hardtack

With all due respect RR, do we really know for a fact hat he walked out on the club? I have seen nothing from the club stating this.

I agree... we have carried a number of players of lesser potential for a number of years (Bate, Morton, Dunn, Miller and so on), so I can't see why we wouldn't at least give Liam a bit more time; particularly considering that we have already seen glimpses of what he is capable of.

You may be right OD, but I suppose there is also the possibility that the family will be pushing him to continue his AFL career as it gives some hope and pride back to his community; maybe that's what they need in the circumstances.

Maybe, but the glass half full (or should that be "fool") side of me says that a tough pre-season might be a blessing as it could help take his mind off such matters.

Why? I would have thought the timing was almost perfect. It means he can do a full pre-season and then, assuming he gets off with a fine or even better, with all charges dropped, he may not miss a game... he would even be available for most pre-season comp games (unless we made the final).

I would actually argue that of all our players, Jones and Clark are pretty much untouchable.

Definitely OD... but I think even he said himself that Heath Ledger nailed the Joker perfectly... and I have to agree on that score.

Yes... that, The Last Detail and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest were may favourite JN films... of the more recent, I do love the dialogue in As Good As It Gets... incredibly well written!

Sure it wasn't Marvin Gardens?

Wouldn't 1968's Easy Rider have been his first feature role? Five Easy Pieces was 1970. He and Dennis Hopper were two of my favourite psychos... Nicholson in The Shining and Hopper in Blue Velvet. And how could we forget One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest!!

My favourite Nicho lines: "I want you to hold the chicken... between your knees" (Five Easy Pieces) "He wanted the cheese melted" (The Last Detail)

I have no idea how these estimations work, but it seems to be a standard practice and does not appear to be because someone has an agenda to push... we will know in 10 years I suppose. But their "guesstimations" are no more ridiculous than your claims of zero deaths so early in the piece. My argument is, and always has been, that nuclear energy is fine as long as the plants are built with appropriate safety measures and correct maintenance procedures... in both cases (Chernobyl and Fukushima - and 5 Mile Island?), it was pretty obvious, things had not been very well thought out or managed.

Rather than take five easy pieces he's been working on his game down to the last detail and by all reports is simply shining. Expect his game, if he is named as one of a few good men in the final squad, to be as good as it gets. He's no easy rider is our Nicho!

No, because that is exactly what you were like on Demonology. Saying I'm full of it doesn't really have much of an affect, but I am pointing out that rather than looking at any facts, you prefer to play the man in orderr to deflect from the issue. As I said, look at the results in 10 years time... and in the meantime, try reading a few reported projections from reputable institutes such as Stanford University, to get some insight. Surely you cannot be so stupid as to think the effects of radiation are going to be manifesting themselves in the space of a year. Surely you cannot be so stupid as to believe thatr the thousands who were moved out of the area are going to be repatriated any time soon (if ever). And surely you cannot be so stupid as to believe that the relocation of those thousands of people evacuated as a result of the radiation is not hitting the public purse. Laughable? Yes, I suppose your blinkered view of things would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

i nominate vincehotboy...

It's interesting to note Malthouse's comments re Cloke in light of what people have been saying here about his underwhelming performance this season (and especially considering many of his critics agree that he had a very good/outstanding season last year): "He's still the highest contested-marking player in the competition, and he's only about 10 goals off last year, he's lost a bit of confidence because he's attending to two players." http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/cloke-may-go-says-malthouse-20120822-24mt4.html#ixzz24KOWrfN5

If you are trying to provide facts and want to be listened to, don't you think you should also take into account the facts others provide to you?... for example, those figures I provided that came out of Stanford University. If you are dealing in facts, then surely you must realise that the real damage from a nuclear reactor meltdown will not manifest itself immediately (and we are only just over one year in since it occurred), but can take up to 10 years.

Then you obviously didn't read the point I made in more than one of my posts that I am NOT against nuclear power... I just think it needs to be better managed than it has been. And you are still to answer two questions I asked... show me where I said Fukushima was some kind of humanitarian disaster and show me where I stated I was against nuclear energy. The only reason you have avoided answering is that you are unable to do so. Facts are something that you don't deal well in. 19 posts and you have already set yourself up as the same opinionated and abusive poster you were on Demonology.

So was I... but I think you get my point.

I'm pretty certain more than a few were saying the same thing about Clark when we threw all of that money at him.

Excuse me? Please cite the part of any of my texts that states I consider the Fukushima meltdown to be some sort of humanitarian disaster. I have answered your unsupported comments re no sickness as a result of radiation levels with references to give them some credence... you provide nothing but nay saying. If I'm hysterical, I would say that you are illiterate. And I love the way that because I happen to refute your remarks about "not caring" for the people, you turn it around as something ingenuous. Says a lot more about you than it does me.

1st of Sept is a Saturday.

AoB... you are citing my statement: "Nuclear energy is all well and good, but it can, and has been, the cause of a lot of suffering due to major mismanagement (in the case of Chernobyl) or lack of foresight in a country prone to major earthquake activity (Fukushima)." ...and then raising Bhopal which was a perfect example of what I was saying is the problem I have with Chernobyl and Fukushima??? It was another example of a substandard operation that had numerous safety issues prior to the final disaster...I say it again (and again, and again), please point out any comment of mine that says I am against nuclear energy... why is it that citing reports that document the likely affects of radiation on those living close to such disasters, means that the person raising the issues is anti the whole concept? I understand the benefits of nuclear energy, but I am also happy to point out the negatives when, like any form of energy, is not handled well or the benefits are not weighed up against the very real possibilities. Look at Chernobyl, it has left a tract of land with a 31km radius that will be uninhabitable for thousands of years (if I recall correctly)... It doesn't look like much on paper, but effectively it means that an area the size of most of Melbourne and its suburbs has become a wasteland. Fukushima may well suffer the same fate... it's not just the risks of radiation sickness etc, this also poses the issues and expense involved in relocating entire populations.

Ding, it seems you are the one who is getting hysterical. I am merely pointing out a few facts to support my argument; and how dare you claim that I have no concern for the victims... you are clueless! I would argue that it is you who couldn't care less about the victims as you would appear to consider them to be "collateral damage" who's loss/suffering is acceptable in the name of clean energy. Just to set the record straight, we have donated via various organisations to aid the Pakistani flood relief, New Zealand earthquake victims, Queensland flood relief, and have raised through garage sales, almost $1,000 to go to the Japan Tsunami/Earthquake victims (via the NGO, JEN)... not too bad for someone who doesn't care about the victims I would have thought. It never ceases to amaze me that people like yourself will raise coal mining, or Bhopal, or the Exon Valdez etc, when someone such as myself is responding to claims regarding radiation sickness... why would I be touching on those other disasters when I am responding to you denying the affects of radiation? I am all for clean energy, I am just not for it when due care is not taken in the first place as was the case in both Chernobyl and Japan - but you would have noted that I already stated that quite clearly in another post. As I have previously said, I have not once stated that I am against nuclear energy, but please feel free to point out where I may have made such a statement.

Yes there are exaggerated reports, but do you consider 700 cases of thyroid cancer in children and 10 deaths acceptable? Do you consider the 28 deaths immediately following the Chernobyl disaster as a result of severe radiation, acceptable? Deaths or no deaths, the issue is that if proper precautions are not taken, serious issues can arise. Nuclear energy is all well and good, but it can, and has been, the cause of a lot of suffering due to major mismanagement (in the case of Chernobyl) or lack of foresight in a country prone to major earthquake activity (Fukushima).