hardtack

A Tom Scully thread was created specifically for discussion of ALL matters Tom Scully related... why start another topic????

Well, Sheahan certainly came out of that looking pretty silly.

I suppose the real answer here is that when he has others around, he doesn't HAVE TO try to do more than he is capable of; this is where. I think, a lot of the unjustified criticism of his game comes from. Too often he has to carry too much responsibility. As for Petterd, yes he was quiet early in the game, but who cares... he stood up and put in when it really mattered and helped to stop the game from slipping away. That is what good players do!

When you consider how much misinformation, hearsay and inuendo has been spouted in the various forums in relation to Scully and the volatility of the subject matter, is it any wonder that some of us apply "exacting reporting requirements"? I for one, am willing to take Scully at his word (what he said has been quoted numerous times already) - he will sign a contract (for whoever) when he is ready. How many of us would sign an extension with our employer when we still have six months to run on our current contract and why should he be any different in that regard? And if I were to be looking to improve my circumstances at my current place of employment, I certainly wouldn't be signalling my intent to stay until I knew exactly what was going to be put on the table.

Going to Casey was the best thing that could happen to him... Petterd's rise started with the Casey game against Collingwood and has continued since. He has rediscovered his mojo and is not going to allow himself for the remainder of the season, to be in a position where demotion is an option.

That's exactly why he was given "crap"... his first two posts contradicted each other in terms of who he claimed to have spoken to. And even now there is reason for doubt as in the first post he states that he DID speak to Sheedy, yet in his most recent post he states that he definitely DID NOT speak to Sheedy. So, I for one, am taking this hearsay with a sack full of salt.

In Sheed's world, they are the bottom feeders who thrive on his rumours to sell their publications.

My kids won't let me... oh, and what makes you think I'm the person on the right? ;-)

You mean in the same way you ignored the whole premise of my response? That is, your contradictory statements. (I'll admit my closing line was somewhat juvenile, but I couldn't resist the play on words given the film RB was from... plus, being juvenile at age 59 is, I think, a good effort).

Then why did you start your original post by saying: "I attended the GWS 'Captain's Club' function at the Swans v Pies game last night. Spoke to Sheedy, Dipper and the GWS CEO.", and yet you made no mention of the opinion being passed on to you by a Foundation member. You original post reeks of shenanigans and your second post compounds that by contradicting the first. Anchorman or Wanchorman?

care factor re tipsters = zero

You were doing well up until this point (but I will put it down to temporary insanity due to the hour at which you were posting):

Not to mention they will be wanting to stamp their authority on the game right from the first bounce, so I think they will want that Jamar/Moloney combination up and running early.

You see, if you had used the power of the internet, you would have found that the Walter Sobchak quote is actually: "I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude. Across this line, you DO NOT... uh also, Dude..." yada yada

And yet, here you are (and yes, your attempt to justify it with your comment re trawling around for garbage etc didn't go unnoticed - internet equivalent to "oh, I buy Penthouse and Playboy for the articles"). If you were really concerned about such things, you would never walk out your front door. Like anything else, the internet and social media are what you make them. Yes, there's a lot of garbage purporting to be "the truth", but there is also a lot of very useful information to be had as well... you just need to be discerning in what you choose to believe. A tweet takes a few seconds to throw out there, so it is hardly likely to be having an impact on Jones' game. Tweeting also throws him open to a lot of open and honest commentary on his (and the teams) performances than he would otherwise get anywhere else... you are kidding yourself if you think he comes onto Demonland, Demonology etc regularly to find out the current state of the football nation.

I doubt very much he has been banned from tweeting as Morton, Sylvia and Gawn are all still active. I get the feeling he maybe decided he wanted a break or perhaps after the Pies game, he sent himself into self-imposed exile to escape what must have been a lot of unfriendly tweeting. And just what are these "political" tweets digby? I certainly don't recall anything particularly political in any of his tweets... and even if I did, I would never consider having an opinion, political or otherwise, as "going too far".

Absolutely no way I would want to see Jones going anywhere... he is an integral part of the team going forward; rather than farming them out, we need to be bringing in more players with his attitude.

Has his appeal been heard yet? If not, then that is not necessarily so.

I agree... I'm not for one minute suggesting that Bartram be dropped for the game... I think we need a number of smaller players and that there is a role for both Bartram and Bennell - I just happen to think Bennell would be a better match-up on Nahas.

I understand what you are saying, but it really has to be a case of horses for courses... and I don't think Bartram has the pace or agility to handle (or nullify) Nahas who is probably in career best form at the moment.

My problem with Bartram is that he tends to "panic" when he has the ball and is under pressure - that leads to his making the poor decisions for which he has developed an unfortunate reputation... and Nahas has the pace to create that kind of pressure. Bennell is a much cooler customer in those situations.

I would be keeping Bennell in the side to counter Nahas... he is probably the only player we have that has the pace and agility to match it with Nahas.

TS = anagram for "To Sydney" TOM = anagram for "Tom Out of Melbourne" Yes, the signs are there alright!

I think TS knows we want him to stay... there is nothing we can do other than cheer him on in every game he plays. The more things we do that are designed specifically to tell him we want him to stay, the more uncomfortable he is going to feel... what's the good of that?

Don't tell me, you disappeared up your own fundament?