Jump to content

daisycutter

Life Member
  • Posts

    29,022
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

Everything posted by daisycutter

  1. anderson on 3aw predicting oliver will be a withdrawal hope he's wrong
  2. i'm thinking more john doremus of "the passing parade" format ... lol
  3. well what would you expect when the afl monetized the score review the score review has an official sponsor. more reviews, more ads, more money, happy broadcaster
  4. what do you expect from a filth supporter? the minute he refused to listen to our expert witness i knew we were done
  5. fair enough, wcw but i don't think there are many bays anywhere near the alice
  6. yeah, they could have found a better photo. that one is terrible.
  7. wrong. from a membership pov there were no reserved member seat entitlements, just ga
  8. no need to insult dennis. at least he understood the vibe.
  9. yes, but 5 games in and only had 1 home game. plus 3 games interstate.
  10. go to fox footy seems mfc has gone to adrian anderson to advocate - g-d only knows why. can't we get a better advocate?
  11. brisbane bears from 1987 brisbane lions from 1996
  12. maybe you are referring to this?
  13. binman, given your hippiness, try replacing the the 'um' with an 'ooommmm' would be much more smoothing and meditative to the listener
  14. "here's some more big guys"
  15. The Umpire Strikes Back
  16. he? you mean they?
  17. lol. an afl document that describes the rules. that's real funny, uncle
  18. ht, i think those types of actions count more towards the accidental/careless category rather than impact category of course it is impossible to find official documentation on this
  19. the point i'm trying to make is that the grading is the key 1. careless vs accidental. forget it. that was the maynard defence and that has been removed for smothers 2. contact not high. forget it , was unambiguously high 3. impact. low vs medium. this is the only arguable grading category the defence needs to focus on this only and keep it simple. impact low is still guilty but attracts a fine not suspension.
  20. why not just keep it simple and argue (correctly) that the impact was low. it's not that hard.
×
×
  • Create New...