MadAsHell

I agree that the senate needs a partial overhaul and that you should win at least 5% of the Primary vote to get in, otherwise it's a system that's worked us well up until now. As for Palmer holding the country to ransom, he has 2 seats. Liberal Party will have 33, Family First 2 (and lets face it, their just the right wing faction of Liberal), Labor 25, Greens 10 and then we've got the Motor Enthusiast, Sports Party, Democratic Liberal Party (Gun nut) and the experienced independent Nick Xenophon. It's up to the Liberal Party to convince Family First (easy enough) and the 4 of Nick Xenophon, Motor Enthusiast, Sports Party and DLP that what they want to pass is just and for the good of the country and there's no issue. No holding the country to ransom by Palmer or negative politics by Labor or The Greens, after all that's the Liberal Party's game anyway. Anyway that's how the senate's suppose to work, it's suppose to be up to some smaller parties who can look at things from a different perspective to decide whether what the government want passed, should be passed. What you seem to be thinking is a good idea is a dictatorship... I'm sure Christopher Pine would agree with you there, however that never seems to work out to well. Anyway, if it wasn't for the Liberal Party (& Meg Lees of course) the Democrats would probably of still been a viable option and held anywhere from 4-6 of the 8 remaining senate seats, held the balance of power and we wouldn't have the mess of a senate that we're seeing now. Make no mistake, this can be linked back to the GST first being introduced. Oh and by the way, I voted Greens in the senate Robbie, as at least I know they're not going to just rubber stamp anything that comes through whether it's Labor or Liberal in power. If Democrats were still a viable option I would have voted for them however.

Who would you have liked them to preference instead Robbie? The biggots at Family First? Their direct opposition in the Liberal/National party? Or maybe the racists at One Nation or Rise up Australia Party??? Since the Liberals (and Meg Lees of course) killed off the Democrats, Labor & The Greens could throw a blanket over the rest as to who and what order they should preference in. I was upset that I had to number the Palmer United member number 4 on election Day when I was doing my house of reps card with 9 options. But I sure as hell wasn't going to preference any of the other 5 options ahead of them.

Geelong & GWS may look at Jolly for a short term option, but can't really see anyone else picking him up.

I agree with you Choke, unfortunatly though media being fair and balanced went out of fashion a long time ago to the extent we see it across all forms of news from politics to sport to world affairs. They're all pushing their own agenda.

Final paragraph from The Age's open letter in their editorial in today's paper page 20. "The Age believes in economic and social progress, in liberty and justice, in equality and compassion, and openness of government. We believe the role of government is to build a strong, fair nation for future generations, and not to pander to sectional interests. It is with these values in mind that we endorse the Labor Party in this important election." You can read the full letter here: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-age-editorial/labors-policies-best-reflect-our-values-20130905-2t828.html Couldn't of said it any better myself. We'll see what tomorrow brings....

I've gone with Fitzy,a s he's gone from certain delister to someone Roos himself has said he'd have in our 22. Strong argument for Garland though.

Lindsay in NSW up against Fiona Scott. He doesn't think the traffick's as bad as she does...

Paul Roos has turned down the Melbourne job to take on an even bigger challenge: Leader of the Labor Party. Labor are hoping that with his sudden appointment as PM, it will help boost their popularity to victory on Saturday. Roos will be sworn in as PM and cast his vote simultaneously on Saturday morning...

Wel Maccas had to go to VCAT to get permission to build because the council rejected the bid. It's the councils job to represent their community so to answer your question. No, the people of Tecoma don't want Maccas there.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/667951.html White no longer Victorian captain and Matthew Wade now has the job. Shipperd trying to give Wade some leadership experience to get him back into the Australian XI do we think?

I get the point you're making rpfc. The logic behind my thinking is I'd much rather see us use those early picks on mids andalthough Davis is no world beater, he has displayed a lot of Chip's qualities at VFL level. Speed, run off half back, good spoiler, good mark and hard at the contest. Also in case of injury we'd have a mature body that can come into the team, compared to say picking a kid at pick 60 who's only 18 and weighs in under 80kg.

