Skuit

Why is this the accepted societal standard of journalism? (And I ask that as basically a journalist myself). There is a difference between 'in the public's interest' and what some of the public may be interested in. Others trying to hide stuff? Like most people, as part of my job I'm privy to confidential commercial information. Are my efforts to keep that private akin to me 'hiding stuff'? Or is all information open slather for the public? Do football coaches not have some right to go about their already high-pressured jobs without other people constantly sniffing around trying to undermine that process? Who knows if Hunter had even been told of his demotion yet. That's where mental health may have come in. There are probably numerous protocols at clubs nowadays for how to support players being demoted, which is a publicly-broadcast set-back to one's career and ambitions. And breaching that is for what? So that people who are interested in other people chasing a ball around can get their fix a few hours earlier than the official team release? And so that someone can build their own public profile? How do you reckon Goody would have felt if Nathan Jones found out he wasn't playing in the grand final through the media before Simon had a chance to discuss it with him personally? Leakers are only one part. Our premiership coach recently talked about the strain that he had been under. Journalism need to move on from recognition for point-scoring to celebration of accuracy and good writing and factual reporting. However wayward the content, I fully support Beveridge having the opportunity to take a swipe at a journalist in return, especially one who wants to be in the public conversation by taking swipes in the other direction.

Devil's advocate but also a genuine question (the official rules are consistently vague): does there need to be actual contact for an action to be considered blocking? A common test applied seems to be whether a player had eyes for the ball. Smith clearly didn't. He had one intention and that was to block Weightman's run at it. Weightman altered his run and jump to avoid what would have been illegal contact, and so was impeded by a player not contesting the ball. Smith's approach was actually quite dangerous. Had he crouched rather than jumped out of the way at the last moment - a scenario Weightman would have to assess - there was a serious risk of high-impact tunnelling. Why should the onus be on the competing player to take the risk of such a hit to prove they were impeded?

Not a bad effort by Jamarra.

Teams will be looking at ways to disrupt our defensive set-up, and one of the more successful attempts last year was in dragging Lever away from the zone. Hence I imagine Smith's inclusion, due to his better closing speed and aerial ability and the flexibility for a more mobile one-on-one rolling-off system where required. On the flip-side, I reckon Goody would have spent a good deal of time planning to negate Caleb Daniel's influence, and I wouldn't be surprised if he deploys Harmes for a forward-tagging role (ignore the team-sheet). Harmes is a proven shut-down player who is also a genuine threat going the other way if given space inside 50.

People want to make a fairly innocuous tackle into a catalytic moment, but Petracca's also-milked response in the doco suggests otherwise - if it was really a thing we were in obvious trouble, such as our moments of bullying Selwood in the 2018 elimination final. I remember my reaction on grand final day and it was basically nothing, maybe that we should be given a free. Viney's efforts which resulted in Harmes' collect are also overblown in my opinion. We scored a goal from a stoppage on the wing which steadied the ship and gave us back some belief, normal stuff really, which in turn led us to getting back on top in the midfield and scoring a couple more not especially well-constructed ones. We then went from there with extra wind in our sales.

Does this qualify for the 'Jack Viney made me cry' thread?

Cheers SWYL. Are you in Thailand at the moment? I'll be passing through soon if you fancy a catch-up?

I expect that I'll be in and out of Australia for the course of the upcoming season, though unlikely much in Melbourne bar maybe one or two matches at most. Previously had the membership-linked Watch AFL when living overseas, and am currently subscribed to Kayo while here. is there some solution where I can have constant access without forking out for both? Ideally while channelling money to the club rather than Rupert?

The people who have been complaining about the costs involved in a postal vote seem to forget the investment it will take to switch to a digital one. It's not small fry - we're among the largest sporting clubs in Australia competing in a multi-billion dollar competition. The cost of lawyers to rewrite our constitution and have it signed off would probably outstrip the cost of a single postal election, let alone the expense of building or licensing a secure online voting platform. I understand that each election is a sunken cost, but we are in a period of budgetary squeeze and it's simply not a priority - rather than a lack of haste as some would like to frame it.

People complain that we're still wasting money on postal votes. Then complain that we didn't host an in-person AGM.

Should be resurrected to cut through a lot of the recent nonsense.

Can't quite recall which clown it was on here who called me our for using the phrase 'bent over' in a trade negotiation context once, like in using that phrase I was somehow being disparaging to men who like [censored] intercourse. ?

I'm still astounded that @picket fencehas somehow emerged as our most ever mentally stable court-side reporter.

Adam Tomlinson shows Clayton Oliver how you deal with a dislocated finger.

Steven May and Jake Lever as co-captains of the future. There will be no slacking.

But should he be offered $550,000 over three years, what do we get in compensation? That's all I really want to know.

We've been drafting on credit for a few years now, and our talent pipeline seems reasonably promising. That said, you didn't remotely answer my question. I would try to keep Gus if I could, but what's he worth if he wants to walk? And would you really want the club to spend all its cookies on a short window of heightened success and then hit the ground hard like Hawthorn, or rather carefully manage our list for a longer spell at the top? Genuine question.

Presuming we stroll to another flag, and Gus found a suitor willing to stump up ~$2.4 million over four years, would that be enough to net us an end-of-first round compo, something like pick 22 after adjustments? While that boxes us in on recruiting our own free agents, do people think that would be a fair price? Considering that's quite a draft sweet spot nowadays and our high calibre recruitment team?

"Melbourne has a clean bill of health heading into the practice match phase, with only minor dental surgeries for Luke Jackson and Trent Rivers." It's not that hard.

Not one post-season surgery . . . except for actually two. Nice work J. Clark. I see News Corp have set up a journalism academy at the University of Melbourne's business school. Apply today.

Had it sewn up after the Port game. Proved we could take all challengers when we were inspired to.

I went ten metres to the fridge to get a beer and nearly missed Clarry's goal. A minute later I went and exchanged my beer for a whisky, knowing we had it completely sewn up by the broken expression on the Dogs' faces.

You're not allowed to criticize the football department in any way whatsoever now that we've won a flag. Those are the new Demonland rules. Even if you backed said football department for years while people took constant swipes You're basically a traitor now.

Ray Liotta auditioning for the role of Terminator. James Cameron: The idea is that you are an unemotional robot. Ray Liotta: I intend to wipe out you and your entire species.

Yet in that last footage Jeff shared he was really nowhere near dunking the ball in an open lane ? (Jeff mentioned the nearness, which makes it seem not so common). 6.5 - can't dunk - something is wrong with this picture.