Dr. Gonzo

So you saw a 2nd year player with only 25 games experience playing in the 17th side twice on TV and once in the flesh and are prepared to write him off completely as ever being able to be a decent player in the future? I am assuming one of those games you watched on TV was not the game against the Cats?

Yeah I don't get the Tebow move either especially if he's just gonna sit on the bench for all but about 4 snaps like he did last week. I'd love to see him in a different position like the RB where he can use his strengths to his advantage. Would keep opposition on their toes as well as they wouldn't know if be was going to be passing or running. Not all that confident against Miami but thinking we should be narrow favourites. They did touch us up in week 17 last year when Holmes cracked it in the huddle so who knows hoping for a win though because after that we have a tough 4-5 week stretch that includes both the Texans & 49ers though they are at home.

Got a 10 leg multi on Monday mornings games - for a $5 outlay looking at a $2700 return if it gets up. Left out my Jets because they're as schizophrenic as Melbourne were under Daniher so not a good team to bet on. Looking forward to Pats/Ravens and seeing how the Jets back up from last weeks debacle against Pitt. Loving RGIII at the moment though with those injuries last week and the fact theyre in a pretty tough division could make it difficult for them to get a playoff spot. Will be keeping an eye on them though.

Not better than Jones - Jones showed this year he is one of the most consistent midfielders in the comp, he can win his own ball, disposal has improved and he can kick goals. Vast improvement from where he started where he tried to bullock through everyone like a rugby player. Caddy would sit comfortably in our starting midfield though I feel. Better than Moloney and actually reminds me of a younger version of Sylvia though without the "off-field" issues. Is a strong player who can find his own ball and can hit the scoreboard. Haven't seen enough of him to really comment on his defensive side but I don't think there's much doubt he would make a better option than some of our starting 22 this year.

Well he was injured pretty much his entire first season. No-one is suggesting he will be a franchise player, but can he be a good 10-year midfielder who can kick goals and win his own ball? Absolutely.

He has proven he can play midfield in the AFL in a crap team against significantly better opposition most weeks. He has proven he has the body to match it with more senior players. And most importantly he has proven he can kick multiple goals a game, something which none of our midfielders bar maybe Jones is capable of to date. Is he Gary Ablett Jr.? No, and he's not even Nathan Jones, but getting him at pick 13 would be about right. It probably won't be enough though as I have a feeling either Carlton, Richmond or Saints will offer a pick just before ours and Geelong will also offer their inactive compo pick, something which is of worth to the Suns considering they have to downsize their list this year so they can bank the pick for next year.

Pretty harsh when it was spelt out in the post above he's been coming to terms with the aftermath of losing his father. Pretty rough on a kid forced to move interstate at the age of 17 and leave his grieving family behind.

Not if Melbourne, Richmond, Carlton or St. Kilda are willing to offer their first round picks. There is no doubt Essendon want him but they have nothing to trade so it is unlikely they'll get him. A hypothetical 3-way trade could occur with Geelong offering up picks, Tippett going to GC and Caddy to Geelong. Still think we should go hard for him though.

But that's what I'm saying. If he was rated a pick 7 two years ago then how can we make the assumption the player rated as pick 13 this year is going to be a much better prospect. Caddy hasn't dominated games but he has had a couple of very good games playing in a very poor side. He is also the exact type of player we need and has a couple of years in the system something a potential pick 13 would not. Would I rather get Bennell or Swallow from GC? Of course but theyre not on the market and if they were it would cost much more than pick 13.

Caddy is a big bodied midfielder who has decent pace and a decent tank with good disposal and can hit the scoreboard. Would definitely take him for Martin or pick 13 & Bail. If we baulk at getting him because we don't want to get rid of Bail I would be extremely [censored] off with the club it would be another massive blunder. I think people overrate draft picks, a lesson I would have thought we'd have learnt of recent times. Caddy went pick 7 two years ago and has had a couple of good games - there is nothing to indicate pick 13 this year is going to be a vastly better player and Caddy already has two years in the system. If its one thing our club is crying out for it is midfielders who can kick goals. Jones is currently our only one (but not multiple goals a game) and hopefully Trengove will get there too. Caddy can kick multiple goals a game which is something we could sorely use.

