Nasher

That's a bit of a cop-out. Does the end justify the means? Also, we didn't win.

Not wanting to look someone in the eye when you're already completely humiliated is a completely normal human response. Being able to do so doesn't make you tougher or more of a man, it just means you have a higher tolerance for personal humiliation. I'm a very emotional person and when my negative emotions like humiliation or anger are at their peak, talking to me is a complete waste of time - I'm not going to hear a word you say until I've had a moment to let it boil over. Everyone reacts differently.

What should he have done instead? He reacted pretty much the same way I would have to be honest.

Get off his back, he's been in our top couple so far.

wtf? How was that Morton's fault?

I liked it better when there was no thread.

I'd dispute the fact that he's played zero good games this year. His use around the ground has been sub-par compared to what we've come to expect, but he's #1 in the comp for hitouts - surely this is a pretty crucial KPI for a ruckman. Even if you believe he is in poor form, ideally contract terms should be about the long term value to the club, not short term form. I.e. that the a guy might happen to be in a (potentially) short term form slump shouldn't shape his contract for the next 2+ years.

I'd look to put Jetta on the rookie list next year. I believe that despite his lack of size and pace he's got attributes at a coach like Neeld would love like commitment to the contest, and by all reports has a good head on his shoulders. I've never been a huge fan, but I'm keeping an open mind because of the attributes he does have, rather than the ones he doesn't. Just a shame the season will be just about up before he gets his chance to show Neeld what he's got, and we've got quite a bit of list clearing that needs to be done to fit in the next intake of talent. That's why I'd consider him for the rookie list.

The "like" function on this forum is designed for the man with the ego! I actually thought it was a stupid idea (too facebooky) initially but have warmed to it. It gives a way to be able to give someone a 'nod' without having to actually reply. And it's kind of nice when you see 10+ people give your post a 'like'. Seriously though, as Robbie said, good posts don't go unnoticed. One problem that comes with mass popularity in forums is mass waves of numpties posting crap - this is true for every forum I've ever been a part of. People who talk sense regularly really stick out and regulars get a feel for whose posts to read and whose not to read. I've become a master at skim-reading threads and just picking out the quality posts to read, and I've always done that on both sites. And as for the sub-forum idea, I'm always still open to the possibility.

It's not "here we go again", you haven't said anything there that I disagree with or challenged. Like I said faultydet, I've been active on both sites and once was active more on 'ology than 'land despite my title on this site. I still read 'ology regularly and post occasionally - I may not be that recognisable because I've never been a particularly opinionated person, so my views don't stand out much, but I do consider both sites to be home. "Long term 'ology" poster includes me as well. I know I sounded like a bit evangelistic and one-sided in my last post - that was unintentional, but I just find it amazing that someone who has been around as long and is as switched on as Chook in Perth could be surprised that some people hang it on the other site; this has been happening forever on both sites. It's not just 'land members who are guilty. That's all I took exception to.

Chook, you've got to be kidding don't you? "These days?!" As if there's never been a "Demonland are a bunch of pimply teenage kids with rose coloured glasses; I'd never dream of posting there" attitude from most of the fogies on 'ology. I say this as a member who has been active on both sites (and was active on 'ology more than 'land in its glory years as I believed its intelligence-to-nuff-nuff ratio was better). And frankly, I can't blame those who weren't around a few years ago from seeing 'ology the way they see it - watching Dee_Flower, IRW and co do the rounds is mind numbing stuff. By the way, most who have been around a long time don't do the "us and them" thing and (now with admin hat on) it has never been condoned by admin. It's been my personal view and is shared by Jack and Andy that we're sister sites, not rival sites. But let's not pretend the mud slinging has only ever happened from one side of the fence. Edit: I've just read through the thread again and I'm not even sure who you and Deers even think is hanging that much poo anyway. I've read much, much worse on both sites in the past!

The idea of current players being pitted against players from 50 years ago is nonsensical anyway, so I don't see how what I added to it makes it any worse.

There's no way that is the case. These things take ages to prepare, I highly doubt TH and co just whipped a new contract together in the day or two after the game and said "here Mark, sign this".

I fell asleep at 3/4 time. Epic fail.

If you don't care then stay out of the thread. Pretty easy.

What if the assumption was that those old players had today's coaching, fitness and general professionalism?

Yes, it's been broken since yesterday. It's been running without anyone really behind the wheel for a couple of years now, it's a wonder it's stayed up this long. Look up George on the Outer on these forums and send him a message, he's the only one who could possibly help.

Bloody excited about Cook's form. Nothing will give me greater pleasure than bumping all those Darling posts if he continues on this trajectory. Lots of water to pass under that bridge yet though. Also very pleasing to see the SME kicking a small bag - there's hope yet...?

Old and RR have already nailed it, but I guess the difference between this and the White/Jolly situation that even at the time it was obvious Jolly was quality, whereas there's all sorts of doubt over Spencer, Martin and Gawn, all for differing reasons. Letting one of the comp's best ruckmen go in the hopes that one of the three NQR ruckmen might overcome their issues is dangerous to the point of recklessness. And for what it's worth I believe we could've kept both Jolly and White if Neale had been more flexible in the way he operated them when he had both at his disposal. Keeping Jamar doesn't have to mean robbing Spencer/Martin/Gawn of development opportunities - Jamar himself developed just fine under White. There's room there for them if they're good enough (or fit enough in Gawn's case).

This was never in doubt in my mind. I heard him say on air more than once that once the offer was on the table he'd sign it, and (at risk of earning Range Rover's wrath), I believed every word he said. Three years is surprising, but pleasantly. Another so called "disenfranchised" player showing a huge amount of faith in the club.

It's not even that, we get less from the AFL than some of the big clubs. From the 2010 AFL report (page 58): http://www.afl.com.a...inCorporate.pdf The base payment to all the clubs was the same, then there's an "other" payments thing and the total. The clubs that got more payments from the AFL than us in 2010 were: Carlton, Collingwood, North Melbourne, St. Kilda and Western Bulldogs. And the difference between the biggest (Western Bulldogs) and the smallest (Adelaide) was a touch under $3m so it's not a huge spread.

All the clubs get lots of money from the AFL and always will. Us being a "charity case" is one of the biggest misnomers in the wider community.

If their first behind had been a goal it'd be back to the middle and we'd be in a completely alternate universe. We might've won by more for all we know. It's why the "if this, if that" arguments are pointless, because we have no idea how alternate results early in the game would have affected the rest of the match.

I wouldn't make that swap.

It was probably before your time, but at one stage on the forums (during the Swans success), it was in vogue for every player to be a "Ryan O'Keefe type player" on this forum. It actually got embarrassing after a while.