beelzebub

These boys will want to see the journey together. I like this

Do I ? What have you been reading ? My whole point is the opposite. Getting some quality mids in the draft bolsters the growing of the midfield.. That not INSTANT...thats planning. The two available KPP that we get a look at are at best Id say Suss 1 and Suss 2. Be wasting picks . We can get this player later

Here are the procedural rules for CAS I can see no where amongst them any particular or specific limitations on evidence' I would presume as a Hearing ( novo ..so new ) then R44.2 applies R44.3 goes to Evidentiary Proceedings. Maybe Im missing something

whos to say we havent some ability rising already on the list ? Theyd also be far closer to playing ( in a meaningful way ) than any tallish kid plucked at 3 or 7 We arent going to solve ALL of our needs in this draft...only a fool would try. Theres next year and the next etc. Get the midfield sorted and on its way and in years to come that only needs topping up whilst you spend your picks and time garnering the players you need in other positions. A systematic approach is far more assured of success rather than random panic

This is what I dont get... no kid as a future fwd/kpp is going to be able to do that, especially out of this draft. Its a folly of an assumption wouldnt you agree ?

I feel some maybe on the verge of some form of desperation as they make their way through this mire. We have an issue where we'd like to find a 'foil' a partner of some sort for Hogan and to just bolster our fwd line anyway. Thats fine for what it is. No one is really going to argue the point. Its a given. Then we have that there are a couple of KPP types in the draft. Neither is a truly standout type. Neither has lit the world on fire. Both can play though one has , for rmine, serious fitness/injury concerns. Both lads play(ed) in leagues where strapping young bigguns get to strut their stuff. They dont get an awful lot of attention from the defenders , not this the same way they will at the next level(s) With rare exception the era of being able to size up a absolute gun and pick him I think is over. There is far more scrutiny and attention paid to draftees than it wa back when Roughy Buddy etc were swallowed up. That was then and this is now. KPP notoriously take years longer to come on than utility/mids. How I see it is. Unless you are absolutely desperate for a fwd /back of any kind then you dont waste pointy end picks on a so-so player. Let another roll the dice here. Picks 3 and & will guarantee ( all but ) one of them will succeed and become at worst a decent b grade utility/mid. Chances are one will become an A grader. Possibly one might indeed become elite...Bargain... With luck both might turn out more than alright. But to me just using one pick on a mid is again roling the dice when you dont have to. Roos has long been an advocate of snaffling players a little bit along the path. Im with him. If you have the luxury of an already high functioning team/list yo can do what you like almost. We dont. We have quite a bit of talent, but a lot of the value sits on the 'potential' side of the ledger. It wont matter who the hell is in our fwd 50 arc if the ball is spending most of the game down the other end. Build a midfield that is hard at it and relentless....and do that first. We can fill that fwd spot in some fashion even if only temporarily until we can snaffle another player whos got a bit of experience. More a known item.as it were.. If you dont know what youre really getting....shy away.

Even if as a test case you'll want to be pretty confident of winning....else the test is a failure .

So Jack. What couldn't they submit as evidence, as in nature thereof. Seems a rather murky delineationre 'was available' not presented etc. If a new hearing why is there any limits ?

Ty

LH.. I'm not sure about those evidence guidelines.This isnt a rehearing per se...its a new hearing. My understanding is they CAN introduce whatever they wish. Happy to be corrected. Cheers

I don't think it's evidence per se. I think it's alternative corroboration of existing known transgressions. Where the CAS hearing is bound to ( and historically likely ) differ from its' predecessor is how even the 'knowns' are listened to. A differing weight and , dare i suggest, a predisposition to a willingness to understand the 'probabilities' as opposed to lumping the already sizable wad of paper-trails with neccesity to meet more stringent interpretation of qualification as might be expected by say, learned men of a judicial lifetime They might even take Dank at his word. He made interesting admissions during various TV shows when big noting self. A different ear might 'hear' that for what it is.

Or....playing it to the wire.. has history there. Whatever WADA is or has done since being out manouvred by the opposition when lil ASADA was at the helm, it has done knowing how this end game plays out. Wada knows this 'neighbourhood'. Very little has leaked since the EFC has NOT been party to proceedings much to the chagrin of club and fanboy brigade alike. Now they just make it up and repeat ad nauseum pretending this alone makes it correct ! This is unfamiliar territory for all other than WADA. I reckon they know how to play the game

Its curious eh DC. Youd think one or the other side would be saying something. If its nay...then the Fanboy press would be all over it surely ? If its a Yes.. then maybe they have already served them. None of that lot would be keen to advertise it youd think.

Ol' Jakey isnt't exactly batting `1000 on this topic over the distance. If your read the Aged article there's a plethora of detail errors. There are elements that are pure conjecture and much of it is no more than an Essendon fanfare. An interesting summation of it all can be read here WADA pursues ‘appropriate sanctions’ for Essendon FC players accused of dopingA particular extract : A crucial issue facing WADA is whether it has the power to compel these individuals to give evidence at the appeal. Neither the WADA Code nor the CAS Code confers an express power on WADA to compel witnesses by way of subpoena. In addition, a recent decision of the Victorian Supreme Court [1], in which it was held that ASADA did not have power to compel witnesses to appear at the AFL Tribunal hearing, may be applicable to the same effect in the appeal hearing before CAS. However, the possibility of WADA having the power to issue subpoenas to witnesses to give evidence in the appeal cannot yet be conclusively excluded. So there ...clear as mud

Love the way this kid plays.. Big season coming up

I hear you , but theyd be suing the club, not their mates. Youd be a mug not to put your own interests and that of your family first. A mate that didnt get that ..not a mate worth having imho

I think should anyone have 'rolled' they will now be far away from Windy Hill. As to any 'hard feelings " etc....why would the player (s) be concerned. A club has put them LAST on any list of care, why would they care about that club anymore ?

Id still be happy with Parish and Mathieson From there on youd only be topping up and refining the midfield and future Trading /Drafting can look at other needs etc. We've often talked about 'best available....now it seems many want to go to 'needs" only.. I would have though the best avail approach would be to gather mids with these picks then.

Was there any ? is listed on the MFC site as scheduled The reports are always appreciated from those of us unable to make it on those days cheers

The Midfileld I reckon with a few more decent types it will finally click making us a whole different team to play

I wonder if one or two might not have done just that

Id still have Parish a tad higher than she has...but it's all rather moot really. Our recruiters will place them as they see warranted.

Makes a good foil for the Druglords though. You I and any intelligent folk will see through it. Lot of knuckle dragging numbnuts out there though lol

It becomes another 'dot' It would add weight . Might make someone more inclined to be 'comfortable"

The AFL can submit all it likes. The AFL will have no real say in the outcomes or penalties. Must be very unsettling for Gil the Dill to feel so emasculated