mauriesy

How do we know it isn't the club selectively leaking information, maybe even in a Machiavellian manner, to highlight how ridiculous the evidence is? Ideas about fumbling footballs and Jack Watts' non-selection can only help our argument and develop the Keystone Cops nature of the investigation.

No one has actually been charged yet. If they are to be formally charged, it will be after the AFL Commission, at a future meeting, studies the investigator's files and considers Melbourne's response. At the moment, all we really have is the equivalent of a prosecutor's brief going to the DPP. There's a lot of water to pass under the bridge before formal proceedings.

This one is a better production: http://www.theage.com.au/tv/award-winners/show/vanguard/guns-in-america-4201205.html You can't tell me this type of behaviour and culture is just a question of 'easy access'. Maybe the gun culture has provided the environment where access is easy.

So do you reckon this is easy access, culture or both? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-IS6wUyzjA

Well for a start, no one has ever even contemplated the possibility that the AFL could have good reasons for its investigation, or that Wilson might even be substantially right. Of course I'd prefer that not to be the case, but the character assassinations, conspiracy theories, questioning of motivation and anti-AFL ridicule flow pretty freely when the threat is perceived to be great, regardless of any evidence that might still be to come out. For example, the post just previous to this one (#1163) is just pure convenient supposition without a shred of evidence.

I don't throw away anything. Go and read the original work by Janis and you'll find plenty of correlations, including unquestioned belief in the morality of the group (Melbourne supporters on Demonland); pressure to conform placed on any member (e.g. Fan, Ben-Hur) who questions the group, couched in terms of 'disloyalty' and personal attack; group cohesiveness becoming more important than individual freedom of expression; and a situational context of highly stressful external threats (tanking allegations and possible sanctions). 'The more amiability there is among the members of an ingroup (e.g. Demonland), the greater the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanising actions directed against outgroups (e.g. AFL, Wilson, Denham, Fitzpatrick, Carlton, Richmond, Fan, Ben-Hur etc.).'

I think that's a cop-out. How I think about the future of the club is up to me alone. Positive thinking engenders positivism. Paranoia just engenders blame without rationally examining issues and solutions. I also don't want to fall for the trap where I feel superior and victimised at the same time. I've always thought that's the preserve of Collingwood supporters.

I think that's why I used the word 'also'. Believing the world is out to get us, that Melbourne as a club is being treated differently to another club in the same situation, that the AFL wants to 'cut us from the pack', that the media hold us particularly in contempt, and disparaging individuals who hold a contrary view without rational argument ... they're all elements of paranoia and/or 'group think'. We've got to get over this rubbish before we can believe we're the equal of other clubs. There's a heap of good things going on at Melbourne now, and I don't really want to be part of a pessimism derived from four years ago.

Maybe there's also now a mentality bordering on paranoia in some Melbourne supporter circles.

It's Sellar, not Sellars.

This month's compulsory last sentence for any journalists writing about Melbourne: "The Demons are in the process of responding to the AFL's tanking investigation."

Bananas are ripening very quickly at present. Must be the warmer weather.

Theysay Street or Iheard Street.

Agreed. That article I quoted by Dvorak in the Washington Post finished with this: "But America already knows how this is going to go. We are getting scary good at this. There will be school counsellors and vigils and maybe some protests. We will all hug our kids extra hard. I don't know if I'm going to be able to let my kindergartner and third-grader go to their sleepover this weekend, I won't be able to let them go. There will be great work done by reporters in the next few weeks uncovering how the shooter was able to get his hands on the weapons. We'll probably learn that he was mentally ill, that there were holes in the safety net and everyone around him saw the signs, but our treatment of mental health issues is lacking, our care incomplete and our system broken. Schools will re-examine safety procedures. It's going to be even harder for the babysitter to come to pick up a child or for mum to drop off a forgotten lunch because of new ID checks and security guards hired by the school district. And somehow, parents are going to agree to this madness because, what else can you do? The drills for surviving during a school shooting will now begin in kindergarten. Pre-school board meetings will discuss whether this should be looked into. Board members will nod sagely. What else can you do? Sandy Hook will become a database entry, next to Columbine and Stockton and Virginia Tech. What's not going to happen? Nothing will change when it comes to guns in America."

I've got diesel.

An article from the Washington Post cites a report from the Children's Defense Fund in the USA, which showed that in 2008 and 2009, 5740 children — “one child or teen every three hours, eight every day, 55 every week for two years” — were killed by guns. In 2008, 408 of them were under the age of 15; 148 were under 10. A year later, 354 under 15 and 151 under 10 were killed by gunfire. All in all, 34,387 children were wounded by guns in those two years. That's total lunacy and Rhino is right about 'innocent vulnerable defenceless children' and the misdirected preference for guns over children's safety. This article: More is done to protect guns than to protect children (originally from the Washington Post, re-produced in The Age on Sunday) hits the nail on the head. To quote: "We live in a society (USA) that makes it very, very easy to kill kids, although we want to pretend that it isn't true. Because the kids gunned down in Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday were swaddled in federally regulated, fire-retardant blankets, rode in elaborate car seats plastered with safety stickers, learned to ride bikes with elbow pads, knee guards and safety helmets and were never left alone with a plastic bag. Cribs, bouncy seats, cough medicine, scooters, sugary snacks — we have no problem regulating the everliving life out of those. But how do we keep them safe in their sweet, little elementary school when we live in a culture that has convinced itself to accept guns?"

BTW, rather eerie coincidence that Martin Bryant lived in a suburb of Hobart called New Town.

Games won must be a yardstick, but the nature of losses, especially against the good teams, must come into consideration because it shows the side's defensive and endurance capability. I'd much rather lose a dozen games by a couple of goals, than a few by 100, or one by 186.

Indeed, the 'right to bear arms' was written into the US Constitution not for self-protection but in the context of the citizenry having the means to overthrow a tyrannical government (i.e. at that time the British). I'm sure it wasn't meant to be machine guns and assault weapons to overthrow a democratically-elected 21st-century government. Perhaps if they want their constitutional right, all the arms US citizens ought to be able to bear now are muskets.

The buy-back in Australia of automatic and semi-automatic guns, plus licensing and ownership restrictions, cut firearm suicides by 74%, or 200 lives a year. Firearm homicides have dropped by 59%. The proportion of Australian homes with a gun is now only 8% (mainly farms), which is half what it was before the buy-back. Easy access to guns in a household causes situations where there is argument and violence to escalate to dangerous levels ... often ending in 'get the gun first and think later'. Easy access to guns, particularly semi-automatic weapons, by intelligent but low-esteem young male 'loners' is the common denominator with Newtown, Port Arthur, Columbine and a host of other US school shootings. So perhaps the greatest thing the buy-back achieved is that there hasn't been a mass shooting in Australia since Port Arthur over 16 years ago. Finally a cartoon about the American gun psyche. One gun lobbyist has already said "if the teachers were armed with M-16s they would have avoided the tragedy".

How come the player list view isn't sortable any more?

You can play with Kim Jong-il. 18 holes-in-one.

Like those road signs that say "Police enforcing speed".

How did Carlton get the 2nd-best forward line rating? They've got Garlett and Betts, plus Waite for a few games a year.

You had the option last year of refusing the scarf and either getting a Demons Shop voucher or giving the extra money to the club.