No I think you misread my post or I was unclear - I just said people who wanted to vote were locked out and unable to, I didn't make any guesses as to their intention.

There were members not allowed in who wanted to vote and there were also "proxy" memberships bought up by wealthy Melbourne supporters and used to vote for the merger. If Hawthorn voted for the merger they would have faced a lengthy court challenge to get the new team up.

Does anyone have any video or audio footage of stuff from around the time of the proposed merger? I know there is a Hawks supporter on BF who has a collection of news clippings/video reports etc about Hawthorn as well as the pro-mergerpamphlet which I have downloaded somewhere. I have the merger match downloaded but would like to get my hands on any news reports, interviews, footage from the Dallas Brooks Hall/Camberwell Civic Centre etc as I have always thought about trying to make a documentary on the proposed merger someday. If anyone has any footage PM me I have tonnes of games on VHS/DVD that I can trade for. The only footage I have seen from the nights of the votes is just snippets shown on TV at the time and the brief footage shown on That Was The Season That Was 1996.

This is an ugly period in our history but it was now 16 years ago - hopefully we can all acknowledge that both sides were trying to do what they thought was right for the MFC and move forward as a united club as we all know the club needs all the support it can get.

Yeah anyone who thinks we would have just absorbed the Hawks players and changed back to the red & blue Demons after 5 years would have been in for a rude shock. It would have ended in legal battles that would have shattered the already politically fractured new club. The old Fitzroy crew took Brisbane to court just because they wanted to change the kind of Lion they had on the jumper, do you really think the Hawthorn component would have just let us change back to the Demons and get rid of the yellow? Not to mention our entire history would have been wiped (go and check how many flags are recorded in the history books for the Bribane Lions).

Oh please, if a player can't cop a spray from a coach we might as well just all give up. He is a paid professional athlete getting paid very good money to run around and kick a ball. He's not a primary school kid FFS.

I was only 14 at the time but can remember reading the papers about it as well watching the voting meetings on Talking Footy or whatever it was. There may have been vitriol shown but they were trying to destroy our club so of course people were emotional. Would love to see footage from that night if available (from both Camberwell Civic Centre & Dallas Brooks Hall) as well as news clips from the time - would make an interesting doco (in the style of 30 for 30) particularly considering the Merger Match in R22.

TD didn't hijack the thread, the thread had already evolved into a general discussion on drugs, their impact on society and how society deals with the drug question. The thread is about a former champion player addicted to drugs who has now been arrested. TD's post is well within those parameters.

It also reduces the amount of violent crime, by the users to fund their habit and by the pushers to maintain their turf. The problem is while certain governments are able to fund their covert wars through black budgets funded in part by the illicit drug trade there is no hope of decriminalisation on a large scale. It is also an extremely convenient method of depriving people of their civil rights on the basis of labelling them a "suspected drug user". The thing with keeping all "recreational" drugs prohibited is that humanity is also deprived of the many benefits that some of these substances could provide. Marijuana has so many benefits that are well documented that it is a crime to keep it illegal. The fact that research into other drugs such as psilocybin, LSD & MDMA is halted by the criminalisation of them has probably put psychiatry back decades. I am convinced that the guided and educated use of hallucinogens can help people with addictions or other minor mental "illnesses" (for lack of a better word) far better than current psychology/psychiatry and the drugs they peddle on behalf of companies like Pfizer which are far more dangerous and addictive than many prohibited substances.

It wouldn't surprise me if most of these drugs are developed by US intelligence/military related industries - they already feed their pilots (and probably other armed forces) "dextroamphetamine" i.e. speed to enable them to perform long missions at optimum level. Diet pills are also basically "speed" which suppresses a persons appetite. Drugs are everywhere and I agree that the issue needs to be addressed in an intelligent way rather than just illegal bad, legal good manner. I think what is being fed to us in our food and what is prescribed by GP's/psych's is of far greater importance, particularly when people either don't know what they are consuming or are relying on someone else's "expertise" to make the decisions for them.

