Demonstone

Three weeks is his right whack, I reckon. I wonder if this forum would have been paying such close attention to this matter if we weren't playing Geelong in three weeks time!

Kevin Murray didn't play fullback. His positions were ruck-rover and half-back flank. Might you be thinking of St Kilda's Bob Murray who was an excellent fullback (but never won a Brownlow!)?

Hahahahaha!! As long as he doesn't give us the cold shoulder, I suppose.

Hanging is too good for him. Three weeks minimum.

Google is your friend, mono. Cardwell retired from his position at the end of 1975 and Tilbrook was recruited in 1971 (and co-incidentally also left Melbourne at the end of 1975).

* Jordon

It's always been his weakness. Out like Flynn?

* Jordon

Depends how you look at at it, hardtack. Given that it is apparent they won't be playing after August, I would hope that their season will be somewhat shorter than our own.

Here's hoping he becomes such a good player that is widely recognised to the extent that people realise his surname is spelled Jordon and not Jordan. I know, I know, it's a forlorn hope.

Mental As Anything.

Nil illegitimi carborundum, Nasher.

Are Roost If Far and Dee Zee the same poster or is it just coincidence that they have the exact same avatar and posted one after the other?

Seems like plenty of posters are!

Geez, fair suck of the sauce bottle there, Stretch. I know the coach gets all of the blame when we lose and none of the credit when we win, but it's a bit rich to pot him after a win!

Must have a good coach if we can still win when we are as terrible as the matchday thread would suggest.

Would have / should have etc is correct. It's often abbreviated to would've / should've which clearly confuses some people as it then sounds like would of / should of. You can block me as well if you like but you'd still be wrong.

A huge manatee? Nah faulty, just observing that it wasn't only The Lone Numpty potting a debutant.

I was confused because you alluded to "17 on the field". As far as the new sub rule goes, I've yet to hear a convincing argument in favour of it and I believe it to be totally unnecessary and yet another example of the AFL feeling the urge to tinker with the game.

It's not just this thread, Ernest. There have been some horrible things posted on this site about our coach.

Which has been liked by three other posters so far.

I don't get your point, SWYL. If a team of 22 loses a player to a match-ending injury, they would still have 18 on the field but the bench would reduce from four to three. Ergo, the load is spread among 21 players.

If posters are being this nasty and vicious towards Simon Goodwin before we've even played a game, one shudders to think what new level of vitriol they have in reserve if things don't go well this season.

One of the many quirks of our wonderful English language is that one who is down may be described as being "flat as a tack" but a person who is clever can also be said to be as "sharp as a tack". What does that all mean? Well, it's a tack so there must be a point. I suppose it depends upon which end the tack you're referring to.