bing181

Tyson for VDB would be about it, perhaps Fitzy, depending on match ups, but he wasn't out worst, and got better as the game wore on. Next cab off the rank for a change/out would be Newton. Started the season well, but wheels seem to have come off somewhere along the way. Rather than in/outs making a difference, there are players who need to get back to their best: Tommy Mac, Jetta and Viney to name but 3.

Not bad. We'll probably lose, but not through a lack of endeavour. Skills, turnovers, experience, killing us, but a lot to like.

Great hand pass to Bradshaw from Jimmy Toumpas to start the chain that lead to Garlett's goal.

The whole team is a rabble, and you pick out one player.

Collingwood looking very good. Too many weak links in the chain for Melbourne for the moment. Viney, Jetta look underdone/off the pace. Howe looking decent, one of the few positives.

R58 Law Applicable to the merits The Panel shall decide the dispute according to the applicable regulations and, subsidiarily, to the rules of law chosen by the parties or, in the absence of such a choice, according to the law of the country in which the federation, association or sports-related body which has issued the challenged decision is domiciled or according to the rules of law the Panel deems appropriate. In the latter case, the Panel shall give reasons for its decision. http://www.tas-cas.org/en/arbitration/code-procedural-rules.html

Robbie and Pitmaster, thanks for your excellent posts. Reason and insight.

Think they'll give ANB a couple more at Casey. Tyson definitely in, then let's see what else presents itself. Salem must only be a couple of weeks away as well.

Too you, yes.

ANB I believe.

I believe you're incorrect, though in practical terms, it probably won't make any difference. It's for the parties involved (WADA and the Essendon payers) to agree on which jurisdiction of law should be applied, not CAS. CAS only get a say if the parties can't agree, at which point, they apply Swiss Law (if this is held in Switzerland). Given that presumably WADA will argue for Swiss law, and the Essendon players for Australian law, in the absence of an agreement, it will become Swiss law.

Been discussed here. Go back and look at what Roos is actually saying.

No.

I don't know that that's what's being said. Roos' comments reflect on a group who've never been part of a winning culture, and who haven't been immersed - on field AND off - in a winning culture. Or much of a culture at all for that matter. As such, there are still some that, it seems, don't quite trust their team mates, don't quite trust their coaches, and don't quite trust the game plan. They may do so intellectually and when it's all working, but in the heat of the moment, when the pressure is applied, it all goes out the window and they end up playing for/by themselves ... because to some extent, it's all they've ever known. Leaps of faith, the "just do this, trust me, it'll work". Always tricky.

Not to mention that old chestnut, "I'm not racist but ..."

Perhaps you should have been ...

For which we are internally grateful.

No, sorry, I meant how close they (people in general) were to getting it right/making it work. See it all the time. Was speaking generally, not so much about the players. A moment of whimsy, my apologies.

I suspect we'll never know.

Part of it, not all of it. How is it that our best players last week was an 18 year old kid? Roos' Sydney was full of players who were "not up to the level". But they did what they needed to and played as a team.

Even Yoda has a breaking point. Sounds like Roos is pretty close to his. More list changes coming. Still, you see it all around you, it's not just footy - people who just don't or can't or won't do what they need to, because ... well, just because. And you end up scratching your head and thinking "if only you knew how close you were".

Ridiculous. Just ridiculous. The big difference yesterday wasn't between Roos and Daniher/Northery, it was between our team of decent and also-ran players and a couple of genuine A-Graders who were able to single-handedly turn a game. Jones had 11 possessions in the first quarter. Boak went to him ... end of Jones, end of Melbourne. It's not complicated, and has little to do with who's sitting in the coaching box. If players can't beat their opponents, then Melbourne can't beat their opponents. End of. "Boak gathered an equal game-high 31 disposals (18 contested), as well as eight clearances and played an influential role around stoppages. The Port skipper led a dominant midfield, which included outstanding contributions from Brad Ebert (32 disposals, nine clearances and seven inside 50s), Ollie Wines (29 touches and six inside 50s) and Robbie Gray (26 and eight clearances). "When you lead from the top, it's a great spot to start. Then the other boys like Ollie, Brad, Robbie, the forwards and the backs all join in; but they had a symbolic person up front saying, 'this is the way we're going to play,' Hinkley said."

Bummer. Can't watch. Updates via the iPhone app, plus this Game Day thread are all I have to go on. Luckily, I have a Masters Degree, and am thinking about a PhD, so all is well ...

Sure. But a close second is stopping opposition players getting and using the ball. Especially key opposition playmakers.

OT, but good to see that AFL isn't the only football code having to learn that they're not above the law.