bing181

There is no WADA-approved test for TB4, so no-one can be found to have tested positive (within the meaning of the code). Though it doesn't really matter: a doping infringement is a doping infringement, no matter what path you take to get there, presence or not. If WADA can establish their non-presence case, penalties will be the same: 2 years, with deductions for time served provisionally, and perhaps some deduction (6 months?) for "no significant fault" if they can establish that (not a given).

Walking the walk.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34763036

Speaking of MN, see he has changed role over at Essendon from Development to "Game Performance Manager". Whatever that might be ... he cuts up the oranges?

Only 55 years? Same as me. (confession thread, right?) We're not that old OD. More like Spring Chicken Dee.

Really?

We've probably all participated in a spot of rude and condescend at some point. Not sure that m/any of us are in a position to cast the first stone.

Then just put him on ignore. FFS ...

Come on WB, what's next: layout requirements and specifications on what Font to use? People are free to attend training or not, and to post about it or not.

Agree with Nutbean. With Saty's reports, you do what you do with any report: take from them what's useful to you, ignore the rest. I just don't see the point of castigating someone for not doing what each of us would do, and as someone who can't ever get to training, I appreciate reports from anyone, no matter the shape or form.

Presumably WADA agree with you, which is why they appealed. But they haven't got off lightly or otherwise for the moment, hearing starts later this month.

Once again, we didn't give up next year's 1st round pick - we took it this year. We haven't lost a pick. Two picks at the pointy end of the first round trumps pretty well everything IMHO, and to be able to take them sooner rather than later is some rather thick icing on the cake. We need improvement ASAP. In any case, we'll move up the ladder next year, so it's a moot discussion. (insert relevant smiley)

The next Selwood dynasty? Or, as they're farmers ... McDonald dynasty?

Agreed. OK, it's only under-age footy, but who do we have who can consistently pick out a target like that?

Yep, that's about how you see the world. Mirror handy?

The draft is a lottery - and the further down the draft you go, the more of a lottery it becomes. Or probably more significantly: the higher up the draft you go, the less of a lottery it becomes.

Also, there's no anti-doping code if you're working in a supermarket or as an architect. The information that was deliberately withheld goes to the player's capacity to fulfil his contract. Which is why it was deliberately withheld in the first place.

Places will open up. But compared to this year, he'll be behind the likes of Melksham and Bugg, plus hopefully Petracca and Trengove. Not going to be easy.

It's on.

Under normal circumstances I would agree, but while we might have had a quiet chat with GC and Lions, I find it hard to believe that Essendon would be giving out anything - except perhaps misinformation.

Streaming through the AFL's international provider: http://watchafl.afl.com.au I have a yearly subscription that's part of my MFC membership, but from memory, the NAB cup games are streamed free. If not, you can do a subscription per match, or by month (or something similar). No reason to not have the best of both worlds on your travels. Be aware though, that if you're in Europe, it can make for some horrendously early starts ... or very late nights.

Not just seeing them, meeting them, talking to their coaches, etc. etc. The whole 9 yards.

Hmm ... been a bit of hoovering going on.

Mercifully, we'll have training threads to pour over in the meantime. In contrast with some of the recent postings, I'm sure that they won't prove contentious.

Not to be confused with hakuna matata.