DeeSpencer

Went to Hobart on a footy trip a few years ago. They stopped letting anyone in to pubs with Victorian ID because they thought we were all trouble. I can only presume they don't like footy in Tasmania.

He'd be the main option. Garland and Grimes the other ones, especially Garland if he doesn't have to play tall, he did a pretty good job on Ablett when Ablett played forward for a fair part of the game we played against them up there in late 2013. Of course he was in much better form then.

I don't know the particulars but I don't like the idea of mixing the two together. 2 stimulants together is a recipe for a heart attack.

No tagging and zones are in TAC. So the AFL might just have seen the light in junior footy at least. One Roos line I'll always detest is this line about young players not being able to defend. I reckon it's crap. Defending in AFL footy with the exception of within 50m from goal and to an extent at stoppages is mindset. Tackling is not a difficult skill for most players (excluding many of ours). Chasing your opponent is pretty simple. Forward pressure defending is a skill but it's one the best players have naturally. Cyril Rioli was a master in his first season. Chad Wingard is great at it, Jack Darling from game 1. The smart players no how to do it. Stick to your opponent and read the play to get to the dangerous space. If you have the right mix of athletic tools and physical and mental determination then I reckon you'll succeed at defending if you have the right coach. But all the coaching in the world struggles to correct skills that just aren't up to scratch or an inability to find the ball.

The 2 years just became 4 years and that ban extends to all levels from AFL to Div 4 Ammos. And you can count the players on one hand who made it back from state leagues and usually they were good and went off the rails (Andrew Krakouer and now maybe Nathan Krakouer). Admitting to illicit drugs wouldn't finish your career. Tom Liberatore did it and the rumours abound about players at nearly every side. They'd probably get the sack from Collingwood but I'd have no problem taking either of them at Melbourne as long as they subject to regular testing and drug counselling. AFL players taking illicit drugs are stupid, but not so stupid as to finish their careers. IF they did get it from illicit drugs then they'd be better off admitting to it and proving it by testing the sample than by concocting a dodgy steak story they will catch up to them.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/reni-maitua-is-on-the-cusp-of-returning-to-the-nrl-with-parramatta-admits-he-took-party-drugs/story-e6frf3ou-1226055784270 You can do whatever with pretty much any illicit drug really. If (and I'm not implying that have in any way taken cocaine) but if they did I'd like to see them get the sample analysed, detect cocaine, collect an AFL strike and fight the ASADA charges. ASADA are not the police. They certainly aren't the NZ police. If the players have accidentally ingested it from cocaine then it's no different to Michael Rogers dodgy Chinese steak.

I know what you mean, but I care much more for our players fighting for spots and developing than I do for the VFL ladder, therefore I consider this weeks VFL game not as a practice but as a fair dinkum legitimate game for our players.

You can never touch Hawthorn. Apparently they were first on to this diet we are on and on to supplements early. I will say there is a huge gap between supplements and Dank And between clearly legal and possibly not.

I'd say he's 3/4 fit, can play midfield for some minutes but has to play half back or half forward for other times. He's not speedy so I'm not sold on him on a wing. Wines probably wasn't much fitter. But was a bit stronger. He played a bit midfield and a bit forward. It might not suit him perfectly but I'd love him in Grimes' spot at half back. He might not even be that successful but he'd get a really good footy education and it would suit his fitness and body compared to the midfield.

Brayshaw kicked 2 goals and found more footy. Even if he made more mistakes I think he was more effective than Michie and I can say that without even seeing the game. Michie might be handy in close and reliable with the ball but until he busts a gut and gets involved away from the packs and running both ways he won't make an impact at AFL level.

The half life is 36 hours (according to that other poster), which means that half of the drug is out of your system in 36. Usually for a drug to not have an effect it takes 5 half lives which would be 7.5 days and that's when only about 5% is left in your system. How sensitive the test is I'm not sure. A quick google says about a week, but that was on an old site. It might get more like 2 or even 3 weeks. But that also could be influenced by dose. Obviously if you take a full course of a drug you store up more than if you eat one dodgy steak. I'd say the players in question should be looking from maybe a month back until the test day and if they truly are innocent then they need to be right on to absolutely everything they may have taken or eaten.