Davey = Retired Rodan = Retired MacDonald = Retired Sellar = Delist (if Pedersen wasn't on a 3 year deal would probably of stayed in favour of) Gillies = Delist Jetta = Delist Nicholson = Delist Magner ® = Delist Couch ® = Delist Davis to get a 1 year deal in case we were to loose Frawley at the end of 2014. Taggert & Tynan also given 1 year deals and told they're on notice for 2014. Trade bait: Watts (if Roos comes on board will be more likely to stay), Blease, Tapscott but wouldn't be against keeping them all to see what Roos can do. Free Agent: Sylvia (still think he'll stay) Hogan comes onto the senior list which leaves us with 6 senior spots and 2 rookie spots to fill. If we get a priority Pick (Pick 1) Trades both picks 1 & 3 for two of Sloane, Rockliff, Swallow or Fyfe. And sign Cross as a free agent. Go to the national draft with 3 live picks. Two mids and 1 KPD (after Frawley, Garland, McDonald not much depth there) and rookie draft with 2 picks. (Long term ruck prospect and maybe a mature age KPF in case of injury issues with Clark & Dawes. I like Khan Haretuku in the VFL.)

Pick 1 to Adelaide for Sloane Pick 3 to Brisbane for Rockliff Would be swapping of other picks in there of course, but that would be the crust of what I'd be looking to do.

Ray Bright was a reasonable bowler jazza, but 53 wickets in 25 tests @ 41.13 isn't anything to get to excited about. In fact we've never had a left arm spinner get to 100 test wickets and I'm pretty sure Hugh Trumble is the only right arm off break bowler we've had that has got past 100 test wickets and his last test match was in 1904! As Rhino said Australian conditins suit the leg break spinners which is why our best spinners Warne, O'Reilly, Grimmett, Benaud and MacGill were all leg break bowlers. Trumble being the exception of course. This is why Fawad Ahmed is probably our best prospect at the moment, however going forward look out for the development of both Adam Zampa who's now on South Australia's list and should hopefully get more Shield matches there and James Muirhead for Victoria, who if Fawad Ahmed is selected for Australia, should get some opportunities with the Vics. Although he'll have to battle for a spot with John Holland. Muirhead had a very good season in district cricket last summer.

That's a pretty fair call Rhino, and history backs you up. As all of our best spinners have been wrist spinners rather then finger spinners. The only really good finger spinner we've ever had that I can think of is Hugh Trumble from several eras back. Where as on the flip side there's the likes of Warne, O'Reilly, Grimmett, Benaud, MacGill etc. And elsewhere I find this really sad: http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/the-ashes/brett-lee-calls-for-reinstatement-of-mitchell-johnson-to-australian-test-side/story-e6frf3gl-1226705909564 Clearly Brett Lee has lost his grip on reality and he needs to be supported by close friends and well wishes to make sure he gets back to a much better mental state and isn't as dilusional as he clearly is right now....

Not wrong Jazza, I found a link to that article here: http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/the-ashes/stuart-macgill-says-fawad-ahmed-should-be-picked-for-ashes-tour-if-he-gets-an-australian-passport/story-e6frf3gl-1226613791486 I'm pretty confident he is Rhino. In his last 3 (being his first) Shield games of the season he took 16 wickets @ 28.38, two games at the G and one at Belrieve, neither of which are traditional spin friendly wickets like Sydney or Adelaide. He did then struggle in his first two games with Australia A against Ireland and Glousta over in the UK in pretty ordinary conditions it must be said. Could possibly be put down to nerves also. However in his last three First Class matches, one against a full strength Zimbabwe XI and the other two against a pretty handy South Africa A side he took 15 wickets @ 22.67. Lyon will get first crack in Australia, and rightly so, probably the first three tests (GABBA, Adelaide Oval & WACA) but if he fails to deliver I can see a Fawad Ahmed Boxing Day debut.

