mauriesy

In the rush to align actions of a similar nature, are Adelaide suggesting the AFL toss out the outcome altogether? McAdam's and Kossie's weren't entirely "similar". McAdam was later and the victim was concussed. Kossie didn't cause that level of injury. Three weeks for one and two for the other seems appropriate to me. Buddy maybe should have got two weeks, but he didn't launch at the player off the ground like the other two.

In the desire to display all the collected anti-Hawthorn sentiment over decades, this article whooshed over everyone's heads. It's not about Hawthorn. That just happened to be the team the kid supports. It could be North, Essendon, St Kilda or others. It was Melbourne not that long ago. It's about kids growing up never having seen their team win, the ties that bind them to the team they grew up with and their parents supported, whether they'll want to change teams in adversity, and whether they'll still want to go the the football next week ... and the next week ... and the week after. Or maybe even lose interest in football all together. It's the universal dilemma for parents whose team isn't doing well. It could happen to anyone. It happened to my own kids for over 30 years (but they stuck with the Demons).

Spargo, Sparrow ... close enough!

"Sent for" scans has a different connotation to "went in" for scans. One could be to analyse a new injury, the other for a check to see if a previous repair is still OK. Hopefully, as we haven't heard anything.

Massive inefficient disposal numbers in that match for very little outcome ... Saints 395 to Freo 435. Fremantle 65 inside 50s for 7 goals.

Don't ignore the threat of Bontempelli at 192cm.

I think that's a very cynical view of a serious condition. There is strong evidence of the effects of concussion, just as there is/was evidence for asbestos, cigarette smoking and now silicosis ... you know, all the other tragic conditions the "ambulance chasers" made us alert to.

Not so sure about bankruptcy. But rules and umpiring will be changed. Maybe those who think the game is poorer for having lost some of the "biffo" will be forced to reconsider their position.

Don't know about "burning".

Jackson didn't chop his.

There's always the virus excuse.

Robbo is trying to "crystal ball gaze" to the end of the season and it's clickbait to sell papers. It's a low-probability exercise that you'd hardly waste your time analysing or spending more than a minute discussing. My crystal ball only says that Max Gawn will be much more influential than #27 and Dustin Martin will be nowhere near #7.

My words of wisdom from no internal knowledge of these things ... If he goes, he goes, if he stays he stays. Until he makes a decision, save your breath.

I'd trade him for Petracca. 😄

"Out-of-contract livewire" is the latest iteration.

There it is ... "out-of-contract livewire"! Expect to hear it repeated ad infinitum this year in reference to Pickett. 🙄

But we are playing the side with the worst free kick differential in the AFL for the last three years at least.

The last thing I want to do is promote anything Murdoch, but I can happily stream Kayo in HD on a 7mbps ADSL connection without any quality issues. And I'm out in the sticks 7km from an exchange.

I've always reserved judgement on players until it's obvious, rather than make rash predictions either way. But for some reason, a few people like to make an early call, hoping they can get the kudos from being proved right, but often looking like fools when they're proved wrong.

A lot of premature speculation early in this thread.

Yes, but since Essendon last won a final, we've won 7 and a premiership.

Must have been a virus.

Drugs like cocaine and ketamine are far more dangerous when taken with alcohol. I think it would be a fair assumption that since Ginnivan was at the Torquay hotel, he wasn't just drinking lemonade. In relation to drug use among footballers, I think we have to be careful not to make an assumption, based on a Twitter comment, that "everyone is taking it" and they are somehow different to the rest of society. The rate of cannabis taking among the general population is estimated around 12%, but hard drugs like cocaine, ecstasy and meth/amphetamine are less than 3%. There's no evidence to say footballers would be well above those figures. The fact they are young men would increase the likelihood, but they are also professional sportspeople with excellent resources and objectives and that would diminish it. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/illicit-drug-use

Yeah, so ketamine is a whole lot better ... https://adf.org.au/drug-facts/ketamine/

Arguments about the legality of drugs are one thing, and there are good reason for decriminalisation. But getting back to Ginnivan as a footballer and member of a football club ... snorting cocaine, especially over the long term, may cause anything from damage to nasal passages through to depression and heart problems. At the extreme end an overdose can cause seizures, stroke or cardiac arrest leading to death. Regular use can cause poor mental function. Coming down from taking it may cause irritability, paranoia, mood swings and exhaustion. https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/cocaine Why would any football club interested in the welfare and performance of their professional footballers and the team want to turn a blind eye to that? Is just recreational use once in a while or in the off-season acceptable, or should they only accept "never"? That's aside from any issues to do with footballers being public role models, or examplars and influences to their team mates. Ginnivan did make his own choice, "raw deal" or not. You could argue 4 matches is comparatively weak.