daisycutter

andy, better put those backup hamsters to work

great news i don't have to join isis now allah be praised

given the time i'm expecting the deliberation findings will be longer than the magna carta

obviously out to break cripps' 2 hour record

and now for something completely different storm score the first try

what did brad green tweet?

it's all in the 1909 case ... read up on it

cripps case was 2 hours just saying

why was there no argument about the severity of contact being downgraded from high must say i thought the arguments were pretty thin i could've thought of a lot of things to challenge

boy, it's a long game of 500

he can just say he was observing his duty of care towards jacon von rooyen

must have read my post

i think we all do

might be going for the filibuster.

more like a kc upping his billable seconds 🤣

wtf .... better be good

dermie?

can i have some more please? 61,324

jacob should have changed his name by deed poll to patrick cripps before tonight's hearing

if you want to see brown bananas monbon, you should become a dorks supporter you'll see 18 of them on the field every week

the 'reasonable player' argument was just the tribunal chairman's weak narrative. it was not the reason the mro decision was upheld. the afl was not happy about the lynch and fogarty decisions (mainly about liigation and optics considerations) and decided the next bunny would not be so lucky and jvr suited their desires being young and not a star of the game or from a big powerful club. if the afl were genuine they would have been more transparent and changed the rules/interprtation around spoiling situation, publicly giving video examples and education. except they didn't have the guts to be upfront and transparent, so chose the backdoor, mates method.

put one on the table, bends to the right flip it over, bends to the left your mission if you accept it, is to determine why

to the left or right of what?

i know that technically this is not a court of law, but nevertheless jvr is still entitled to fairness and natural justice. how then do we explain natural justice to jvr when the afl mro/tribunal processes in just the last few weeks, in the fogarty and lynch cases, can come up with different interpretations and results? Is this natural justice? Did the afl change the rules of the game or the interpretations in the last few weeks? didn't the afl tell the clubs that this year there would be no mid season changing of rules or interpretations? the afl must be the only sporting organisation that has a set of rules that only the afl fully understand, and only then when it suits their agenda.

i'd settle for just a plain reformation