bing181

And the mighty Toump the only player to have a stat in each column - including a hitout. JKH looks to be getting his mojo back, 13 possessions and 4 tackles, more than respectable in half a game of footy where you're being thrashed.

Am I allowed to say "You're an idiot"? If not, my apologies, Mods please delete. Otherwise ...

Great vote of confidence that Salem keeps his spot when he under-performed and was subbed out last week. Starting to see how this Roos thing works ...

In: Gawn, Terlich, Nicholson, and Barry. Out: Cross, McKenzie, Riley, and McDonald. Interesting ...

You've swallowed the (pro) Essendon spin hook, line and sinker.

Barry vs Blease: based on the player reviews from last week, which of the following deserves a call-up? "He got a bit of the ball in the second quarter, but he started to take it sideways and backwards, rather than forward. He only had six possessions after the half-time break, so he fell away after half-time." "He had a negating run-with role on Sam Iles, who has been averaging around 30 possessions per week. Xxx did a very, very good job. He was disciplined, stuck to his task and tried to run both ways. Xxx also kept his opponent to little to no impact on the day."

Maybe time to brush up on the procedure Bob.

As someone who lives in France, and speaks French all day, must say I'm enjoying the taking of the proverbial. Continuez ainsi.

Waiting for the "sack Dave Misson" posts.

Athletics Australia president David Grace QC warned over role on Essendon legal team

Roos singled him out for praise, one of only two played (with Vince). Look again.

Need a couple of players with great disposal and a bit of run coming off half-back. Which is exactly what we don't have with McDonald, Grimes, Howe, and to a lesser extent Garland, today they were all turnover kings. Pity perhaps that Toumpas isn't ready to slot in there, or that Watts behind the ball hasn't been pursued. I'm just not sure where the player(s) that we need there are going to come from, it's not as if Terlich or Clisby or even, cough cough, Blease are the answers either.

Not getting mixed up with Schadenfreude? Holger was it? Only played that one game, tragic what happened.

The thing that stagers me in all this is that it's not even ASADA who give/set the bans - as even a cursory reading of the rules will have shown. So how could the whole Essendon hierarchy have ever believed in some kind of get out of jail free card? Didn't anyone there ever go through the WADA rules and processes?

No, there was no team ban, only individual bans. Only Armstrong, Brunel (director) and a couple of the medical staff got long bans. Riders and ex-riders on the Armstrong teams (mainly US Postal), had 6 months bans because they spilled the beans. There have been cases in cycling where race organisers have refused to accept teams with a record of doping offences, but they're not official WADA or UCI bans, and are commercial as much as anything.

Well, in theory that should be Fitzpatrick, but he seems to have stalled for the moment. Big second half of the year?

It was a general discussion. Group hug? Anyway, doesn't seem to have had any impact on Jesse's allegiance to Melbourne given recent news. He's obviously willing to put up with another 3 years of in-jokes from crazed Demonlanders.

But what's it got to do with you? It's between Saty and the players.

You spoke to him? Not a good idea. He'll be back to Perth now, and it'll all be your fault.

TB4. (Thymosin Beta 4) Injected.

Nicholson, Blease, Terlich all named for Casey, but none of the others from the I/C ... so suspect it'll be No Change.

Yes - but the riders with the 6 month bans didn't just dob themselves and Lance in, they dobbed everyone in from riders, managers, doctors, staff, the whole enchilada. Not sure of how far ASADA want to take it, but according to the WADA rule-book, in order to get a reduction you need to do a bit more than just put your hand up and say "OK, I did it". Also, they weren't technically off-season bans, because there isn't the same clear "off-season" in cycling. Certainly, those riders were banned for some months when normally they would have taken a break - but the 6 month bans for most of them ran from September till March, and there are still some really important races in that time - the World Championships is in September, there are a series of major races, especially in Italy, etc. etc.. Then, even in January, things start cranking up again fairly rapidly, e.g. Tour Down Under. They were certainly penalised.

Fair enough, but the back line under Rawlings wasn't entirely disgraceful. Those huge blowout scores were coming from a lack of team-wide defence, which was letting opposition mids (and even half-backs) stream into their forward line. Not to mention, the difficulty that our backs had in clearing the ball because our mids were so poor, which meant that it just kept on coming back in. I wouldn't be so quick to write Rawlings off - he was the only one they kept, after all.

Good question! When you can be charged with intent for something you didn't intend to do - for example, because you didn't know you were doing it. Wade Lees: imports a product that he doesn't know contains banned substances. Had intended to use/consume the product, so is charged on that basis, as per previous post. BTW, it's not a legal term!

Mine's similar: 14. Luckily for me/him, we live overseas, and has only seen about 3 matches his whole life. Luckily for him/us, we've somehow managed to win all of them, which has somewhat skewed his perception of the team - a perception I haven't been in a hurry to correct. Go Dees.