daisycutter

dat u enyaw?

yes, good pickup earl

i think that's obligatory for the saturnalia festival, bub. different time of year.

you should visit romsey for the mid summer's harvest festival, picket. they bring out the the may-pole, drink lots of cider and swap wives. be sure to take a partner, they don't take kindly to single strangers.

sorry to hear you are passed, pf, however you must be mistaken in your geography. there is nothing palatial in romsey nor is there anything remotely resembling a mansion. are you sure you didn't over-inbibe, get lost and end up in caroline springs?

i'm not saying one way or the other, just that it's premature to pull the trigger now as i have said before, his good is good enough to be best 22, needs more consistency

drugs or big money - what a choice

all i'm saying od, is hold your decision for another 12 months.

think you need to give kennedy some more time, od. his best was quite good and he is not as established yet as howe. patience grasshopper

or even a % type agree for the mathematicians amongst us

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Funny

it's just plainly stupid that only 1 player can (and must) be nominated in each round. if there are 2 (or 3 or more) outstanding examples in a single round then nominate them all. if none then no nomination. it's not that hard.

well, just to expand things a bit, wait till gene modification takes off. the future looks even murkier, not that i'm saying we should resign our-self to it

but it wasn't in isolation. i didn't raise the issue re jamaica, i merely responded/added to previous posts. besides you and i have discussed before (and been in general agreement) the broad issue of drugs in sport.

i don't understand your comment, macca i have been very vocal in my condemnation of the afl's unconvincing drug testing protocols (peds or otherwise)

maybe, but the disproportionate success rate per capita plus the almost non-existence of drug testing in jamaica all adds to suspicion in an environment where everyone is becoming increasingly sceptical of successful athletes, especially where the statistics are out of the norm. i'm not accusing, merely raising my eyebrows

that, plus the population of jamaica is only 2.8M and they have won the 4x100 for the last 3 olympics. plus 16 sprint medals at rio - 11 gold, 3 silver,2 bronze must be the bananas

are you a financial consultant in real-life, maurie?

on a different issue i have read of essendon offering contracts to some of their top-up players. i would have thought with the return of the banned players, all the top-up players would have to go back into the draft.........not that i'm saying any would be particularly appealing

just wait and watch the afl give the bummers the easiest fixture of all clubs (in the name of rehabilitation)

any chance the cas court might make a decision this year?

the other annoying aspect is when they bring in a new interpretation and apply it with over-kill, then gradually during the season scale it back dramatically. good example this year was the deliberate out of bounds. red hot initially, now rarely paid (thankfully) another has been the "sacrosanct" head contact we saw a couple of years ago has been scaled back (and seems to coincide with more concussions) just talking about the inconsistency over a relatively short period of time. it seems to be more an exercise of experimentation than common sense

why would connors care about whether essendon gets overs. there is no money in that for him? his prime concern would be getting the highest contract for hibberd