daisycutter

he may have inherited the mess up to point, but he was never going to be the one to fix it up

and.....it was all predictable......should have stuck to the polo world

and it's a cricket ground without a cricket pitch now. no shield games either. money speaks loudest

surely you are not suggesting that people are raising red herrings in this saga?

but whether it is "threads in the rope" or "links in the chain" it is nothing to do with new evidence it is just a method of argument with respect to "reasonable satisfaction" being met and should be unhindered

that sounds like a possibility if the only grounds for appeal being accepted are the de novo legitimacy but, we don't even know what are all the actual grounds of appeal are, if they in fact lodge one next week all will become clearer murkier then no doubt

stuck to the navy cut eh, saty?

we don't have enough already??

"anyhow, have a winfield".....................hoges and....wasn't camel favoured by 4 out of 5 doctors?

i guess the players see it as no risk. it is all organised and paid for by others. all they have to do is sign on the line, not think about it.... much like dank's waivers

exactly. but i was highlighting his claim of no emotion involved on his part, lol

another gem from that literary giant, slobbo in today's hun (in regard to brownlow) i can see a walkley in the tea leaves

not at all, nasher has nothing to worry about appealing a guilty conviction doesn't miraculously turn the convicted into alleged miscreants in this case they remain guilty until and if any appeal case overrides the existing verdict and it should be pointed out that lodging an appeal does not mean an appeal trial will even be granted

i've always suspected that the players must have known or suspected that they were being given illegal substances but preferred deliberately to be kept in a state of plausible denial their secrecy, inaction and solidarity only reinforce this. i don't buy the innocence (at least collectively) and "we wuz duped" claims i might be persuaded that maybe a couple of the younger players may have been duped but i can't see in all the fog how they could be isolated. they end up as accessories or collateral damage. but many before have been in that situation and all it gets is a reduction in sentence, not an innocence finding

assuming they lodge the appeal how long does it take to accept/reject appeal?

i believe you because that makes more sense i do recall though last season commentators claiming he was 189cm which is still big for a midfielder

nab means zip, zero, zilch, nada. it only gets serious on round 1 nevertheless we will expound terabytes of useless words examining it to the nth degree

you are both right, it only affects casey, but it is an hypocritical unfair decision

don't be too concerned steve, bbo anthropomorphises his alpacas into lads and maids. it's all consensual

picket alias?

off you go then. flogging time

saw on tv tonight that patrick cripps is now 194cm (last year quoted at 189cm) and taller than roughy just reporting

i did see the cheaters, but

i think the local citizen's militia might have a strong "opinion" on that, bitters, if you were to try

why not buyer beware with monfries and crameri? they weren't cleared at the time they were drafted were they?