hardtack

Warnock is doing very well in the last line

I'm liking Newton's aggression

Jones is fast becoming one of our best kicks

Garland had treatment on ankle and is back on.

Dastardly clever cryptanalysis skills. How many of us could have seen the 'c' and the 'o' in MacDonald and the 'o' and 'k' in Stockdale and worked out Casey's real plan is to play Cook in the backline.

Well, I liked this... funniest thing I've seen on this site in a long time.

to be pedantic (or is that anal?) its actually ht not Ht B)

Or, if you really want to be pedantic, as it is a single word, it should probably be neither "Ht" nor "ht", but "h"

And HT, I actually find AFL360 to be a little too opinionated to be a good source of analysis - not to mention that fact that I find Robbo a little unsettling, as I continually find myself waiting for him to start weeping as he becomes all reflective about what a great game AFL is etc etc.

As if I'd use Mark McClure ! Fwiw, he isn't on Insider.

He's H's reference.

I hope that "H" isn't a reference to me... last time I looked, McClure's not on AFL Teams either

There are too many people on here looking at panels on Fox to support their views and it isn't healthy.

They are idiots on individual teams - they 'skim read' while we 'delve into the minutiae' when it comes to the Dees.

They are in a position where they take a much broader view and do not have the blinkers on that many of us do - I do not dismiss their comments summarily simply because they are "Fox commentators" - I'm not saying you do this, but I find it funny that often people in these forums (Demonland and Demonology) will respect their views when they are positive or supportive of the MFC, yet as soon as they make a criticism, they are suddenly all idiots who have no clue.

In this particular instance, what drew my attention to their comment was the fact that they were all in agreement, which is a very rare thing.

Put this is the wrong thread earlier: "Look Out!! There's Danger-afield!"

Whilst DC's post had nothing to do with Bate. I find your statement regarding "media pundits unanimously expressed surprise at his omission" a little unusual...........maybe I haven't read enough articles.

Sorry, I should have been more specific and repeated my earlier comment on the first page... it was the entire panel of the AFL Teams show on Foxtel.

Banner could read: "Look Out!! There's Danger-a-field!"

you need to get your sarcasm monitor or eyesight looked at

Yep... eyesight plus the fact that bate seems to be the whipping boy, so my perception monitor was out of whack (I took it to be a reference to Bate's worth as a tackler) - my apologies :-)

better make that10-non-excessive-force tackles......

Perhaps then you can explain for me why the media pundits unanimously expressed surprise it his omission, stating he was one of the main reasons we had so many entries into the forward line. And please don't use the old "what would they know?" chestnut.

It's funny hearing all of the anti-Bate sentiment here, particularly as the panel on Fox's AFL Teams show were unanimous in their disbelief that he could be dropped as he was responsible in a large part for our successful forward thrusts and pressure. Obviously they are seeing something that no-one here seems to be seeing, but it is interesting none-the-less. And as for all of this putting of the boot into Bennell... I still think he offers a lot to this team... I really do not understand why so many have it in for him.

I think it's about $20 for a guest pass into the redlegs area Mousey, Punt rd end. Access to the Hassett room which has players not playing that day speak at half time and retired players usually in attendance on QB.

Make sure you attend the post match function as well, good chance to chat with players and other supporters.

Is that $20 on top of the usual members free admission, or on top of a paid reserved ticket?

does the penalty get worse if he appeals a second time... and fails?

No, as stated elsewhere, he already received the maximum for the charge.

I'm another who is going to his first QB bash!

Booked my flight from Sydney and hotel in the city two days ago... can't wait! Last saw them in Shanghai, but it's been a few seasons since I have had the chance to see them play here in Sydney.

Vlad will be angry.

Maybe if he overrides the decision as a nod towards the media and general football public response, he will go down in history as "Vlad the Impala - man of good grace".

RN I think you have only blind faith to support your argument.

We have lost two of our best players of the last 2-3 weeks, both helped us dominate the centre clearances last week.

Our first replacement Ruckman is out for the season along with the next guy ( Fitzpatrick )for 8 weeks.

Martin is under a cloud and Campbell has no fitness and needs to be up graded before he can play.

There is no replacement for Trengove who is even half as good.

Add the loss of Grimes and we are staring down the barrel.

Then the big one!

We have not beaten North or anyone at ES since Adam played full back for Jerusalem.

The way things work when we play, all of that has us winning by a clear margin.

Just love a good conspiracy theory... shame this is a less than ordinary one.

I would think this will secure a spot in the side for Juice and Gawn may get a run (even as a sub possibly?)

Just announced on On the Couch :-(

Well, let's hope you are right AllenIsLord13... but I still get the feeling he is gone regardless. One thing though, I think this querying of the medical report simply because it was a club doctor's report doesn't hold much water. These people are qualified practitioners and stand to lose a lot if they are found to be "tampering" - if a doctor's report based on a player's condition at that time cannot be trusted, then what other options are available?

They over look it every match when players don't get concussed by it. The sling tackle is either illegal and whenever it's applied a player should be suspended (there were half a dozen of these in the match last night). Or it's legal. You can't just single one out cause the player who's been tackled is more prone to concussion then others.

You get no argument from me on that point... but let's face it, since when has the MRP ever been consistent in it's application of "justice"? I would make the same argument about intent... if a player goes in with a swinging arm intentionally and misses, then I believe that player should get the same penalty they would have received if they had connected - if you are going to eradicate certain "behaviour", then intent and actual contact should be regarded equally (but that is a whole different kettle of fish).

Dangerous Tackle!?

What is the game coming to when you can't bring a bloke to the ground who feels and tackle and tries to get a kick away.

Not in the back, not too high, doesn't pin both arms. Its a contact sport where sometimes players accidently get hurt. Trengove does absolutely nothing wrong.

The tackled player is not moving and a tackle could equally well have been made without slinging the player to the ground in that manner; when head injuries and concussion are very prominent issues at the moment, do you seriously believe the MRP is going to overlook that?