bing181

Misson isn't a sports scientist. Having got that part wrong, you might also like to brush up on his experience and qualifications before dismissing him with patronising one-liners.

Well, Voss is spitting chips, and to the extent that it's possible, they're going to come out fighting. They're also at home. On the other hand, we should take some confidence out of today - and even out of a half last week. But I think more to the point, it's one more game into the likes of Terlich, Matt Jones, Pedersen, Gawn, Evans etc. and one more game that this team plays together.

Post match presser below. Will answer some of your questions. Jack Trengove: "The way we played in that last quarter is the way we've been training all along" http://lon-cdn220-is-11.se.bponlinewoc2264.ngcdn.telstra.com/PlatformRelease/493/725/130421_Neeld__042995.mp4

He's been trying to get them to be bold the whole year. As Nate Jones summed it up last week: ""That's Melbourne footy – that's how we want to play, we want to be bold, we want to take it on."

Here, from the man himself: "The coach, thought, kept his nerve heading to the huddle and emphasised five things: style, training, spirit, fitness and supporters. He told the players they had "30 minutes to dig deep". No mention there of "play your natural game".

No, it's clear it wasn't, but that won't stop those here who only look for negatives.

Agree, but the pressure etc. in the first quarter was also good. Those couple of "lucky" O'hAilpin goals made their score a bit more respectable, but on all the stats at 1/4 time, we were well in front. Also, we managed 86 tackles, which weren't all just in the last quarter. Interesting stat actually - no team has managed 86 tackles against us this year, highest was WCE with 78.

Maybe, but no other team has kicked 12 goals against them in a quarter this year. We didn't overrun them just because they were terrible.

Like WC last weekend against us? FFS. No, we weren't perfect. But we still had a very good win.

As an aside, and not excusing Melb., GWS have really managed to plunder the draft with all their top picks, and have taken the cream. Give them a few years when their KPP's mature, and AD and co. will be happy bunnies. Makes it hard for the rest of us though.

Jamar was resting forward, Gawn was off the ground. Clark often has a run in the ruck, especially later in the quarters. He was across half back because that's where the ball was.

They have any number of fast, classy mids. We don't. Being beaten on spread and around the clearances.

He's not in the backline, he's in the Ruck, staying behind the ball as he should. Get a grip.

Of course they know about it, who's ever said otherwise? Injecting athletes is a standard procedure in all sports where applicable and necessary. Except, perhaps ironically enough, in cycling where since 2011 there's been a No Needle policy, unless where medically justified.

11 possessions? By that standard, even we have a team of stars ...

Not been reading the Casey reports? He's doing OK, nothing more, and today was even less than OK. Hopefully, will turn out to be a keeper, but still a fair way off it it seems.

You can only 'fess up what you know.

Here's what he's thinking right now: jesse hogan ‏@jesseBhogan2h Another good win to the scorps now just need Melbourne to have a win. #3-0 #carnthescorps #getaroundthedees

Completely OT, but I live in France, and spend most of my time speaking, reading and writing French. As a result, I get thrown by French spelling of English words. I know that we're not discussing Stephen Danque, and that we weren't found guilty of tanquing ... but for "cheque" I need to think twice. Which I didn't do ...

Well spotted ... there's a long story behind that one, but no need to go into it now ...!!

I'd be interested to know what kind of protocols other clubs had in control prior to the Essendon/Dank/Supplements issue coming to a head. If any. Anyone? In any case, there's a presumption in the above post that no-one was checking. I can't pretend to have followed this overly closely, but I've yet to see any evidence that that was the case. I also feel you're drawing a very long bow in equivalating signing cheques to giving injections to players. I don't believe there's a Hippocratic Oath for accountants. In any case, this isn't about what Bate prescribed (for the moment at least). It's that he apparently denied having had contact with Dank when asked. (edit. checks/cheques ... thanks to Rjay!)

Oh come on: "Dank says he never gave banned substances to Essendon players and you'd expect he'd say the same about his involvement with Melbourne players." How can you put that out there, at least without acknowledging that the club has already denied that Dank had any direct contact with any of the players?

Several months?? Please expand.

FWIW, and file under "unconfirmed", but was wondering why he wasn't listed anywhere: "The reason Dom Barry was not named at Casey this weekend is because he is under a club imposed ban. He got home at 5am after the North Ballarat game."

"The Club’s protocol and governance in relation to all treatment of players is that only the Club Doctor can prescribe and approve treatment to players. This system meant that at no time was Dank able to directly treat players"