RalphiusMaximus

I do wonder if they will have the fortitude to follow through on the verdict handed down. If ASADA say they need to suspend the players for a year or more, will the AFL bite the bullet and do it, or will they take the massive loss of credibility and give a half-assed penalty to the club while sparing the players? Nope. No doctor was involved. That is part of the issue the AFL have been investigating, that the doctors were cut out of the process. I have to wonder why Jobe Watson is still playing right now. When Lees was charged, he was banned from playing for the duration of the investigation. That's eight months prior to the hearing, presumed guilty and unable to take part in any professional sporting event. Now Watson has admitted to taking a banned substance, surely the same must apply? I was listening to SEN earlier today and they had the WADA banned list up and were making a point that the drug in question was not specifically mentioned at the time they were using it and that this could be a defence. If they do have a blanket ban on substances not approved for human use then that would squash this line, but they were saying that it is the tack the Bombers plan on using.

I'm pretty sure I've seen him step around players to the right and kick on that side. I can't recall how good a kick, but I'm sure I've seen him use it.

Needs a better tank and a bit more muscle to stick his tackles. He's got speed and skill to burn.

Surprised they didn't. Mandatory two weeks, and it would make them look all tough and serious and stuff.

I'd take the line that it was unavoidable and not a bump. Random injuries sometimes happen in a contact sport, and that's exactly what it was, two unco big men who ran into each other.

Kind of makes you question the authority of the writer's opinions doesn't it?

This is why ASADA and WADA are in no way affiliated with a sporting body. They don't care if they damage the brand of the AFL or the EFC. They will stick to their rules and regulations regardless. The AFL may well try to influence them to not punish the players, but when Watson comes out and admits he knew what he was taking he's doing nobody any favours. With the precedents they have already set and the fact that they tend to go harder at bigger targets, I think they are going to shock us all with how harsh they can be.

What is Whelan doing these days? Does he want to coach?

As Neeld said, was he supposed to draft 14 new kids? They moved on that many, they had to get more from somewhere. They got the best mature players they could. A case could be made for not getting rid of the players he did, but his job was to cut out the cancer and that's what he did. I said at the time that he shouldn't have been going so hard at Pedo, but plenty of others said he would be a great pickup, so it's not like he was a known spud. I seem to recall someone saying that Gillies was a great athlete and would be playing on the wing for us this year with his speed and skills. I really like what Rodan has been doing around the club if not on the field. Byrnes, not so much. He seems to have folded under the extra pressure.

Even if he thought he was allowed to take it, this should be a two year ban. Once again, look at Wade Lees. I'd say that given the way they handled Lees they will hit Watson pretty hard here. He's admitting that he knew what he was taking. It doesn't matter that he didn't know it was banned. This puts him in a worse category than Lees who imported a banned substance on the advice of the club doctor but never got to take it.

He played on Sam Mitchel for a short time. I know this because I loved his confidence in taking him on and running right past after taking a mark.

Fair enough. Not sre I'd want to give up our pick 2, but you do have a point that his existence will add value to that pick for some sides.

This chasing after a reluctant coach has too much of the Saints' debacle about it. They threw money at Blight until he caved and agreed to coach them, but his heart wasn't in it and he clashed with the board pretty much from day 1. I don't think we would get any more out of it than they did. Better to have someone who wants to be here.

We'd have to sit on him for a year then. Could very easily turn into a Melbourne FC-style disaster if he was injured or got wind of the fact that we only drafted him to trade him on. I see far too much potential for disaster in that plan.

You'd be right. Found the link. He played for St Pats and NT in the u18 champs. Also says he was at St Pats on a tennis scholarship.

The Boyd situation is interesting. He's rated so highly, but the sides likely to have the first two picks have no need of another tall forward. He could very easily slip to three. He won't drop further as both the Saints and Doggies need a forward badly. It's really going to put the "Best Available" line to the test.

I would love to see a player with his talent in the side, but I do have one concern. There was an article about him a while ago that talked about how he has settled down since moving in with his girlfriends family, and how much stability they have provided him. I have to wonder if he would backslide when removed from that environment. I have no doubt that he is serious about his AFL dream, but does he have the discipline to keep his act together off the field when his entire support network is taken away? I have a feeling that he could wind up being a freeby for one of the WA-based teams.

