The Chazz

Always had the potential to be a star once he found his right level. Looks like he might have found it.

Having 3 tall forwards on a regular basis never hurts, especially when one runs like a whippet (Watts), one can run all day (McDonald) and one is a potential superstar (Hogan). The only ones it does hurt are opponents that don't have enough tall defenders to cover them all.

He's everything in a forward that Jeremy Howe wanted to be.

A great example of quality not quantity. Doesn't get huge numbers, but he kicks goals, pressures and tackles hard, gets to the right spots and can take a mark. Ticks a lot of boxes for mine moving forward.

From the two teams above, it looks like a lot will depend on JKH and Harmes' form over the coming weeks. Either of them would be considered our "22nd player" in my view, which, when you use the "quality of your bottom 6" argument, we're almost getting to a side that will be a serious contender. That said, I think either of the above sides are more than capable of winning finals this year. The surprise packet for me is Hannan. Hasn't he done a terrific job to cement a spot in our 18?

Vince won't get dropped this week, he will be needed to tag Sloane. Actually, he won't be dropped the week after, or the week after that, or the week...you get my drift.

Womens tennis is good for one thing, and one thing only. But that one thing is not so good for my eyesight so I have been told. On the flip side, I could hear a cat fart 3 blocks down from my place.

It can happen. With results going against us, we can be 9th at the end of the round. With results going in our favour, we can land in 4th. I don't remember such an even top 11. Perhaps it's mostly because, other than last year, we haven't been in the top 11 for ever!

Last week was a far bigger game in the lead up. It would've put us equal 4th, maybe even top 4, and a game ahead of the pack. Not only that, it would've put us 2 games ahead of Sydney. Because that all didn't happen, now this week has become huge. But it wouldn't have had the significance if we had got up last week.

It's a bigger game than the Sydney one because we didn't beat Sydney.

Luckily, because you're failing dismally!

All due respect, I'd take Dill's comments about 10 years of service, as well as Fahour's statement of 10 years, over a LinkedIn profile. Even if he was in the role for just under 5 years, you're talking about 4 weeks suspension over that period. It's possible he hadn't had any suspensions prior to that, and equally, if he had 4 weeks "accrued" prior to starting, it means he has been "clean" for 4 years. Either way you look at it Bub, you're trying to stitch up an individual (or two if you include Dill), as well as an entire organisation, with a wet tissue strength argument. I'm all for this bloke getting his just deserts, but get it right before you starting tying the noose.

I'm presuming the first question from the defence to the plaintiff would be about his involvement in the melee. I hope for his (the plaintiff) and his family's sake that he has had some top notch legal advice.

https://audioboom.com/posts/6080317-gillon-mclachlan-press-conference-afternoons Gill mentions 10 years work in his presser. So, going back to his original job interview (approx 2007), I doubt after the asked about his strengths, that they would've asked how many weeks he has been rubbed out for in his career. Further to that, since he started at the AFL (2007), up until the end of the 2016 season, he's been rubbed out for a total of 4 weeks. 4 weeks is 9 years. I would've started asking questions about his onfield behaviour about Monday of this week, and not a moment earlier (that's if you want to be realistic about it).

Is that how long he had worked at the AFL?

When was he first employed by the AFL? I thought I heard he had been there for 10 years? If it is 10, that means that by the time you take away the 14 week suspension from this week, as well as the 3 games from earlier this year, that since 2008, he'd been suspended for a total of 4 weeks. Is 4 weeks suspension over a 10 year period enough to ask questions at a job interview? Wouldn't have thought.

How good is that commentary of AFL Nation? And how poor is Dill's brother? Also, take a look at the footy smarts of Jeffy. Had to position himself the best while at the same time read Jack's mind. His (Jeffy) inclusion this week is big.

Thanks mate. Just can't see them risking him this week, especially with bigger forwards to contend with next week.

A report on how Frost trains would be appreciated. Had hammy issues during last week's game. Yes, played the game out, but given how current state with soft tissue injuries, I'd be surprised if they risked Frosty. Could be a simple Frost out, TMac to CHB, Weed comes in.

And if you spell Radar backwards, he's still Radar.

Given that the table only shows data from this year and the 2016 season, I'm not sure how you can claim that their fans dropped off in the past couple of seasons. They absolutely would've dropped off last year given they fielded a seriously compromised team, so the % increase this year was always going to be higher. Happy for you to show data of the 2015-2013 crowd averages to support your case.

It will be amazing how many people won't "get" this post. Great post Smokie.

Where do we stop with this though, SWYL? Take a look through the list of names that are HOF members, there's many a thug on the list. But also look at some of the other names that have been involved in offield events, such as Carey, Ablett, Lockett. If we are to question the right of Hall being in the HOF, we have to be consistent and question anyone that has priors. Consistency is what we are asking of the AFL, it's only fair that they could ask the same of us.

Thought it was quite a good presser from Dill. We live in a world where everyone wants answers now. There wasn't a great deal the AFL could do until a process had played out. That said, the next logical step is to review the process (i.e. why does it take days for the tribunal to sit?). Will Dill do this? Doubtful.

I'm almost admitting defeat in the midfield. If our backline can hold strong, and we can get them on the rebound, it should be enough to see us get over the line.