Nasher

In the second quarter?!

That's exactly what I thought too. I'm not sure you read what he said.

Laughing is strictly illegal when the team is losing. I, for one, have never laughed, cracked a smile or even had a mildly amused twinkle in my eye when we're getting smashed.

6. Clark 5. Magner Stuck.

No probs. See you next week.

I'm someone who likes the posts I read to make sense. I don't ask for English professor grammar, I just ask for your posts to be readable.

Pretty much what I thought too.

punctuation is your friend

I really hear you there. I have two older brothers: #1 barracks for Collingwood, #2 barracks for Richmond (big extended family - we grew up outside Vic and were all influenced by different people). The dynamic has been pretty simple - #2 and I basically close down any attempts #1 makes at talking footy - he's unbearable when those bastards are winning, which for us seems to be always. That's been the way for the best part of a decade now. #2 and I have basically be able to pain share and empathise with one another. #2 rang me not long after the Richmond game this year. Getting thrashed by Richmond was too much for me. It wasn't just that we were shit (again), or that we'd been flogged (again), it was that it was bloody Richmond. Those guys are meant to know what it feels like. It was the first time, and probably the only time I'll ever reject a call from one of my brothers. Great post, btw.

Part II was a lot more insightful than Part I I reckon. It sounds as if Craig plays a part in literally every thing - I like the analogy of being the godfather in Part I. I also found it interesting that assistant coaches and the players also seek him out for advice - that wouldn't have occurred to me before. There's a lot of benefit to having a former senior coach, who is somewhat at arms length being around to bounce things off and get feedback.

Obviously nobody here is going to know specifically if Viney is still growing or not, but the average 17/18 year old still has growing to do. Probably no more than a cm or two though you'd think.

I've read more in-depth analysis on this forum. Maybe Walls should just start stealing content from here like the Hun writers.

My view also. If this were a business I'd reject that resignation.

I was going to make some hilarious gag about us drafting footballers and not basketballers before it occurred to me that we have 3 highly rated ex-basketballers on our list. What's Oden got planned for 2013?

Particular points of interest for me this week are Tapscott, Jurrah, Blease, Martin, Cook and Watts. Cook for the "hurry up and kick on so we can stop this Darling whinging once and for all" factor, and the others because they're the ones I believe should be bashing the door down for selection in the near term.

Couldn't agree more, Deeoldfart! Very pleased that Bennell and Fitzpatrick have been awarded for good form - very good form in the case of the former. I'd have made the Fitz for Sellar change even if Sellar hadn't been injured. Petterd for Dunn was a pleasant surprise for me. As I've said a lot of times this year I believe Petterd is the superior player (and it seems obvious they're both competing for one spot), but Dunn did enough most weeks to hang on to his spot by the skin of his teeth. This is a golden opportunity for Ricky - if he works hard enough he should be able to hold Dunn out of the side for the rest of the year. Perfect changes for mine.

Just out of curiosity, are you aware of how you currently appear in people's eyes? And believe me, I say that as a fan of yours as a contributor to Demonland, both as a poster and your previous contribution as a moderator.

He also said that Bartram "laid it bare for him" - that doesn't sound like pussyfooting around the issue to me.

Nominations happen before trade week.

But you still don't seem to acknowledge that it'll be one less AFL match Wojcinski can play in. If I were Wojcinski I wouldn't give a shit about missing two VFL matches, but I sure would give a shit about being ineligible for four AFL matches.

I doubt the VFL would issue a zero week suspension. I think it'd have to be a minimum of one (two) weeks for it to work in that situation.

The point is that the whole team IS playing. The Geelong seniors, who David Wojcinski is listed to play for, will play on all four weeks that he is rubbed out for. It's four AFL matches that he is not eligible to play for. That a couple of them happen to fall on weeks where the VFL team doesn't play is what seems to be confusing for you.

He must sit out two VFL matches. In the time that those two VFL matches have been played, four AFL matches will have been played. He's an AFL listed player, so his suspension must scale to the AFL.If there were no state matches or byes in the VFL, he'd have been given four weeks, and still missed four AFL games.

ffs stuie, it's not that hard to grasp. The VFL suspension was engineered so that he'll miss 4 AFL matches. It doesn't matter about the state matches, byes etc - the outcome would've been modified to suit so the end result was still missing 4 AFL matches.