I may be wrong here, but he didn't play in the representative sides did he? Wasn't he just playing for his school last year? That would account for his slower than usual development having to start from significantly further back.

I don't think it's bias so much as a soft target. They tend to avoid hitting players from the big clubs with harsh penlties because they know that those clubs will fight back hard and have the clout to do so. They see the same act by a Melbourne player and have no hesitation in slugging them with a huge penalty because there is a perception that we will not make much of a fuss and lack the clout in terms of media personalities and power-brokers to make anything of it. Do you believe that a Collingwood player would have been given three weeks for a tackle like Trengove was? Eddie would have crucified them on radio and TV, and his friends would have joined in. Likewise, when Beamer was given two games for high contact when the replay clearly showed that he failed to connect with the player at all. Jack Ziebell from the Roos is another. Then there is the traditional injury to Sylvia in the pre-season that is never cited. This is simply another example. It's easy for the MRP and the tribunal to show the world that they are taking a stand against high contact by being overly harsh on a player from a weak club, and it buys them a little more room to avoid doing it to someone from a club that might be able to fight back. What I want to see from the club is the willingness to not just appeal an overly harsh call, but to make NOISE about it. This is one reason I want a more prominent president. We need to be able to make a hell of a lot of noise about issues so that they can't be discretely ignored by the AFL. We need leaders at the club who will fight over every issue and raise hell if the AFL even try to ignore them. This is one (but only one) of the reasons I liked the idea of Jeff being involved with the board. He has a massive public profile and when he speaks people listen.

Out: Spencer and Pado In: Frawley and Gawn. Nice and simple. We keep the structures the same but swap out for a better defender and a slightly less able ruck (although I think he might be a better forward). Jamar would be a better match for Minson in the ruck, but I don't know what the status of his injury is.

We need to contest this. The MRP has made a habit of shafting the MFC at every opportunity. The club needs to put it's foot down and try to force them to do their job properly.

I think he should be in contention for an AA spot as a third KPD/Mid sized back. I think the closest he's come to being beaten this year was Cloke, he plays big or small as required,he's getting a lot of ball and is hurting opponents with his rebounding. Having a really great season.

I think the confusion here is a matter of what we are listening FOR. I don't care about how something is said. I listen for content. Most of the comments on here are praising the way Craig said things, not what he was actually saying. Content-wise, what did he say? Some players stood up, but the team as a whole needs to improve and our turnovers killed us. He singled out several younger players as having had good games. Exactly the same message, but delivered in a new way. He didn't mention inexperience. That would be the primary difference. His spin was perhaps more positive and his manner is much more casual and friendly, but as I said, I am interested in content, not style.

If the AFL are serious about their new guidelines for PP's then they won't see a better candidate than the MFC. However I really don't want one. I think the wish for one on the part of the board is a continuation of the thinking that led to the whole tanking saga. High picks are nice but by no means essential and I think it would be better for the club to minimise the handouts we take from the AFL right now. We are trying to improve the culture of the place. Take what any other team would be getting and make the most of it. Develop the players properly. That's what will see us improve.

Finally saw the game. I think there were a few individuals who stood up and showed something, but on the whole not a lot different from previous weeks. We still committed ritual suicide by turnover. Very impressed with Garland right now. He's leading the backline in every way, dominating opponents, directing teammates and generally being a huge presence. Tommy McDonald smashed Saint Nick. As far as I'm concerned he conceded one goal, given that the other two were disgraceful umpire calls that gifted him shots at point blank range. Pretty much every disposal Nick got was on the wing. Nate Jones continues to lead the midfield. It's all been said before, but he's having a great season. Sylvia looked good in patches (hasn't that been said before as well?) Watts had a real presence about him, just needs to work on his hands. He dropped a few easy marks that would have turned into scoring shots. We can't afford to be dropping the uncontested ones. BIG step forward for Spencer. He's finally showing that he might make it. Fitz not as big a step, but an improvement over last week. Loved his pass to Jones. Clisby was pretty decent for a first game.