daisycutter

or even an old fashioned flat punt........was good enough for peter hudson and many others n.b. for the gen-xy-ers, a flat punt is not a torpedo

bb i think you are asking too much of webber unless he has up-to-date, accurate and specific info of mitch's particulars he can only generalise and speculate (albeit from a more expert pov)

date scones with fig jam............yum (not the collywobble type)

1/2 time scorps 4.3 to ess 4.6

how to polish a turd

Did I hear correct? You said "maintain".

I think "Sonsky" is too busy in the education revolution

yeah, and i'm still puzzled how a lot of 'spuds' under knights have now become B+/A grade players

bb, it may well be "virtual administration" but it is not "full administration" ok it may seem to you i'm splitting hairs but i think full administration would be quite different had to lol about your "no effective board" comment. Am scratching to remember when we last did btw isn't AS now on the board (might be wrong). if so, i don't think jackson or vlad appointed him

we all know what it is but it is not "full administration" and you know it

that's misleading wyl. We are not "under full afl administration" That is quite a different thing we all know what you are trying to say but using such hyperbole is unnecessary and inaccurate

Is there any evidence that jackson is in fact selecting the board and esp the president? I'm sure the afl is trying to influence/approve it but the afl doesn't equal jackson in all cases stockdale may be drawing a long bow re the ceo selecting the board

surely it can't be because the rules are too complex....lol

surely you jest..........lol

forced resignation or sacking = same end result so the question remains.....does wc want a new coach next year?

for those that didn't watch - 8str8

only if he brings his pharmacy with him ... joking ok

and don't forget their victory in securing Izzy too

shouldn't joke, but was this another piece of mfc list management gone wrong yeah i know, bad taste

2011 OD. I discussed this before and gave a link to the relevant WADA document. It is short and easy to understand You need to understand that substance code S0 is NOT a list of drugs. It is a statement that drugs not listed by the the relevant country drug authorities as "fit for human use" are banned No country has approved aod9604 fit for human use Substance code S0 was in effect in the WADA 2011 documentation and more critically before essendon used it

I've heard that theory too If they did, then it had better stand up to intense scrutiny as this would be something that won't be confined to the" afl self interest community"

I also suggested the players would be suspended (unless an asada approval document claimed by danks miraculously appears) There seems to be no (real) doubt that certain players took aod There is no doubt that asada protocols put the onus on the players There is no doubt that aod is banned under wada protocol S0

actually you can od make a silk purse out of a sow's ear

with the whole world watching od it will be very hard to avoid suspensions (players) wada's approach is very hard-line wrt player onus there is much at stake too if the afl ignore any asada direction re penalty the precedent set by letting off the players would have world-wide significant repercussions the afl signed up to wada protocols and must abide by them even if they disagree in this case if there is no clear and demonstrable document (etc) of asada giving approval to danks/essendon then i think the players must be gone (under existing protocols) whether this is a just and fair resolution in this circumstance will obviously be debated by many

LOL - maybe pedigree is more apt for MFC........CS would probably like that