Dr. Mubutu

6. M Jones 5. Garland 4. Dunn 3. Tapscott 2. N Jones 1. Gawn

I must have blocked this game from my memory completely. The last time I recall playing Carlton is round 5, 2011, mainly because I was adhering to the stereotype and watching the game at a pub in Mount Beauty. That is, until I got kicked out for chucking a massive expletive-filled outburst at about halfway through the second quarter.

I'd say we are. Look for Footscray v Melbourne at the 'blockbuster' time of 4:40pm, Sunday September 1st.

The issue for mine is that we don't have a forward that clunks those marks outside of Clark and Dawes, who I wouldn't be rushing back against Carlton. Jamar and Pedersen are next to useless. Really, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

If this is true, why would a club that had just lost Nathan Bock and Phil Davis delist him?

FB: Strauss Frawley Garland HB: Grimes Dunn Terlich C: Evans M Jones Trengove HF: Tapscott Fitzpatrick Sylvia FF: Howe Watts Davey Foll: Gawn McKenzie N Jones Int: Viney Byrnes Blease Sub: Bail In: Strauss, Fitzpatrick, Viney, Dunn Out: Rodan, McDonald, Pedersen, Jamar How much worse could the real team be?

I think the fact they have Simon Black AT the club is a huge factor. The Lions have Simon Black to learn from, and train with. Who do we have? Col Sylvia. Until last year, Moloney. Great. This is exactly why the cultural change that this club is going through is absolutely the most important thing at the moment.

I'm not seeing this at all. Rivers provided decent disposal and a big body in the contests. Nicholson does neither. And as far as rotating goes, aren't Frawley, McDonald and Garland running at about 99% game time this year?

Actually, I forgot the first goal Brown kicked. If that one wasn't Jamar's fault for going to ground, then I'm not here.

63 I50's against, playing on their main spearhead (and a star forward, let's not sidestep that), and manages to keep him to three goals? Yeah, clearly not doing his job. I'm not entirely sure what you all want from him. Not much more he could do, short of punching some heads of our midfielders every time they screw up and allow yet another easy inside 50 for the opposition.

Can't wait for the excuses from the "Get Magner In" club when he has little/no more impact than those currently in the team come mid-season.

Yep, but have you actually tested its veracity?

Clearly fake. Everyone knows it's .co.uk. Not as good as the Cook Islands' country code, though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.ck

Gawn robbed of a GOTW nomination.

Obviously, neither will I. Perhaps I should be more accurate in my wording. Ironic, no?

Which, to my knowledge, and according to AD's comments, they didn't (technically) do. edit: I'm happy to be proven wrong, but none of the information anywhere here, or available publicly, says we misled the AFL, given the direction of questions.

And given Redleg has quoted the interview with AD, where has the club not been entirely truthful? They were asked: 'Was Stephen Dank approached or did Stephen Dank approach Melbourne or was there discussion around employment at the Melbourne Football Club?" The club answered truthfully, regardless of what was hidden. Dank applied for a position, but was knocked back. That was the answer given by the club. Nobody technically lied. It's not a good look, and Vlad's welcome to his position, but the question of contact with the club in any capacity was not asked. I'd like to see the 'rule' that AD is threatening that the club broke. If it's the old 'bringing the game into disrepute', I'd ask to see the Bombers get fined first.

I'm definitely NOT arguing that it was the right decision, in fact quite the opposite, but I can see why they may have approached it in the way they have. Simply trying to approach it from another perspective.

I think this is it. To come out and admit communications with Dank around the same time as the rumours were flying about Essendon and their supplement program, and official ASADA questioning, would clearly have led to the Club being drawn into that crisis, rightly or wrongly, regardless of whether Dank was injecting players with horse tranquilisers, or Bates was seeking advice on efficacy of vitamin tablets. As Young Dee alluded to in another thread, this statement was come up with quite quickly, as opposed to other missives released by the Club in recent times. I wouldn't be surprised if the club was, under its own steam, and at an opportune time for such an announcement, preparing to release this information regardless. Unfortunately, given the massive shellacking the Club has copped, between the 'tanking' fiasco, the awful start to the season, and all other media scuttlebutt around, they have (correctly, IMO) held off on this. It then blew up in their face, as Dank continues to run off scot-free. This is not to say that I don't have issues with the way it was handled, which I definitely do, and would've preferred more transparency from the club, but I can see some logic as to why it has played out like it has.

No need to be revisionist. Bruce walked.

Responsibility, accountability and transparency. 3 required ingredients that this club is sorely lacking.

Godwin's Law. Shut it down.

More of a 'Plato'....

Quoted for hilarity.

Not even just his goals, but his work before others'. Sploosh, but with semen.