Yeah I understand that and I'm not having a go at you, just using this as an example. Many kids are exposed to drugs by the age of 14-15 and are just as ill informed about making a decision. I know there were some kids in my school who had tried marijuana before they had even finished primary school. The problem is around education I agree but even that counts for nought sometimes when confronted by your peers and the invincibility of youth. Just saying drugs are bad and shouldn't be touched is counter-productive because once a kid tries marijuana at the age of 14 or 15 and realises there isn't much wrong with it and they are not going to die it increases the chances they will then try something a bit "harder" because they think, well if I was lied to about this drug they're probably lying about all drugs.

I see many people on here commenting that they have no empathy or compassion for Cousins for whatever reason - but they miss the point that this isn't about someone seeking public approval, empathy or compassion. This is a man (still young) who has personal demons to battle which is made even more difficult by being in the public eye and having an ego fuelled by too many slaps on the back and wry smiles from a young age because he can run and kick an inflated piece of leather. I don't see him out there pleading for your approval so why do people on here feel the need to use the opportunity for their self-righteous moralising and judgment? It really is egotistical of them Just to pick out one argument, RobbieF commented on having given up the drink but also stating he can't understand why someone would inject or swallow something that is potentially harmful. The fact is regardless of having now given up booze you did pick up a drink for the first time once so you would know exactly why someone would inject or swallw something that is potentially harmful. You were lucky enough that your drug of choice was easier to give up than some others which create a greater chemical dependence due to the foreign nature of the chemicals used to our biology. Some drugs the body absorbs and processes better than others for this reason which is why it is more difficult for someone on speed to go cold turkey than someone who is on weed or MDMA. This is a broader social issue but the facts coming in are that prohibition doesn't work. There are many reasons but taking this one in particular, question why does speed/meth even exist? It's a cheap, easy to make substitute for cocaine. If natural drugs like weed, opium, psilocybin, coca were decriminalised or god forbid legalised it would take out a massive market for other prohibited drugs which are more potent & more addictive and are used to fund violent gangsters, dictatorships and even coups, assassinations and terrorism of the CIA who is one of the biggest drug runners in the world. When the Afghan war started Afghan opium accounted for about 7% of world supply - it now makes up somewhere around 92%. Same thing happened during the Vietnam War. This is why drugs remain illegal and why the chances of them ever being decriminalised are slim to none while the current world order remains.

On one hand that's right - but I don't think he's really asking for anyone's compassion or understanding is he? Addiction is an illness, albeit one that is self-imposed. Everyone has their demons and it doesn't really matter what your background is. I doubt he had his first line thinking it would end up like it has the last few years. I can understand the judgments that get thrown around because at the end of the day the addicts problem is self-inflicted and s/he has control over his own destiny with every action he takes. But once you fall into the habit (and it is very much to do with habit as well as chemical dependence) it can be a very difficult cycle to break. Thats all well and good but there's a reason the "Just Say No" crowd and the drug war has failed. The fact is all drugs are different. Alcohol is one of the most destructive drugs around but it is legal. Caffeine and sugar are drugs that invade most processed foods that we consume in western society. Drugs like LSD and psilocybin have many beneficial uses if the user is educated about them. Meanwhile drugs like heroin and meth have no real benefits whatsoever though are highly addictive due to the euphoric feelings they give you immediately and which you keep chasing after the first hit looking to recreate that feeling. So you can tell your kids that drug users are stupid and they should just stay away as drugs are dangerous but what happens when they have a puff on a joint and realise that its relatively harmless? How do you reconcile the fact that alcohol & tobacco are both dangerous/deadly but legal while marijuana and MDMA are no worse (and in many cases better) but are illegal? This is why "Just Say No" doesn't work because kids are smart and quickly realise that it is [censored]. This doesn't mean you should condone your kids taking drugs or even tell them it's up to them or there are no dangers with drugs, but education is better than simply telling them all drugs are bad and deadly and drug users are stupid because odds are they will have at least one friend if not a number of friends who end up at least experimenting with drugs at some stage.

Wow what an insane game this morning great win to the 9ers thought they hadn't capitalised enough on the Saints early TO's but to come back with only a minute or so on the clock and score a touchdown when it looked certain that a FG would send it into OT was just crazy. Bit let down by the game afterwards but hopefully tomorrows games will have some more great action for us - just a pity the Jets aren't involved this year its not quite the same when you're watching from the sidelines.

Richie Vandenberg