bananas

After the commentators had drooled over the size of Fogarty for the whole first half, to see Viney literally throw him off after picking the ball up was GLORIOUS. Somebody GIF it for me, pretty please!!!

That thirty metre handpass to Trac in space which led to Hogan's 5th goal? Yeah … that was better than any [censored] kick.

Renewed yesterday, chose Nev Jetta for the player on my membership card. The smartest thing the club ever did was start putting the 'Consecutive Years Membership' on the cards, there's no way in hell I'm breaking my streak. (And I suspect, as the sour taste in people's mouths lessens the closer we get to the 2018 season, most die-hards will do the same. Might take a little longer than usual for some, and tbh I couldn't blame anyone for that.)

Hahaha … oh wait, you're serious? That's a completely ridiculous (and monstrously selfish) argument. Imagine for a second that the situation was completely reversed. Gay people can legally marry, and straight people can't. In that scenario, would you seriously think that your rights as a straight person weren't being impeded? Would you seriously make the case that "I have the right to marry, I'd just have to marry a man"?* Of course you wouldn't. So … have a little imaginative empathy, and put yourself in their shoes. Also, on the "nobody's rights are impeded because (gay) men can still marry women" thing ... So … somewhere between 0.01% (low end estimate) and 1.7% (high end estimate) of babies born are born either A) without genitals/gonads/hormones that aren't identifiably male or female; or B) with a combination of chromosomes other than a simple 'XX' or 'XY'. Those people are called 'Intersex', it's the 'I' in LGBTQIA, and it's a well-documented medical fact. To borrow your phrase, that IS "existing biology." Here's the wikipedia article to get you started. So those people, neither men nor women, have no right to marry anyone at all? Even if we accept the logic of 'gay people could legally get married to people they aren't attracted to', some people's rights still ARE being impeded by specifying "between a man and a woman" in the marriage act. I'm in favour of equality. To be otherwise is monstrously selfish. *I'm assuming Wrecker45 is a straight man. If I'm incorrect in that assumption, I apologise.

Person A: "I demand the right to (do X). I ALSO demand that Person B NOT have the right to (do X)." There aren't many circumstances in which Person A is in the right to think this way. At its heart, it's really just monstrously selfish.

Being a realist, it's very very very very very unlikely we're going to win the premiership this year. That being the case, I wouldn't mind playing Sydney in Sydney, because that's the kind of finals experience that will hold all our players in good stead in the coming years. And hey, given our form interstate. maybe we'd even give them a shake ... Still, let's just make it first, eh?

6. Hogan 5. Hibberd 4. Pedersen 3. Melksham 2. Jones 1. Oliver

Because of the percentage gap to Port and Sydney, for us to overtake either of them and get a home final, one of them would need to drop both of their remaining games. In round 23 Port play GC and Sydney play Carlton, so it's hard to see either scenario eventuating. Realistically, seventh is the best we can aim for. Of those two, I'd MUCH rather play Port in the first week than Sydney, so if the Swans do lose to the Crows on Friday night, we need to be barracking for the Dogs to beat Port on Saturday, otherwise Port move to 5th, Sydney drops to 6th, and we're (likely) off to the SCG. That's contingent, of course, on us winning both of our remaining games. The absolute best case scenario would be if us, the Swans and Port all win in the last two rounds, and Richmond drop one (they've got Freo over there and the Saints at the MCG). In that scenario, Richmond are 6th and we're 7th, and the stage is set for a blockbuster MCG elimination final. Given the abysmal form of the Dockers and Saints, I doubt it would happen, but it's Richmond, so you never know.

A strange quirk of the draw this week is that the top nine teams on the ladder are all playing against the bottom nine teams on the ladder. This would be absolutely the wrong week for any of the top teams to drop a game as it's likely that most of the teams around you on the ladder will be winning. Must. Win. Game.

Three games against top four sides. Three games against bottom four sides. And the Saints game. The optimist in me pencils in four wins and hopes for an upset against at least one of Crows, Power, or GWS to (possibly) get us a home final in the first week. If that win comes against the Power, it *may* be enough for us to leapfrog them (despite their percentage) and really challenge for the top four. But then the pessimist in me sees North and Pies as loseable games, and if the Saints play like they did this weekend then we could easily get done there too. I was playing around with the Ladder Predictor this morning, and this season is too crazy, with too many possible permutations left, to make any kind of predictions this far out. This season is INSANE.

I'm old enough to remember Monica Seles being stabbed by a 'fan' during a match. There is absolutely no excuse for even 'incidental' contact, and when the MFC make a statement on this incident, I hope that's exactly what they say. That's the only reply this [censored] deserves.

