Nasher

I don't think he's a spud. Players who make 50 or more AFL games have to have done so because they add something to their team. You wouldn't make it that far otherwise. I don't see the world in black and white. But your "we win more games" stat is just silly. For a start, it hardly showed a huge difference - what was it, 25% vs 26%? As they say correlation doesn't mean causation. I just don't know how you can conclude anything with that statistic. There's no link between the stat and Pedersen playing, it's just a co-incidence. How about a "Games in AFL" vs "Games in VFL" ratio? Not an easy stat to get but the fact that he's spent a significant portion of the last two seasons in the VFL is indicative of his standing amongst his coaching group.

To be clear, I wasn't implying that there was any merit whatsoever in the assertion that Kent had cracked the sads - I agree it's probably BS. Just arguing the point that if he had cracked the sads, I didn't agree with the "who could blame him" call.

You have to be taking the p*** with that stat, surely.

He became redundant in the ruck as soon as Watts lined up at a centre bounce. Watts adds the same amount in the ruck (not much) and makes a much better midfielder. I'd actually argue he became redundant full stop when Watts lined up at a centre bounce. Pedersen's career stats since Watts took over in the ruck in round 9 last year: 2 games for 3 hitouts.

Hah, but no, this was Dion Scott - a fairly modest CHF/Ruckman from Tassie that played for the Bears in the 90s.

According to Demonwiki, he had the peak ripped off by Dion Scott and the rest of it ripped in half by Matthew Kennedy. Who did those hacks think they were, touching a gentleman's hat? I've got to admit - all aspects of that story sound hilarious.

While I hate it when old mate refuses to accept any criticism of the club at all, I can understand why people will often shrug their shoulders and defer when it comes to matters of selection and the like. The OP in this thread might as well have said "Goodwin is an idiot for not selecting Pedersen", when it's obvious from the outside that we cannot and will not ever have as deep an understanding of the inner machinations of the team as Goodwin will. People don't understand that from our position in the stands or on the couch, we don't know what we don't know. I get that it's a discussion forum, but it irritates me when posters carry on as if they're the expert.

Or it may be it's because he's chosen to have long hair intentionally. I know that may come as a shock to some.

Topic amended for people's ongoing cardiac health.

Emily's Dad is the new Judd's Grandmother.

If anything, getting the sulks up further justifies it. Compare and contrast to the Tom Bugg response.

Thanks. That's a fair bit different to "causes a free kick or stoppage".

That was news to me. It almost makes the tackle stat redundant. I often wondered how so many players could make it through a whole AFL game without laying a tackle. Do unrewarded tackles get recorded in any way? 1%ers?

Your condition has deteriorated badly in your time away, Rangie. I haven't the faintest what this post is about. I think there's a shot at me in there somewhere because I saw my name, but I'm not offended because frankly, it went flying over my head. Get well soon mate.

Might as well put the cue in the rack then!

Odd combination George. Are you actually Frank Abagnale Jr?

Neither Jones nor Goodwin are very articulate in front of the media. Jones is just regurgitating exactly what the coach says. The "journey" thing is just them trying to tell you that we're a work in progress. It might be tedious to listen to, but it's pretty hard to disagree with the point. I wouldn't take the absence of those key words to mean an absence of commitment, it's not the point they're choosing to labour in front of the mics. I'm a big supporter of our coach and our skipper, but I think you could just as easily skip the pressers and you wouldn't be any less informed. They give donuts.

Martin, Morton and Gysberts traded out. Green (retired), Jurrah, Moloney, Bate, Bennell and Cook delisted. Gee, the side starts looking stronger already.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against giving Trengove a shot at some point. I don't want unforced changes though unless it's a clear, definitive upgrade - Hibberd and Hogan are the only players available who offer that in my opinion. Tinkering around the edges like that gives me flashbacks to 2012 when we had a team of NQRs doing a revolving door tour of the side on a weekly basis. *shudder*

I see absolutely zero point in the Trengove for Bugg exchange. Excited to hear the reports about Hibberd though. I thought he might take a while to get going, but it would seem not.

It's certainly going to be hot - both sides credibility is on the line, and it will happen on a big stage. Richmond are flying and we're buoyant - the 'G will be packed and nousy. I can't wait. "Biggest test in years" is just silly hyperbole though. At our stage of development, every game is winnable and losable. Every week is a test - it's just that this week, more people are watching.

I don't think that's an argument against using consequences as an input in to the penalty, which is the position you took (or at least, how I interpreted it). I think my examples show that the consequence is relevant and you appear to agree. I think both our arguments lend support to the idea that the weighting of the consequence should be significantly scaled down, but I'm yet to be convinced they should be discarded altogether. A cherry on top rather than the determining factor if you will. By the way I completely agree with you that the outcomes at present are BS and are in need of reform. Just trying to flesh out the logic in where the process fails.

You would expect to see differing penalties for: A drunk driver who doesn't crash or kill anyone A sober driver who crashes and kills someone A drunk driver who crashes and kills someone Would you not?

Same mate. I'm too cheap to shell out for Foxtel HD though. I begrudge having to have Foxtel at all as it is - footy is the only reason I have it.

Nah, the problem was they weren't playing Carlton, so the opposition doctor didn't put in a report of delayed onset concussion. They are using the consequence as a factor of determining impact. I can see the logic in it, but it can lead to inconsistent, obviously bulldust outcomes, because it comes down to the word of the club doctors, who are going to exhibit varying degrees of conservatism (to give them the benefit of the doubt).