If the AFL season has started then the VFL practice games are no longer practice games for AFL players. Terlich and ANB are having late starts to the season.

What's the relevance? Does NZ have different meat standards to us? I wouldn't think so. Maybe even more stringent. Unless they were visiting this website http://www.clenbuterol.co.nz/

Yeah the test samples were collected on Feb 10. Way too late for their end of season trips. They're going to have to come up with a pretty strong defence to win me over. Being in Mexico would've - as I expressed earlier - had me pretty interested in them getting a fair hearing and stating their case. Still hoping ASADA do nail them with some other evidence, even if it's just the levels being really indicative of cheating. Or I wouldn't care if they got 3 or even 2 years if they pleaded guilty, the chance of them making it back to AFL is pretty remote. Collingwood have moved swiftly to distance themselves from this. I hope the players tackle it head on as well instead of lawyering up and dragging it on for months with excuses..

The good news is it looks like there will a really good chance to see him play either way. The Scorps are set to play Collingwood at Olympic Park on Saturday at 11. The closest thing we'll get to a curtain raiser all season.

Testing will only catch a small percentage of people anyway, we saw that with cycling. In fact I think testing is likely to catch more innocents or stupids (like Saad) than the real trouble makers like Essendon (regardless of whether they've technically cheater or not). That said, the AFL is already on to it and are willing to do more than ASADA prescribes - http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-to-use-asada-alternative-in-expansion-of-drug-testing-program-20140214-32rl8.html

Or we will see continuous rotations between forward and midfield and any limited endurance athletes (see small forwards like Jeff Garlett) or midfield ball winners without speed and skill needed for other positions (see Matt Priddis) get replaced with Rohan Bails. I don't know if there's a way to prove who will be right and who will be wrong without trying it. I'm happy for them to clamp down the number and see what happens though.

The game had to evolve. Defensive tactics were non existent besides putting a man behind the ball. If you watch soccer you can see what AFL has become but unlike soccer we don't have off side rules and can still get 360 degree action. But zoning and pressing were too effective and always will be from now on in I think. If you watch 10 year old A league you'll see something comparable to AFL right now for many teams. If you watch top flight soccer with good teams you'll see something that AFL should become. It's not a bad thing that some teams will be attacking and others defensive. The variety is good. Hawthorn and Port have adapted. Sydney are not a terrible defensive boring team any more. Even Freo are improving. Geelong never went too defensive. The issue right now is I think the game has too many Rohan Bail's and Jordie McKenzie's instead of talented players. Cracking the NSW and QLD development markets will turn those states in to a talent boost instead of the drain they are putting on currently. Melbourne could play much better footy if you gave us a couple of speedy and talented GWS players. Turns out Hawthorn got one of them on the cheap in Jono O'Rourke this season. We didn't. He might not be that skilled by Lumumba will help us. So will Garlett if he's in form.

What do you suggest they do? They have adopted the WADA/ASADA code, have worked together with clubs to make sure all supplements are pre registered and recorded and have implemented an out of season recreational drug policy that many sports simply wash their hands of. When you have a crime problem the first thing that usually happens is you increase the police force and you get an increase in the crime statistics. If you live in Melbourne you would've noticed how that happened with gangland murders a decade or longer ago and CBD violence from about 2005-2010. First they became problems then they seemingly became more prevalent - why? Because the police and media were out to find them. The same thing is now happening with drugs in the AFL.

See I don't think they have. Tyson hasn't. A few bad errors aside Jack Viney hasn't unless you think Brayshaw has been perfect at Casey. Newton hasn't. Cross is ticking over ok for a veteran in preseason. Lumumba certainly not. And if Bernie Vince is fit then he gets a spot in the team. He's in with a shot, but it's naive to suggest he's a walk up start.

