family now. That’s literally cult behaviour which I’m sure you would agree. Don’t feel like I need to engage with the whole how to and how much you should wash. But all that is by the by really. What I really want to know is considering you are against generalisations (which I asserted none), why didn’t you aim the ‘don’t make generalisations’ point to the commenter who made blatant generalisations against specific claims made in the article that he didn’t read, but to my reply?? Why would you aim the ‘don’t generalise’ comment to the person that is asking another poster to not generalise? I’m sincerely not implying anything further than, if you don’t want people to generalise, then why are you aiming that at me in this situation? I’m trying to clarify Mullets overt generalisation?

Are these the larger cultural shifts you mean? Or applying to any student? From the article: ‘Examples include staff presuming that a student had special learning needs, despite evidence to the contrary. One young woman was top of her class but required to attend supplementary English as a Second Language lessons with the overseas students. Today she is a doctor. Young men reported being banned from speaking in their home languages at school or in the boarding house. Another was told that their family of origin was a “dead loss” and that the school family who mentored them should be their family now. Two young women explained how humiliated they felt when a poster was fixed to the bathroom wall telling them how, and how often, to wash themselves’

This seems prescient: https://amp.abc.net.au/article/12825394

Wait, so harmes and a second round pick for pick 60??

Yeah, they were all on the phone to lawyers as soon as they got wind that the abc were asking questions.

I love it! It’s like a time machine

There is still a significant portion of Australians that deny racism exists outside of explicitly calling people racial slurs. On top of that, there’s a smaller segment that want to propagate and perpetuate racism because… well… they’re just racist and they want to hold onto that apparently. People still defend Andrew Bolt for example even though he peddles anti-genocide rhetoric in the biggest newspaper in the country. Even if the allegations are proven to be 100 % correct on the weight of things, I have learned to never underestimate people’s ability to deny racist intent. People will then just say ‘ok yes those things happened, but it’s an isolated incident, this definitely isn’t an example of a larger trend and we definitely shouldn’t extrapolate this ‘isolated’ incident to larger societal/historical trends blah blah blah’