RalphiusMaximus

We'll find out when the video gets uploaded, assuming it does. I have to say I was pretty annoyed that there wasn't a team list in the Footy Record. How hard would it have been to do a couple of articles and respective sides for the Women as well as the men? It was frustrating as hell sitting there trying to figure out who was doing what.

Love the pic of Fitzpatrick. Must be a damn nice camera to get those close-ups that clear. Great work.

That was a pretty awesome night. Starting off with a big win in the women's game was good, but to see us finally put the doggies away was sooo sweet. I find it hard to really fault anyone who played tonight. There were a few cases of bad fumbles/overrunning the ball, but not as many as we usually see and we finally started to string together the possession chains that we normally screw up after two kicks. I largely agree with the adulation being directed at Watts. He was very important tonight and played a huge role in the game. My one complaint is the point he kicked. It was the easiest shot he had all night, running into an open goal with no pressure, and he decided to run to the right and kick it sideways. All he needed to do was head directly at the goal and kick it forwards. Stupid play and not the first time he;s done it. Still, that is one relatively small issue in an otherwise really good game.

Totally agree on Randall. Her contested marking was awesome. The only problem is she needs better range on her set shots. Still, I would have had her BOG ahead of Daisy. Great start to the night to have them get up so convincingly. Also great to get the trifecta for Melbourne with wins to Casey and the mens side.

First off, an important question: Does anyone know what the winning numbers were in the raffle tonight? I didn't catch them.

I think that was a pretty impressive game today. The passing from our women's side was far better than from the Male demons. They were actually able to pinpoint targets in traffic. A few of them were seriously hard at the ball too. Not sure I would have given Daisy the player of the match. Whoever no. 3 was for us was absolutely dominant in the forward line. She killed them. Still trying to find a decent team list to figure out who it was. Edit: Chelsea Randall possibly? Hell of a contested mark anyway.

OK, I can see why the communal Man-Crush on Hogan. The kid is a freak of nature. Quite impressed with Davis even if he is being played out of position. He looks taller than he's supposed to be. I think it's about time to give him a run in the seniors and see what he can do.

We have them, but they're not the sort to stoop to match-fixing. They're more into corporate fraud.

So the precedent has been set, having two hands on you at the time does not constitute pressure. We need to remember that.

I'd be happy to have him. Once you start getting into the second and third rounds it tends to be a bit of a crap shoot anyway, so why not go for someone we know has the pedigree? He could turn out to be another Sam Power, but just as likely he could be the next Junior.

This section right here is the important part. If this is found to be accurate then the drug is very likely to find it's way onto the S2 list. Not relevant to this case, but I would guess that this is the part that interested Dank and the Bombers.

Pretty sure that would be right.

Not fussed. There is nothing incriminating in those texts. AOD is a broad class, not all of which are banned. There is no indication of what substance they were referring to in Trengove's case.

Wasn't Magner promoted for Grimes when he went LTI? If so, when Grimes comes back his chance is gone.

If my boss told me that, I'd say they need it much more than I do. 1. AOD is banned. WADA has repeatedly stated this. 2. It is not illegal, but part of a club being registered in the AFL is an agreement to abide by certain codes and bylaws, one of which is the drug code. If the AFL's policy is to follow WADA guidelines then they have in fact breached this agreement and as such are liable to punishment in accordance with the AFL's and WADA's policies. 3. Watson's statement is absolutely damning for this defence. He says that he knew they were giving him AOD, but not that it was banned. Given that WADA has repeatedly stated that the onus is on the athlete to ensure that they are not taking a banned substance, his statement has removed their ability to claim that they were not told what was being used and as such they are liable. Basically, they look to be very very screwed and I wait in eager anticipation to see what rabbits they have in their hats to get out of this situation. There was an interesting bit of discussion on SEN this afternoon about what would happen to the club if 15-20 players were suspended for a year or more. They pointed out that they would still have a number of good players available to them, Goddard and Daniher being the most notable. They may need permission to raid the VFL for top-up players to field a team, and could well be thrashed all season (earning a high draft pick?). It could be a very interesting thing.

I take them with a grain of salt. And some Lime and tequila occasionally.

This should be interesting. We have a team without a midfield vs a team without a spine. It's almost a battle of dogmas. Is it better to fill the key positions first or to make sure you have the mids to get the ball in to them?

And Davis at FF, with Tappy as CHF. I guess now that we've taken most of their tall timber they're trying something different.

Toes are the new OP.

Did anyone notice Gawn eying off Jamar near the start of the clip? I wonder what was going through his mind there? "No way he's getting back next week" maybe?

Or bypass their agent and have a quiet word to them offering $$$ for their services should they choose to jump ship.

This. Step 1 in particular.

"We have purposely trained him wrong,as a joke"

You would hope they are regarded differently, given that Jacks case is a cream that may or may not have been given to him by the club doctors while Watson was injected repeatedly and admits it.

Interesting article here. From the sound of it, WADA are not planning on being gentle. Also saw that they have stated clearly that AOD9604 is banned on the S0 list, and that there are no exceptions to this ban. The S0 list deals with substances that are not approved for use by humans.