bing181

They have more experienced players than us (over 100 games), and more experience and class where it counts (mids). Nathan Jones can only do so much.

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/dealing-with-dank-20130426-2ik8y.html Update/summary in the Age, which includes: "A senior official at the club agrees that Bates' conduct is serious, but says that Demons officials are furious that the AFL has not publicly acknowledged that in February the club did pass on details to McLachlan about Dank's links to Bates and Thurin's planned review. Club insiders say that the AFL never requested a copy of this review and did not send an investigator to interview Bates until the day after 7.30 aired. That same day, Bates stood down from the club. Says the senior official: ''We are a football club, not an investigation agency. The AFL and the government have all the powers to do in-depth investigations and they keep saying that they know more than everybody else. To say that the club as a whole tried to cover anything up or mislead the AFL is a joke.''

Since Neeld took over, we've let go/lost 20 players. Of those 20, 1 is doing well (Rivers), 2 are doing OK in the sense that they're at least getting games elsewhere (Moloney, Petterd). Green retired, and Jurrah we know about. But there was still around a third of the list who weren't AFL standard, or fringe at best. Then, out of what's left, add in 4 long-term injuries (Gawn, Taggert, Evans and Clark), and hard to see how the (available) list could be seen as "not all that bad".

You're just being ridiculous. Viney 82 kg. Kent 82 Kg. Toumpas 79 Kg. Terlich 83 Kg. For comparison: no. 1 pick Lachie Whitfield: 75 kg. Jake Neade (has been more than useful ...): 67 Kg. And seeing you refer to Stringer at the Dogs, apart from Dom Barry, all of our picks were heavier than all of their other picks. Not that that has anything much to do with anything. Carlton's top goal scorer today is 74 kg.

Comparing like with like might give your point some validity, Stringer is a KPF and 191 cm. Pick a kid with muscle on his frame? Hogan: 97 Kg

Fitzy 3 for the quarter according to Scorps Twitter. Useful!

Just wondering, who's taking ruck duties? Presume Spencer went to Qld.

Not Davey. For someone who's into conspiracy theories, you're missing this one big time. Same name (heavily) implicated in the tanking allegations.

Age report interesting. Perhaps the Board and Admin did everything they should have and could have. Perhaps we don't have to sack everyone and go into administration after all.

There were a large number of sanctions - Sevilla, Ulrich and Basso (e.g.) were sanctioned for a couple of years for their involvement. It was for blood doping. The main reason why there were fewer prosecutions is simply because in Spain, where all this took place, blood-doping wasn't illegal at the time (2006) - in fact, Spanish regulations and attitudes in regards to doping in sport lagged well behind other European countries. There has recently been a court case against the main protagonist (Dr. Fuentes), but it's for "endangering public health" which is about all they could get him on. Hard to see any parallels there, and in any case, the laws are now much more stringent.

Spelling checkers going downhill fast as well.

Absolutely. The Aplaca Husbandry column just isn't what it was.

Round five Melbourne team B: Jack Watts, James Frawley, Dean Terlich HB: Jack Grimes, Tom McDonald, Colin Garland C: Jack Trengove, Colin Sylvia, Sam Blease HF: Rohan Bail, Cameron Pedersen, Jeremy Howe F: David Rodan, Max Gawn, Shannon Byrnes FOLL: Mark Jamar, Michael Evans, Nathan Jones I/C (from): Jordie McKenzie, James Strauss, Daniel Nicholson, Luke Tapscott, Aaron Davey, Jake Spencer, Matt Jones IN: David Rodan, Jordie McKenzie, James Strauss, Jake Spencer, Sam Blease, Daniel Nicholson OUT: Mitch Clark (foot), Neville Jetta (suspension), Jack Viney (rested)

??? There's nothing in what Garland said that contradicts anything there. On the other hand, there's plenty in what you're implying Garland said that contradicts what Garland said. As in the other thread: you're quoting selectively and in doing so, misrepresenting the meaning. It's clear in everything that has been said from within the club, there has been no change in game plan or approach, only in execution and intent on the field.

a) He didn't say or use the word "instinctive" as you claim b) In quoting selectively, you're skewing the original meaning, especially in omitting what followed: "We have got a lot of external pressures and Mark's really taken the shackles off the playing group. He has probably taken a lot of criticism that the playing group probably deserved ...." The intent of the article is clear: Neeld has absorbed the external pressures, and in doing so, has enabled the players to focus on playing. Any other reading is wilful misrepresentation.

Where does he say that he'd let the boys play instinctive footy? He says nothing of the sort, nor does the article. The point of which is that he's protected them from outside pressures, so that they could just be focused on playing. The shackles he refers to are that of external criticism and pressure.

... and drop a note of complaint to the club, drawing their attention to it. Helps to put pressure on the AFL. Unacceptable.

This furphy is getting to be yet another Demonland reality that has no basis in fact. Not directed at you per se, but what the players, coaches and staff have repeatedly said, is that we've been training and aiming to play the same way over the whole pre-season and into the season. Nothing has changed. Garland's comment above is in regards to Neeld (and the other FD staff) sheltering them from the external stresses, so that they could just concentrate on playing. It has nothing to do with a change in directives to the players or the game plan.

Believe nuts and bolts funding is by the Fed Govt., but tests etc. are also (mainly?) funded by the end-users (the various sporting codes).

Interesting to see North and Scott (also) threatening legal action in regard to CW's article re North's fitness staff/doctor. Maybe some have had enough and/or the journos are starting to go too far.

The crux of what he is suggesting was not reported in the press the way he was presenting it (the players never told Dawes he wasn't first 22, they basically just told him to go if it would make him happy), and is at best a less-than-full picture of why Dawes left Collingwood.

The salient point, that you seem to miss, is that with the departure of Leigh Brown, Buckley wanted (needed) a second-string KPF who could take on ruck duties. Dawes isn't really that player. Him leaving is not a reflection on where Dawes was at, it's a reflection of where the team and coach were at. While Cloak was at Collingwood, Dawes could never just be the KPF that he is. It's a bit like why Jolly left Melbourne, he was never going to get a run while Jeff White was there. Jolly was not a dud, or "not first 22".

Based on?

ASADA are just the local arm of WADA. If they're beholden to anyone, it's to WADA.

Yes, but they're trying to play him as key forward. Which he never was. Which is why he was traded.