pitmaster

Are those bagging TMac aware that Hibberd started on JR? And before this is misinterpreted I thought Hibberd was sensational.

Terribly unlucky with injuries. You can't win two men down for three quarters unless you take every possible chance when you have a full contingent. We didn't and paid the price. Very disappointed because we could easily be 3-2, even 4-1. Nat Jones another shocker. Watts crucified in the ruck again. Very sorry for Jake and Smith.

Glad to see the website is not making much of the membership record. Just a thank y'all tweet and on with the sales campaign. That's the way to handle it. Forty thou would be worth a bit more of a celebration though.

Now let me get this right...this thread is about a bloke who had toe surgery last week after his foot was stomped on, right?

Two-two is very disappointing because but for lousy kicking last week, and an unaccountably poor third term this week it could be four-nil.

6: Petracca 5: Watts 4: Spencer (ultimately outpointed in the ruck by a monster but pushed forward and back to both score and save goals) 3: Frost 2: Salem 1: Garlett (Was Nathan Jones sick? Looked to have little drive and his anticipation was missing.)

6: Watts 5: Jones 4: Stretch 3: Hunt 2: Kent 1: Salem

Settle down. Max was growing frustrated but perhaps because the last of those frees (which gifted them a goal) came from Selwood running past the ball head down (surprise). Selwood actually ran into Gawn's arm. Should have been play on but Selwood has cheated like that all his career and has the eyebrows of a heavyweight boxer to prove it.

Dreadful to throw away a game like this. Some of those misses were schoolyard stuff. However the overall performance augurs well for the future for us, and badly for those show ponies from Geelong. (Don't get me started on Menzels ' carry on after kicking a goal uncontested). We outplayed them for 60% of the game and did everything necessary to bury them with incredible pressure. A setback, sure, but we're going places and they I think are going backwards. This time next year Danger will be wanting to return to Adelaide.

Even if you accept that Hogan's was a dumb response to provocation his penalty is way out of order and another example of how the MRP system is a mess. Scott Thompson elbows - elbows! - another player in the head as that player is lying on the ground. Anyone in their right mind knows if you hit someone in the head while they are on the ground the head has nowhere to go and damage will be maximised. And Thompson gets one week while Hogan cops two for a blow that had no weight in it at all? Total, unadulterated BS. As for Carlton ramping up the odds in their medical report, we know where this goes - a 100 point flogging next time out and ratting on any of theirs who act up.

Really? You know it's from Lewis and not from incidental contact in the other 117 minutes of football?

We should not be surprised when these penalties are not replicated for other incidents later in the year. This can only be the MRP trying to make a stand early in the season. It is such a mediocre operation in there. No transparency and rewards for petals like Rowe indulging in acting classes. Is it my imagination or do we routinely do badly with the MRP?

Hogan should be a reprimand. His opponent went for him shortly beforehand and Hogan responded in kind. There was not much in it. It looked to me like a round arm slap and the Blue made the most of it, but then I have not studied the footage in slow motion. If the Blue's jaw went sideways like some here are describing he must have roller bearings rather than the conventional ligaments that operate the mandible.

Yes that was strange. It was after the blue and Watts appeared confused about whether to go into the middle where we had only three players so its interesting the umpire would not let him in. Sorry off topic but it did give Clarry one more touch. Let's see if he is more willing to kick next week.

Disagree. He set Hogan up for a crunching tackle by refusing to kick in that situation. It was a hospital handpass without the elevation. We were pressing hard and he had to kick looking for a contest in that situation. The classic opportunistic goal was Weideman off a marking contest in the goal square a few minutes later, and before you say yes but that was a Hogan contest, we did have players inside 50 who could have created a contest if Clarry had gone the boot. What would you rather have: a contest inside attacking 50 or the rebound goal that resulted directly from that round-robin episode with Hogan and Oliver? That Hogan-crunched incident would not be so significant if Clarry had not over-handballed all day. I gave him one vote in the player of the round for his winning of the ball which was sensational, but only one vote because he created over-use. OK Just checked replay. We had SIX players inside 50 seconds before Clarry set up Hogan for that crunch: Hannan (who flew for the previous contest), Watts, Neal-Bullen, Viney, Tyson and at least one other and also in the area was Petracca so the no option line does not hold up in IM(humble)O.

6: Salem 5: Jetta 4: Garlett 3: T McDonald 2: N Jones 1: Oliver

Honestly, as happy as I was for the Dogs to break their drought, I am over them. Has there ever been a greater umpires' favourite? Throw the ball? Sure do what you like...you'll be looked after. They are cheats. No other word for it.

There is so much in this article to take in. But we all knew why Watts was selected when he was and why that was wrong. Only the player himself will ever be able to tell us what the "long term effect" was but Jack's easy re-entry to training this year suggests he is not the conventional, driven footballer. The shift in style from Bailey to Neeld's "defensive, robotic style" may have been the issue - well it was at least part of it - but Neeld's hardarse approach without ever having tried to win the players over was a big part of it too. I reckon Neeld lost the players without ever having won them. But on Bails. Clearly a lovely bloke as all here thought, but he was not getting results. I'd like an insider's view on how much of that was down to interference from the CEO. The CEO actually had a pretty good recruiting record from his earlier time at the MFC. Maybe you don't want a CEO who knows the game that well? Or you need one who knows how to pull his head in? Interesting that Josh M was allowed to go to the funeral, but not the board, but this article is surely the epitaph for Cameron S.

Good grief. Maybe save us your insights and predictions until you've seen something.

You have a short memory. Take nothing for granted. As for selection, Oscar is clearly going nowhere. He is a work in progress, like the Weed. Gawn will be fine. Back spasms? The physios will take care of them. The only out, unless there's a mishap at training, will be Smith who was very unlucky and another victim of the hard boundary surface at that rotten stadium.

I have had the same calls and not having bought a past players' ticket before could not understand how they had my details but today the club explains it this way: The club used to employ a marketing company to run its raffle but has now decided to do it in-house. However, the same marketing company is running the past players' raffle and that is how they have the list of people who have previously bought tickets. So like a mug, I bought a club ticket. Be hilarious if I ever won anything in this thing (although back in 1994 I did win a signed footy in one of Dudley's raffles).

Agree. Essendon's going to be really interesting this year, to see how much a year out of the game takes the edge off, or freshens up a list. They could be anything.

It should cheer you up that we've already had better than mild payback for the '88 grannie - that was in 1990 when we knocked them out of the first week of the finals ending their attempt at three in a row. (If only we'd gone on with it instead of losing the next week, we'd have full payback.)

Sorry to be the grammar cop but the word is "shored". (Some blues I can let go but this one is totally new.) Otherwise, I agree.

Regardless of anything you might read on this site, the general hype around the Aints is much greater than about us, so it is not that surprising that their numbers are up there. I like to think they'll fall in a heap post Saint Nick and a couple of other old stagers who seem to drag them over the line against us but that's not the view of the wider football public and media.