1. What's the best thing for the fans: Pro: He's a number 3 pick and isn't Matt Jones/Bail etc, the fans want to see him play -Brayshaw plays. 2. What's the best thing for Angus himself: Pro: He seems a cut above VFL Con: Just in training against Viney and Salem he had 2 head knocks. The bigger/faster bodies of AFL will test him - Another VFL practice match will give him even more confidence. Putting him in the AFL will give him a great first taste. There's no clear answer 3. What's the best thing for the team: Pro: He's clearly part of the future, getting him used to senior team mates is a good thing Pro: He's a ball winner, hard at it, uses it pretty well Pro: He'll bring energy, enthusiasm and confidence to the team Pro: The sub rule is a good way to give a guy a taste Con: He doesn't have an AFL mature body or fitness meaning he's unlikely to perform well in large midfield minutes Con: His best footy is played around the packs and the freedom of midfield, where N Jones, Tyson, Viney, Cross etc will be Con: He doesn't seem as well suited to a wing/half forward role which is probably where he'd play Question 1 is completely irrelevant in picking a side. We all know why! Question 2 is worth considering for all young players before you pick them. You shouldn't pick young guys and set them up to fail. Salem and JKH were used beautifully last year But really I think it comes down to Question 3. It's round 1, we are picking our best side to win. Does Brayshaw on debut, with all of 3 practice matches against men have the form and ability to play better at AFL level than whoever else we pick. Considering we didn't see him in the NAB challenge we are really just projecting based on VFL form on how he'd go up a grade and likely in a different role to where he'll eventually end up. N Jones, Tyson, Cross, Viney, Lumumba, Newton all look set for midfield roles. If Bernie Vince is fit he takes a spot. Howe might be the sub. After that you're looking at 1 or 2 of Matt Jones, Toumpas, Kent, JKH, vandenBerg, Bail for half forward/wing rotation spots in the team. At this stage I'm leaning towards giving 2 of the above names a run knowing (vandenBerg aside) that they have played AFL and played in the NAB challenge, are stronger and have better endurance than Brayshaw and are probably more suited to the role in the team as well. If some guys don't perform then I think Brayshaw will be straight in for round 2 but I'm just not convinced that at this stage just because he's a superior talent that he should be in the team. The team balance, experience and role has to be considered as well. The gap between regular AFL season and VFL preseason is massive.

By the way Thomas was mugged in LA in November. I think they were in Mexico but even if not it wouldn't be a surprise to eat Mexican meat in LA. I've met Lachy Keeffe. He's a really nice guy. If he's a drug cheat then throw him out. 2 years, in fact WADA just increased the penalty to 4. But if he's just had some dodgy mexican meat then let the guy off because it could happen to anyone. He'll likely miss 6 months or so whilst they work through it all anyway. I just hope more than anything we get a clear verdict.

Mick Rogers managed to convince the UCI he had it in meat from China. Banned Australian cyclist Michael Rogers cleared to ride again Keeffe and Thomas will surely use the similar defense from Mexican meat. Apparently the athlete strict liability says they will still be guilty but can get off without a punishment if they somehow prove they it like Rogers managed to. Unfortunately I don't know how exactly they will prove innocence. Natural justice says they have to be given the benefit of the doubt but the drugs rules seem to go beyond that. If they did do it I hope that ASADA can find a doctor/vet/drug importer/Dank etc to come forward with evidence and they can have a 4 year ban. If they truly are innocent and just had some dodgy burritos in mexico then I hope they can find the steaks and cows to prove that as well.

Nice to see Mitch Clark in it at the 5 second mark. It's not bad. Too long to run on TV though, wonder if there's a condensed version. Struggling to find the target audience really. Are they hoping it goes mini viral via social media?

I don't think we've won a game in my time on DL when some muppet has posted this. Thanks for the jinx.