The laws for ASAD/WADA are actually different. You don't actually need a positive test to get banned or even 100% evidence. ASADA/WADA can hand out bans if they have enough circumstantial evidence. It's how they got Armstrong. Of course Essendon can then take it to court. But the burden of proof is actually different to say a criminal case where it has to be beyond reasonable doubt.

I still reckon Fawad Ahmed is better then Lyon. However I'm concerned that he's almost being set up to fail by playing in the upcoming ODI series as I think and his record suggest he's a much better bowler in the longer format of the game then the One Dayers. Still, if he starts the Shield season well then he'll give himself every opportunity. I just hope he doesn't miss a large chunk of it by getting picked in the One Day tour of India which starts the same time as the Shield season. Very poorly organised that one!

Thought I'd post the link to Malcom Conn's report card of our players for the series. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/cricket/news-corp-senior-cricket-writer-malcolm-conn-rates-the-performances-of-australias-ashes-squad/story-fni2usfi-1226704557575 Pretty fair you'd have to say. Thought maybe Rogers could have managed a 7 out of 10 rather then 6 maybe. Otherwise no real suprises. Mentions Haddin was great with the gloves but struggled with the bat. And still a question mark on Nathan Lyon I noticed despite his impressive performance at Durham. Makes me think that Lyon will need to perform in the first few tests (GABBA & Adelaide Oval) to avoid loosing his place to Agar (could come in for the WACA test) or Ahmed (could come in for Boxing Day) if they have good starts to the Shield season.

Amazing finish as the match ends with England needing 21 off 4 overs with 5 wickets in hand due to bad light: Stumps Day 5 Australia 1st Innings 9/492 dec S. Watson 176 J. Anderson 4/95 (29.5) England 1st Innings 377 J. Root 68 J. Faulkner 4/51 (19.4) Australia 2nd Innings 6/111 (In 23 overs!) M. Clarke 28* S. Braod 4/43 (10) England 2nd Innings 5/206 (Target 227 off 44 overs) K. Pietersen 62 R. Harris 2/21 (5) England not happy with Australia but after Manchester all I can say is karma's a b*tch! But well done England on winning the Ashes 3-0 and well done on coming to the party in that sporting chase we set up for you.

You're right HT, there's actually quite a few positives to come out of this tour. Apart from Lords it just seems we've lost the big moments in matches, crossed with some bad luck with the weather at both Old Trafford and here at The Oval. Looks as though we're going to see a draw here as after Englands positive start, their run rate has now dropped under 4. 154 needed off 27 overs and 9 wickets in hand but we'll see. I'll give the match till at least 20 overs remaining before I potentially give up.

Well done Brad Haddin on the keeper record for dismissals in a series. Great work and 9 more wickets to get in 38 overs! haha.

And news from cricinfo is that we have declared and England need 227 to win. Also because we did it over the tea break we don't loose 2 overs for switch over so England need 227 off 44 overs.

I don't necessarily think he's a poor captain. But I think he's very conservative and if they're to get to number 1 in the world for an extended period they need more attacking flair and be able to take more risks. I can't see them beating South Africa playing the cricket they play. And funnily enough I see more scope for improvement in our XI playing Clarke's brand of cricket compared to Englands XI and Cook's brand.

Tea on Day 5 Australia 1st Innings 9/492 dec S. Watson 176 S. Smith 138* J. Anderson 4/95 (29.5) G. Swann 2/95 (33) England 1st Innings 377 J. Root 68 K. Pietersen 50 J. Faulkner 4/51 (19.4) M. Starc 3/92 (33) Australia 2nd Innings 6/111 (In 23 overs!) M. Clarke 28* S. Watson 26 S. Braod 4/43 (10) J. Anderson 1/27 (6) Good on Clarke and Australia for pushing for a result. Lead is now 226 and if they declare over tea England will need 227 off 42 overs at just under 5.5 runs an over. Reckon we could see this happen. Poor form of Cook again not bowling Kerrigan. With the Aussies giving their wickets away chasing quick runs there was the perfect chance for the guy to get his first test wicket and some confidence. That's Cook's captaincy for you!