daisycutter

i don't remember actually. but then i was an early boomer. i do remember when brand names started to be displayed on clothing and how we all thought how crass that was, and that it was only suitable for marketing give-aways. i also don't like the so called generation wars. it's all bs mostly and just creates unnecessary divisions

my gs drives me mad continually using the verb "versing" as in "who are the demons versing this week?"

it was reported that he did clip the parked car......after he was "reaching down for something". the something (phone?) was not described. and yes suvs are easier to roll than a conventional sedan (higher centre of gravity) when i was younger (and stupider) a common refrain was "you don't really know how to drive a car until you have rolled one over"

texting, saw parked car too late, swerved, rolled.....????

so be it. don't throw away 10

on best available basis (2019 form) he's a late 2nd rounder. pick 10 is high risk.

not really, because the cost of getting green is now pick 4 instead of cobbling together late picks and a 2020 deficit if we don't nominate green, they get a top 4 pick then wait to match a later nomination for green where they can get him cheap

drafting (and trading) has just become far too complicated and drawn out to the extent it threatens to be a bigger game than the real game if that makes sense?

think a few posters need to be put on an avo.......alternative to enforced holiday

that must have been after the federal league collapsed in the 70's. think east malvern fc went dormant then for a few years

yes often sports science is just an oxymoron

or that stephen fellow?

may i suggest pistols at 30 paces?

"more than a game", od

yeah right, and gay means being happy they're all sheilas to me

another alternative, though unlikely, is that we are still undecided between green and jackson (and maybe even young)

hmmm, not a bad move....like it

I would just add if they think green is best available then nominate him if they think jackson is best available then nominate him if they think green and jackson are pretty equal on best available then nominate whichever fits their needs best shafting GWS should have nothing to with it for pick3

of course all draftees come with a risk. The draft is like tattslotto but just saying that with respect to jackson does not in itself justify picking him at #3 I won't be upset if we do nominate jackson at #3. but in my personal opinion he's not best-available at that point and more a speculative pick of needs. I agree he has what potentially looks like good upside (over time) but picking him still looks high risk. I'd be going for green. best-available, lower risk, less development time Hey it's just an opinion and if we do take jackson i won't be fussed and will assume the club knows better

i agree, but still need clarification we certainly didn't "trade away a selection with another club for a later selection" because we traded for a player which is different and this situation doesn't seem to be the loophole that the afl is trying to stop just my interpretation

a bit more info would be helpful

this interpretation is doubtful and needs afl clarification. i think the parking rule is where the shift out then back occurs all during the draft. not sure it applies across trade and draft periods.

saw that..........later

https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-regan-8701b0111?originalSubdomain=au ??? maybe