Redleg

An AFL Premiership player.

Yep you got me, that seems to be the outlier. They only played one ruckman as well.

Not when you kick them out on the full.

HF: Jack Macrae, Zaine Cordy, Jake Stringer F: Tory Dickson, Tom Boyd, Clay Smith Fol: Jordan Roughead, Luke Dahlhaus, Tom Liberatore Int: Toby McLean, Fletcher Roberts, Josh Dunkley, Caleb Daniel Dogs had Boyd and Cordy and Stringer 192 cms and Dunkley 190 cms. HF: Cyril Rioli, Ryan Schoenmakers, Isaac Smith F: Luke Breust, Jarryd Roughead, Paul Puopolo Foll: Ben McEvoy, Luke Hodge, Jordan Lewis I/C: Matt Suckling, Taylor Duryea, David Hale, Jack Gunston Hawks had Roughead, Schoenmakers, Gunston and Hale in their forward line. BTW they also had some pretty good small forwards.

Can you name the last Premier who didn't have at least 2 reasonable tall key forwards.

But we know how these "no champs" seem to turn it on against us. JUH kicks 5 straight against us, then kicks 4 points in his next game. Johnson gets 4 straight against us, 3rd or 4th game. Reid and McDonald 3 each and Reid BOG. Been going on for years, where players start their careers, or have their best game against us. A classic example was Warren Ralph for Carlton. He played 21 games for them and 2 against us, scoring 8 goals in the first and 4 in the next. You could find loads of examples if you searched through the records.We seem to be that team where a player can have a day out against us.

You should have, he would have been on Punt Road before he kicked.

They have their best 3 in Cripps, Walsh and Cerra. Our midfield depth is nothing to write home about anyway.

Odds on Cripps first goal or Cripps pass to a forward for first goal?

Last week and Dogs games were pretty big:

TBH I would have thought our season decline would have driven you to harder stuff. There are some cheap brandy’s on the shelf at squire Murphys store. We are in the last chance saloon and need to keep winning from now on, or it’s closing time.

Not necessarily. We could still end up at the SCG if Swans gain a couple of %.

Well if they do I hope it’s by a few points. You do realise that if we win our two and Sydney do as well and they increase their % by a couple of %, we will play our QF at the SCG.

Results have not gone our way at all, the last 6 or so weeks, including our own. Lions have 3 tall key forwards for the big marks and then 3 small forwards, who can also take a good mark and have pace. All 6 are reasonably good kicks for goal. We have one tall key forward, one good medium, and the rest are not good marks and except for Kozzie, aren’t quick.They are also laying no tackles inside 50 and applying negligible pressure. It is vastly different to last year. Hopefully we can get the last two wins and then regain the bye week before the finals.

Turning out to be a good year for us. Jacko, going most likely, Yze possibly and media urging Bombers to get Choco.

Comes from hanging around the opposition supporters of last week and this week. BTW do you drink straight from the nozzle, or does the maid hold it above your mouth and turn the spigot on?

Do they have corks in the cask?

Pretty quiet around here again today. No news to discuss?

How many teams have gone well in the finals with just one tall key forward?

The external Appeals Board, like the Tribunal, like the MRO, are all on the AFL payroll.

I will tell you what I am really angry about, playing the Cats at Geelong, 28 times in the last 30 years, while Carlton, Essendon, Richmond, Collingwood and probably Hawthorn, haven’t seen the place. I won’t even touch on the fact that Cats played Roos and Eagles twice this year and finished the season hardly leaving their home ground. I agree with Jaded No More, if Dees weren’t around, I wouldn’t watch footy anymore. It’s so far off a level playing field it’s not sport anymore, just another business, with all the dirty things that go with big business.

It’s not his fault he got off. He shouldn’t be booed, he and his team should just be well beaten.

Well there is not many others. In legal contest, injury is accident. Therefore it has be a contest for the ball and not an election to bump.

I said the same at the time, even if we lost.

I am not the only lawyer on DL and would be interested to read others views. To me it appears to be a highly technical ruling by the Appeals Board, based upon words used by the Tribunal Chairman. As I wrote before the decision, the fact that Gleeson said he was found guilty of contesting in an unsafe manner, when he would absolutely know, the word bump was the basis of the suspension and the rule, is mind boggling from such an experienced AFL advocate and Tribunal Chairman. If it was just a contest then he gets off. But he jumped off the ground, didn’t try and grab the ball and bumped the player in the head ,causing concussion. The Appeals Board has criticised his word use and said it was a denial of natural justice and procedural fairness. It now puts other penalties into question. Just argue every bump is a contest because the ball is nearby and you braced at last second.