beelzebub

by who.... go on...give us a riddle......been a while

So Saints have pick1 weve 2 and three No sure who's going at 1 or 3 , but at 2 Brayshaws the meat in this sandwich!!

then again...just insert ASADA panel member where it says "Tribunal"

Hope the lad finds a home back in SA... Possibly the Redlegs will have him back. Bit of AFL experience wouldnt hurt his cause

I think folk are just gerkin our chains Nut !!

So....anyone got a special source for info ??

Sort of.....it gives idlots a momentary tease at believing they arent !!

thats my point !!

Got a couple of Premiership medallions... so must be a pretty good varietal of potato then

Used to do that if invited by mates but i cant even really be bothered now Nut...I just end up somewhat funereal as to when WE will be this/that good

That he could beat opponents... that was his good.... disposal possibly not his forte....his bad. I liked his game day attitude. and we move on I suppose

Two rookie spots.....

Tribunal: Did you take Thymosin Beta 4 ? Player : No Tribunal : Did you sign a waiver to allow the injection of Thymosin ? Player we...yes.....bu the "good " one !! Tribunal : Are you aware the legal variant is actually called Thymomodulin and not Thymosin ? Player : Ummm.... ...No Tribunal : Can you or your club provide any proof of purchase of Thymomodulin ...the "good" one ? Player:...ummm...ummm....ahhhhh....well NO Tribunal: Are you aware we have evidence your club purchased Thymosin 4 ? Player : Have you... ( gulp ) Tribunal: Can you prove to this tribunal that you were never injected with , nor intended to be injected with , Thymosin 4 ?? Player: No Tribunal: Do you actually know what you were injected with ? Player:....... .......... next..

name them....and why.... just curious

could be understandable Well Alex thanks for the efforts at Melbourne, best of luck in your endeavors. Enjoyed your brief time as a Demon.

Mitch might have a mate.. Blease may please Cats after Varcoe departure

NO

Yes, correct ( aiui ) He can go as a DFA. But which ever club he goes to he must then go on their Primary list. True, not picks required but he still takes up a spot. He'd go , likely , straight on new teams LTI allowing a rookie elevation but its very convoluted, awkward and an expence for what ? There are better 'prospects' to gamble with i would have thought for most clubs. Riley simply had a broken leg. its prognosis was understood . Risk minimal. Jack's foot ?????? whole different ball game I'm afraid. I genuinely feel sorry for Jack. He's done nothing wrong just copped a bloody crap injury. Shlt happens often to the wrong people.

10.9 Commencement of Ineligibility Period Except as provided below, the period of Ineligibility shall start on the date of the hearing decision providing for Ineligibility or, if the hearing is waived, on the date Ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed. Any period of Provisional Suspension (whether imposed or voluntarily accepted) shall be credited against the total period of Ineligibility imposed. 10.9.1 Delays Not Attributable to the Athlete or other Person Where there have been substantial delays in the hearing process or other aspects of Doping Control not attributable to the Athlete or other Person, the body imposing the sanction may start the period of Ineligibility at an earlier date commencing as early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which another antidoping rule violation last occurred. I'm also interested to see how others may interpret the above. Would the bans be effective from the date of the Tribunals directive ? Even though there have been delays would this not come under the proviso that it was because of the actions of the club and players ? If so then no backdating is warranted ? If thats the case then even if they sneaked off with 6 months ( too little for mine ) then should it not start presumably from the tribunal...sometime in November. ?? This would make the middle of May as their earliest resumption ?? If a year...its goodnight Irene for 2015..........

RPFC I agree... a reasoned path may be to delist and pay out..( provide support of course ). The Idea of Rookieing is only if the club thinks there is the slimmest of possibilities he may come good. There is also the notion of appearances. Yes, cras as that may seem to some.i.e "looking to do the right thing".......maybe this goes to the idea of the club not being totally mercenary. i see it as the middle ground; between reason , and sentiment. ( but not necessary...as you allude ) My reference to cozy sentiment is in the main the stance by many here and as supporters that there seems to be some ethereal nature to a football club. That exists because of how the public positions sport and how we adulate our beloved Footy....up on that pedestal etc..In the end its a 'mortal as anything" entity. There are limitations and realities.

Billy... i'm thinking, and its not much beyond an educated extrapolation of the events as reported, that what the Richmond scans revealed was something a lot worse than obviously considered to b the state of Jacks foot as most parties understood it. This translates into a "Richmond....not even remotely interested ( now ) ....Melbourne "Oh F..K !! " moment . Not what anyone wants by a long shot. As to recover : Jacks foot has to 1) heal/repair 2) strengthen 3) take a sporting load 4) be able to function properly/completely /lastingly at an elite level ( afl ) we havent even got back to 1 yet !! Jacks future is in many respects about damage control. I think its a testament to himself he can push through and think strong. He'll need to In some respects I think he'd be better off on the Rookie list anyway. There he ought not be ascribed the same expectations or pressure to justify his station. On the primary list i think its a warranted question to ask , " why are you there ?" If its about giving him the best opportunity to 'make it' reduce the pressure. Any which way we have to pay his original contract. Thats fair and reasonable. Any which way the club should /will be providing support, medical and otherwise. Again , that's the right course. is Jack likely to play in 2015 ? Very doubtful. So when you assemble all those into the best thing for the club...what becomes the choice of preference? I understand all the sentiment associated with l' Jack and the various 'potential' scenarios that might play if other clubs were to sniff but i just think reality is if he can get back to walking running as for a normal life hes winning. I dont see much of a long term future in footy for him, and thats a shame. I likes his footy and rated him when fit and firing.

Pretty safe to think they wouldnt this time

Why indeed !! its a more valid question than your sarcasm suggests.

lose what exactly.... a 1% to play footy again player. please.. This is more about exit management but no one want to sight the elephant.

I agree and have put this before, the participant sport should have NOTHING to do with the outcome once established. Should be down to ASADA to meet out the punishment. The AFL in signing on ought to be then prepared to stand back and allow what follows, to follow. Its a total balls up really. The AFL is conflicted at best and has shown a complicity in the past. Joke