Nasher

Has anyone complaining about lapses actually watched any footy other than Melbourne games this year? Just curious because I've seen a few and haven't seen a single game where teams didn't have fits and spurts.

No way.

Came here mostly hoping to read that Weid was dominant in a forward/ruck role and wasn't disappointed. This is definitely a missing piece of the puzzle in the seniors side, so fingers crossed he can keep it up and knock the door down.

I don't know how you can conclude that. When you "buy" a player, you aren't paying for his first three games or even his first season, you're paying for the balance of his career. Lever is 22 so he's still 5 years off the finished product. If short term payoff is the only thing that matters, pick 11 and half a mil for Mitch Clark was an absolute bargain.

Nathan Jones in my mind cemented a place in the hearts of club supporters during the early years of free agency. When other players of his vintage couldn't get out fast enough, the Jones response was a determined "I'm not going anywhere", to sign on for three mid-season. That was true leadership, and for me as a spectator who can only go along for the ride, one of the only signals that there might actually exist people at the club who wouldn't give up on it. There's no doubt in my mind Nathan Jones belongs amongst the all time club greats. The fact that he's had to ply his trade in a team that was awful most of the time only enhances his standing, as he's had to do it with little to no support.

To be fair, would *you* go watch them play? Yuck.

Thought Garlett's steal in the pocket qualified as heroics.

Permission to be happy with this, Demonland faithful?

?

While I'm supportive of (and pleased by) the social aspect of this decision, I highly doubt it's any more than a side effect of a decision that was otherwise 100% business. The current administration hasn't done anything to suggest it operates in any way other than a shrewd one. I'm surprised you're not prepared to cut them some slack and let this play out before flying off the handle.

You don't think it reasonable that people's view might evolve as life experience grows? 2010 for me was 50% of my adult life ago and I can tell you that my knowledge on the topic at hand and desire to explore it was precisely zero.

Very pleasing news. Hopefully there is a plan to minimise or ideally negate the impact to the bottom line. The argument that this does nothing to address the social issue because someone else will just pick up the licenses is just rubbish. The best way to initiate change is to lead it, and that's what the MFC have done. Let's see how many other AFL clubs are still operating these venues in 3 years time.

It's almost like Lever is only 22, and only 2 games in to his new club.

In the report it said the Brisbane doctor was consulted. Probably lucky we weren't playing Carlton or Lewis would probably be out for 3 weeks for whatever he did.

As we're all well aware of, crushing teams does rely on the crushee giving way as much as the crusher getting the job done. I'm not convinced the Brisbane side last night lent itself to a crushing, but I'm also not convinced I'm not just telling myself that to avoid facing the truth.

A couple of points: To you it's good info, to everyone else it's information from somebody called "Beetle" and we have no way of judging the veracity of it other than your word. It's not personal, but people are entitled to be sceptical. We have seen a *lot* of this type of information before and it varies from correct, to a mangled chinese whisper, to an outright lie. Often the poster could be correctly relaying what they heard but their source got the wrong end of the stick. Secondly, people will be doubtful about this particular item because it just sounds unlikely after the year he had. On top of that, it beggars belief that no other club would be interested. There's no need to get pissy about it when people question your post, it is inevitable and perfectly reasonable for that to happen. Try to understand a little bit where people are coming from.

Colin Garland missed all but one game of 2009 with a foot injury after numerous setbacks, and came back to have one of his best seasons in 2010. We've seen that foot injuries are notoriously hard to manage because of the amount of force the foot is required to bear, everything can seem fine until it comes time to put heavy load on. I don't think the club has been lying, rather that there was no certainty around it. This is clearly disappointing news, but I'm still prepared to reserve my outrage or panic for the time being.

Yep, this. This is the attitude previous forums I have experienced use too. And it's amazing how the more experienced you get, the less sensitive you get to complaints about hard moderating styles. "You don't think I should have deleted that post? Well I did. Oh well". "Oh, you posted it again after I deleted it? I deleted it again, and banned you for making me waste my time deleting it twice. Oh well."

I was expecting a feature article on Fritsch, and what I read was a bunch of dribble about the Watts trade with a few anecdotes about Fritsch. The quality of journalism in the AFL is pus.

It's not breaking news that Watts is a good player who can really turn it on from time to time. That never was, and never will be the issue.

Please don't present speculation as fact, as you did in your previous post. You would be surprised at how quickly garbage can get traction in the cesspit of the football media.

I'm not blind but I do believe we genuinely clash with Essendon. If I'm staring closely I can tell them apart clearly, but if my eyes are darting about all over the place following the play or I'm relying on peripheral vision to see, for a split second they look the same. I can't be the only one with this problem. It would be worse for people new to the game who don't know what they're looking for. I don't think we clash with the other nominal clashes (Carlton, St Kilda, Adelaide etc) but given that I can see the clash with Essendon, I will take the AFL at their word that some do see a clash. Unfortunately it's impossible to see through others eyes. I thought the AFL were taking the piss last year though when they let us wear that jumper that was traditional at the front and red at the back. I wasn't complaining because I love our traditional jumper, but it definitely muddied the waters regarding eliminating clashes - can't see how wearing that jumper clashed any less than the traditional one. Either that jumper should have been deemed unacceptable, or there was no clash to start with. Both can't be simultaneously true.

I'm not sure being the best of the worst is setting the bar high enough though Ralph.

Macdonald.

Yes, the one year contract is a clear indicator that the FD think there's a chance he'll flop, for whatever reason (be it off field or on). Again though, my response would be 'who cares?' - he clearly has the talent for AFL footy and we cost ourselves nothing to get him.