Rogue

Journalists are always looking for that quip to make the copy more interesting.

Okay, but it's neither here nor there when it comes to that of internal versus external testing bodies. ...except that in the hypothetical case of mistakes or underhanded dealings by a testing body, it's far better for the sport if the testing agency is independent.

Define neutral. The context of the conversation was that having the testing body owned and operated by the AFL would not be favourably viewed by stakeholders. Let's venture into hypothetical land: A sport's governing body contracts a neutral (owned and operated independently of the governing body) anti-doping agency to conduct testing of athletes at the elite level. Assume that once upon a time, someone leaked the identity of upcoming testing targets. If you acknowledged the sport's governing body had nothing to do with the leak, I fail to see how a leak would mean that the testing body was not 'neutral'. If a testing agency allowed itself to be lent on by a governing body in order to avoid positive findings by leaking targets (or burying results, etc), it would lose all integrity and credibility and thus cease to exist. Assume this leak became public, and compare the reaction of stakeholders and the public to a similar case where the sport's governing body owned and operated their own lab. It's probably better for everyone involved, including the AFL, to have an independent body conduct testing.

Go easy - he's hurt and confused

Haha, somehow I don't think that'd have the same ring to it.

If true, I find it very unlikely that the AFL was involved in this leaking in any way, shape, or form.

I agree. I was on a train with DB and he said we were keen. ...or not.

Is there a problem with the neutrality of the ASADA?

Interesting idea, although I imagine at least some stakeholders might prefer the tests performed by a neutral body.

Drug testing is very expensive. The home and away season has many matches. The finals are the most important games (and thus the most temptation?).

Check out some of the old threads for discussion!

I guess we haven't deserved any more than that. As others have said, hopefully it's against a high-drawing Melb side.

Hug required in aisle four, pronto On a serious note, the lack of communication surrounding the research is worth raising. There are some decent ideas floating around on here, so hopefully they get aired by someone =)

Might want to hold off until you get selected hey

I can see McLean as captain, but not yet. I found this surprising too. From what? If he didn't want to be there, he would have left. Wow Btw, what did you think of Neitz as a media performer? McDonald? Is 2008 premiership captain Mitchell a media star? I don't think it'd be unfair to label 2007 premiership captain Harley a little beige.

Indeed.

Hardly. A team's much better served from having a tagger with the attacking skills that Dunn could develop, as opposed to a Godfrey clone.

Thanks - might have to pick it up.

I think Dunn's potential as a forward is over-rated. In his first few games he looked like a natural forward in terms of game sense, but I don't see where he fits in a forward structure. Is he the pacey crumbing type that applies pressure? How about the KPF we're after? Is he a hard-running hit-up high forward? I think that if he's going to make it, it'll be as a running type.

For those that haven't read it - Source If true, it's disappointing. What's odd is that - as stated in the 'email' - the MFC wanted the 30 year deal, and the MFC wanted the community initiatives etc.

It was the right decision regardless of how Grimes goes, IMO.

That'd be fine by me. I'd rather pay the extra 50K and have a young kid running around at Casey (?) instead of Carroll.

Who' our tagger? Note you've already got rid of Bartram. If Dunn can turn himself into a good tagger that also has decent skills, great. It's rubbish that a player 'of his skill' is 'wasted' tagging - much better than a Godfrey clone. We would have paid his contract if he'd stayed, so the additional funds are only whatever we pay Carroll's replacement for the duration of Carroll's current contract.

I imagine he's got over his injuries now.

Nice find. What do you think of the book?