hardtack

Sorry, my comment came across in a way that was stronger than it was meant. Unfortunately, assuming the players acted in self defence, the club can’t really impose sanctions unless they had some sort of policy/rule that players do not attend night clubs etc during the season... hence the comment I added.

True, but let's not forget that it was only an 18 round season... that should balance things out a little? However you view it, it was still a disaster.

Isn't 'under the influence' considered to be anything over 0.5, which is when alcohol starts to affect your judgement and reactions.

Even you refer to the other party as "their antagonist". My comment relates to those assuming that the players may have somehow been responsible for the escalation of the situation. The club has made a statement, so let's see how it plays out before accusing the club of spouting BS.

You may be correct, but it has been reported that "...neither player was under the influence of alcohol when the altercation occurred and neither is expected to face disciplinary action from the club". Is that from witness accounts, or were the police were called in (something that hasn't been mentioned) to interview those involved and to test alchohol levels?

Male violence against women should be everyone's problem... how many serious injuries or worse, deaths, do there need to be before people get the idea that intervention is not such a bad idea?

To that I would say end male on female violence... that is a BIG problem.

Melbourne went 8-0 in 1965 and still missed out on finals.

Hence my comment “maybe this is a case of us seeing what we want to see.“ Couldn’t agree more with your last statement.

The implication in Juicebox's comment was that the players threw the first punches... maybe this is a case of us seeing what we want to see.

I think you could apply that to just about every club in the comp.

Isn't it? So whose GF was it that was being harrassed?

I like to believe someone is innocent until proven guilty... I have no issue with the story as it stands, but if it is proven otherwise (the club should have CCTV footage or there are no doubt numerous phone vids circulating already), then I will be happy to criticise them.

My issue with Juicebox's comment was that he automatically assumed that the Richmond players were the first to throw punches and that it was just further evidence that they are trash with a trash culture.

Had you considered that perhaps Rioli's GF was not handling the situation well, or that the offender was too munted to understand that his attention wasn't appreciated. I agree that toxic male behaviour should be rubbed out, but as we are not privy to the whole situation, we are both probably best not commenting. The reason I called the original comment trash, was that it immediately assumed that Rioli and Bolton must have been the aggressors, based purely on the fact that they play for Richmond.

Ok, pick the Dees fan in this lot... he lives in Sydney nowadays and sat in with my band a few weeks ago...

Apparently the guy behaved inappropriately with Riolli's GF, Rioli remonstrated, the guy punched Rioli in the eye and Bolton stepped in to defend both Rioli and his GF. Your assumption was pretty much trash. Edit: I would prefer to see the clubs place a ban on players going to clubs etc during the season, so that if such things happen, the players can be disciplined. They are supposed to be highly paid professional athletes, and by putting themselves in a position where 'heroes' might try it on with them, they are not doing the club any favours.

The last time we were 8-0, in 1965, we failed to even make finals!

I actually feel for the umpires as they, like the players, are having to make split second decisions and therefore are not always going to get it right. Unfortunately, they don't have the benefit of slow motion replays from countless angles, but have to make a decision based on where they are standing in relation to the action... people might say they should consider the decision before blowing the whistle, but then those same people would probably complain because the umpire took so long to signal the free; they're damned either way. This is not meant as a serious suggestion, but maybe they should introduce an appeals system like in cricket, where a team has two or three appeals available to them... but, to make them think twice before they appeal, if the appeal fails, a 50m penalty is applied ?. And I certainly do not buy into the conspiracy theories that have the umpires (or certain umpires) hating the Dees.

The main impact of Spargo is that his pressure enables team mates to get more of the ball. And when he does get it himself, he rarely wastes it.

I didn’t realise that Salem was a christi... oooh, hang on, I see what you meant now.

Jackson

The reason I wondered about the possibility of the number of teams affecting things was that in a 12 team comp, there may be less easybeat teams than in an 18 team comp... so depending on the luck of the draw, it could be easier to string together a large winning streak in an 18 team comp.

If we beat Carlton next week and Port beat the Dogs, we will have that two game buffer... and that’s a scenario that is not so far fetched.

To the first or second part of my question?