Nasher

If this is the minimum standard, where's the standard whereby you'll be content and possibly even excited, ProDee? (Not disagreeing or trying to make any particular point, just curious.)

To replace whom?

That audio bite made me grumpy. No facts, quotes or anything concrete, just speculation about "personal issues" on top of the concussion, with no actual detail on his concussion recovery. Apparently also we're putting him on the LTI so we can promote a rookie, however the club isn't aware of that yet and there's no obvious candidate for promotion. Sports journalism really is in the gutter these days.

June revision: Jones, Terlich, Grimes and Newton to go. I think with Watts settled as second ruck (who saw that coming?) we only need one of Dawes or Pedersen to hold fort until Weideman or Hulett step up. Early on it was definitely Pedersen but Dawes looks in really good nick at the moment which throws a spanner in the works. I think Dawes is the better player, but also possibly a bigger breakdown risk. Interesting conundrum. Love this aspect of footy!

I think the reverse is true: Casey is having a great season because we have developed some depth. That said, many of the players holding Casey at the top of the ladder are the "almost good enough" types (ANB, Newton, Michie, Jones, Terlich, Grimes et al) who are unlikely to make an impression in the seniors if called upon, so I'd be careful about tossing the word "depth" around. I still wouldn't want to see our injury list start to grow too much. It's definitely a positive that they're all playing well and keeping the heat on the players in the senior side though, no doubt about that.

I guess my point is I don't really give a fig who was better or who won. I'm a MFC supporter not a Casey supporter, so if there's nothing to be gained that is relevant to AFL experience then I'm not too fussed. It's as relevant as it would be if we'd lined up against the Melbourne Storm in a rugby game and lost (okay - that's an exaggeration but you see the point).

There was a Pies supporter near me who was giving Tom Phillips a serve at one point in the kid's first game. I really do wonder what the f is wrong with people sometimes.

It's worth noting that Col Garland said in his on stage interview with Robbo said it was the worst ground conditions he's ever played on and that it was borderline unplayable. It sounds as if it was not played in an environment comparable enough to AFL conditions to be able to draw any inferences from it. I'd pretty much just disregard the result including the form of the players who played in it.

Nope. I was very surprised to see his name come up in here. It's not new for me to be surprised by the views of others though, it happens most weeks. I guess everyone sees things through their own eyes with their own biases.

Without wanting to be too negative about a player who played well in a good win, Bugg is such an unclean user of the ball at times that I find him hard to love as a player. That said, he'll remain in the side so long as he continues to play the way he has this year; with strength and toughness. I think being a Kirk like leader is too high an expectation; if we want to compare to mid 2000s premiership players, reliable foot soldiers like Paul Bevan or Rowan Jones are probably a closer match. Edit: I obviously haven't watched him as much as you though Billy. I've got to admit I'd never paid any attention to him before we picked him up and I was surprised to see how many games he already had up his sleeve. He can obviously play.

They were very consistent in that regard: I saw at one stage Dawes get man handled to the point of falling over (when the player eventually let go) while trying to lead - play on! I try not to dwell on that kind of thing too often though. At the end of the day it's not possible for the umps to see everything, especially things that happen outside the play. How often do you find yourself going "wtf was that free for?!" in total outrage then look at the replay and go "oh."

Haha. I'm surprised but flattered at the amount of attention that got.

"We lost by 100 but Howe took mark of the year". If I was to roll up all of the games from the Neeld era and make them one, that's probably how I'd describe it.

Has work to do on his delivery of ball by foot. Exciting prospect though - his pace is blistering and he looks to use it as much as possible, and he plays a tougher brand of game than I expected. His progress is very pleasing.

Yeah, probably then :-)

Was bloody awesome mate. Waved my flag and sung the song three times, and stayed until the boys went in. Probably won't do any of those things ever again, but felt the need for finally breaking the duck!

Anyone got footage of Kennedy being coathangered by #40 (which was called "play on" by umpire Nicholls)? I spent the whole first quarter watching through red mist after that. I want to see if it was as bad as it looked.

Sun is shining, lovely winters day. Froze my arse off when I got off the plane though, wtf Melbourne? Hobart airport was 6 degrees warmer, I thought Tassie was meant to be the cold place.

Boarding plane in 1/2 hour. Been up since 5. Coffee at airport luke warm and unpleasant. Is it 3 o'clock yet?

Agree that it's a pragmatic and correct approach, but unfortunately Worsfold isn't the only one with his skin in the game, and the likes of Dodoro have a history of being as obstinate and obstructive as possible with these sorts of things. I hope you're right, but I have doubts.

Anyway if the issue is AFL favouring certain clubs for Friday night games, all that would do is guarantee the top clubs get all the Friday night games. At least this way forces the AFL to guess somewhat who the good clubs are going to be.

How do you make just the Friday game a floating fixture?

If Viney plays as well I definitely wouldn't rule out Harmes or Kent making way too. I can't imagine Kennedy not playing on the back of his VFL game and the fact that he was pretty stiff to be dropped in the first place - could easily have been Harmes, Kent or Garlett as previously mentioned. Kennedy and Viney for Garlett and Harmes seems entirely reasonable to me.

*cough*I'veneverseenalivewin*cough*

About as likely as you jogging down I'd have thought.