daisycutter

i'd suggest you find a different way to work or change your employee. mr fence. you are in deep moral danger.

and pray tell, mr fence, how it is that you are in possession of such intimate knowledge of this er... establishment

i blame redleg

cue saty telling us how incompetent/corrupt/politically-influenced ukad/wada are

geez i'd hate to see what this wicket would be like on day 5 that'll serve the icb right trying to interfere

bomber has said he had no idea of the tapes and he definitely wasn't the taper just reporting

michael warner has said there are more tapes to come. reckon the hun will run this for a good week (informative or not)

what new info i learned from audio tape ZILCH ZERO NIL

Some trivia to ponder. while waiting for the next jack watts post.....I never knew this and it gave me a little chuckle Hipsters should take note ! GUESS WHO DRESSED THE SS

surely you've noticed him tipping s@#$ on people? remember jb?

or a telly series. get that bloke who played hogan (with the awful wig) for the lead role of hird

with glee i would imagine. the gift that just keeps giving

i see uncle bitters popped up yesterday (or friday?) then seems to have disappeared don't tell me he is on rehab again already. has he got schwartzitis?

is that all? just those two?

seems like the afl are happy to give anyone a manager licence (i presume they do need to be accredited/licenced)

thanks, red. so could any member of the public sue the afl (or its office bearers) even though they themselves are not directly affected?

also interesting that NO-ONE has tried to take danks to court to force out the "truth"...........or maybe not too surprising

interesting the hun (major essendrugs apologist) today had no article on this, despite a large spread on fitzpatrick

can any legal eagle here explain to me under what "authority" is this person suing fitzpatrick and mclaughlin? i mean he doesn't represent the essendon club or the players and the afl is a private corporation. i seems to me that this is more an exercise to publicly embarrass the defendants by forcing them to disclose information under oath, rather than to win a court case. i'd also like to know if the defendants can even be forced to give evidence. could their lawyers not adopt the stance that the plaintiff must first prove their case and the defendants stay silent? or is that just an option in criminal cases?

dimwit's " Beyond Boundaries Group" sounds reminiscent of "whatever it takes"

silly boy

how inconsiderate of him after you went to all that trouble

as you know, like politics, in the media the dross rises to the top

sigmund would have a field day with you, mr leg

there are other reasons i don't find the comparison valid, based on my recollection of diesal's standout skills. but that's just a personal perspective and it's far too premature anyway