Just watched the replay of the 2nd quarter, and jeez I wish they'd show it at normal speed again when they're talking about it. The slow-mo replay makes his fall look ridiculous; the initial camera angle, playing at normal speed, it's obvious that it's a completely natural reaction. There's 100% nothing to see here. Any boxing or MMA fan has seen guys drop in exactly the same way a hundred times.

Fair play to McGovern, not much more he could have done. Can't say the same about the three other West Coast players standing in the goal square watching. Reckon Tommy was stood up in the tackle long enough for at least one of them to arrive and snuff it completely.

6. Viney. The perfect captain's game. 5. TMac. One vote for each goal. 4. Maxy. Welcome back, son! Best tap ruckman in the game, by a long, long way. 3. Vince. Played a solid game, then came into his own in the fourth. Some brilliant attacking kicks out of the back fifty when we really needed to push. 2. Oliver. A bit down early (relative to his usual standards), but stepped up at the stoppages when we needed him. 1. Pedo. Quiet until the last, but got to give him love for those handful of perfect touches. That kick to Tommy for the second last goal? I could marry that kick. Unlucky: ANB, Harmes, Hannan, Jetta.

That was incredible. Hands still shaking, heart still pumping like I'm Phar Lap and I'm rounding the last bend, smile still as wide as the Bolte bloody Bridge. TMac and Pedo were both immense in those last ten minutes, but it was Viney and Oliver around the ball who truly won it for us. All through that incredible arm wrestle of stoppage after stoppage on their half forward flank, as the clock ticked from four minutes down to two, I just knew, I just f'ing KNEW, that we would be the team to break free and take the ball away. And who was it? Viney, to Oliver, and away. Brilliant, both of them. Credit to West Coast, they're tougher than I thought … but credit to us, we're even tougher still. How long since you could say that about the Demons? God, I love it.

Fact is, not one game we've lost this year has been lost because of the back six. We still need another four or five guys who can RELIABLY play in the midfield and/or play a role running between the arcs, and who can maintain an AFL standard of both skills and intensity from week to week. Some of those four or five might be on the list already (I have hopes for Brayshaw, Stretch, ANB, Harmes, Kent, Bugg, etc.) but until a bunch of them prove their worth week after week after week, we're still going to have those down games that cost us dearly. And it's not gonna be the fault of the defence.

AFL live. I might be a sucker, but I shelled out.

Just re-watched the 3rd quarter (because why not?), and just quietly, Frost had one of the most pivotal moments of the entire match. Two minutes into the third, no score for either team since half-time, we're still down ten points, and the Crows had one of their few moments of slicing through the centre square with ease, leading to a high quality kick inside fifty from Sloane to Tex Walker in space. It looked a mark for sure, but then Frosty closed the last five metres at speed, put a big spoil on, kept his feet and outran Walker to the ball, then turned him inside out and got a clean kick away. It was absolutely brilliant defensive work. If Walker had marked and goaled, we'd have been 16 points down, instead we took it up the other end (with a little pause for Hunt to knock himself out along the way) and TMac goaled. Classic two goal turnaround, and it all started with Sam.

6. Jetta 5. TMac 4. Salem 3. Garlett 2. Jones 1. Oliver

How's this for a missed opportunity? If the Crows hadn't kicked those two late goals last week, we'd already be ahead of them on percentage. Currently: Dees / points for: 258 / points against: 183 / % = 141.0 Crows / points for: 221 / points against: 139 / % = 159.0 Take those two goals off our points against and their points for, you get: Dees / pf: 258 / pa: 171 / %: 150.9 Crows / pf: 209 / pa: 139 / %: 150.4 Obviously the GWS game is the real missed opportunity, we could have the GF spot wrapped up already. But jeez, if we miss, we're going to miss by such a fine margin.

Only watched the first half of the replay, but one thing I've noticed that has gone uncommented about on here, is the excellent pressure put on Carlton as they rebounded out of their defensive 50 by our makeshift half forwards. Neal-Bullen in particular was great with tackles, pressuring, smothering, and just generally making a nuisance of himself, but JKH, Harmes and vandenBerg all had moments of defensive excellence too. I'll still be surprised if ANB plays round one, but at this point I won't be *that* surprised.

Credit where credit is due, fair play to Carlton for coming out after 3 quarter time---with their season hanging by a thread, some key players out injured, and no momentum in the game at that point---and really having a go at us. Brave effort from them. Glad it came up short though!

Ah, cheers for setting me straight.

Aye, but I thought I read somewhere (if it was on here, could easily have been inaccurate!) that any banned player could choose to leave the bombers as a free agent if they didn't want to go back. Seems a bit rough to force players to go back to the club that screwed them over so badly.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if the clock runs out on the Hibberd deal, can't we get him for nothing as he's able to leave the bombers as a free agent? If so, that changes who holds the cards, and the bombers should be the ones to blink. (I also don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that sitting out a year of footy has lessened his value.)