hardtack

I think I don't like the word as it's generally some of the more irritating posters that use it... present company excepted, of course.

I actually prefer to see demeaning words like 'f l o g' kept on the list but your average expletive permitted - would be nice to see 'spud' added to the list as well.

You beat me to it! "Live by the sword, die by the sword" springs to mind.

Under the current regime, we seem to have done quite well with the likes of Hannan and Pedersen.

Are you talking about the use of preterite-present verbs and some irregular weak verbs in which case the past subjunctive differs from the past indicative, but only in the singular form?

I think you'll find that many (not all, of course) of the older brigade are the more reasoned posters on here... if you look through the posts, the most vitriolic seem to be by posters who join at times like this (Watts being traded off etc) to do nothing more than sink the slipper. I've always been a Watts fan, but I would never go so far as to say he has consistently been of much value to the club on game day over the past 9 seasons. Yes, he lifted and helped win us the QB game against the Pies, but as Aristotle once posted on a Forum, "one swallow does not a summer make". Can't agree with your other post: "I find once a person reaches xxxx+ posts I ignore them, figure they are not objective and share a group think mentality". The numbers of posts are most often a reflection of the time someone has been a member on these boards; they are certainly not a reflection of a poster's ability to remain objective. As far as "group think mentality" goes, this being a supporter's forum would tend to indicate that we are all guilty of group think when it comes to supporting the Dees. Oh, and the following should have said: "As a newbie it is a AN aloof community"

Redundancy RB? I too would love to see Rohan running around for the Dees... despite being somewhat injury prone, I think his upside would be fantastic.

With regards to PJ's involvement, I'm guessing that Beetle is speculating.

More surprising was the fact that the change didn't first get put to a public vote! .

Imagine how I felt when I found out that Robert Johnson, Hudie Leadbetter and Elmore James had all passed. And now I believe that Hank Williams may have gone to meet his maker as well????

Quite often the "facts" don't tell the whole story. Yes he had a gambling addiction, but did it affect his ability to lead on the field? - to the best of my knowledge, he was considered a very good captain. The fact that he overcame his addiction could be seen as a measure of his strength and resolve (it is far easier to fall into addiction than it is to break that addiction); he certainly was not the first prominent player to succumb to that particular evil and he almost certainly will not be the last. Re the EFC drug scandal... he was supposedly cleared of any involvement (I doubt assistant coaches and other supplementary staff would be been granted immunity). We really have no idea of how much he was privy to, so I will give him the benefit of the doubt in that case. Yes, the way this is playing out in the media is not a good look, but it certainly didn't hurt Dustin Martin when things went in a similar direction at the Tiges. I am still of the belief that Watts will be staying at the club and will become a better player as a result of this whole episode (at least, I hope so).

The bulk of your post I'm not entirely in agreement with, but I take issue with this line in particular... Goodwin took us from 11th last year with a percentage of 97.6 and 10 wins, to 9th this year with a percentage of 106.5 and 12 wins, many of those wins concocted with a number of our best players unavailable. Having no experienced ruckman after Gawn and Spencer went down, Goodwin was forced to improvise using Watts and Pedersen, which in turn meant a complete rethink of the back and forward lines as players had to be shuffled around, often into unfamiliar positions. Yes we probably should have made finals (and probably would have had an experienced coach like Roos still been in the driver's seat), but to say that Goodwin was average (reads like failed) as a first year coach is a very very harsh call.

If Skin had been a Doggies supporter, he could have gone with Raylin Jong... what a lost opportunity! (Alternatively, he could be a Minecraft nerd? - Deamond Skin)

I know they're completely different "animals", but it certainly worked for the Tiges with Dustin Martin. Closer to home, Nev was another to be given a BIG reality check, one from which he has never looked back.

I think you mean "Everyone is entitled to an opinion" as long as it aligns with yours... your response to WYL's "opinion" that he doesn't really care, says it all: "Geeez you are daft. It's not about women''s league vs men's league ..I am pointing out that we seem to have a number of people working for the club that are not die hard demons. This does not happen at other clubs. "

Well, if the MFC has an issue with it, I'm sure they will let those concerned know... I get the feeling you will find that the club would give them its blessings.

deleted due to stupidity ;-)

Couldn't care less... he rejected Richmond to come to us, so I have no doubts where his allegiences lie http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-05/troy-chaplin-rejects-tigers-for-demon-coaching-role). Our season is over, he obviously still has good friends that are with the Tigers, so let him enjoy a little time off. How do you feel about our players going out and getting [censored] during the off season?

Last I checked, Richmond don't field an AFLW team... not sure how her supporting the Tigers' men's team in their first GF for some time, affects her performance for the Dees AFLW team.

To be fair, there is an Attorney General's Department that can deal with changes to the law including marriage law. Why do they not use a survey to determine changes to other laws? Was there a survey to determine how the public felt about changes that allowed defacto couples to have what are essentially the same legal rights as traditionally wed couples? Have there ever been surveys relating to changing the age of consent or the legal age for marriage? Also, and this is a serious question as I don't know the answer, how was SSM legislated in all of the other "western democracies"? Did any one of those countries that allow SSM go about it with a survey as has been done here?

When I first read it, I thought it said "fiscally"

Um.

EH... that's precisely why I said "assuming that is definitely the case". The article still maintains that climate change is a real thing and is happening, so we should be working towards reducing/eliminating its impact regardless of how much time we do or don't have.

So?

Isn't the keyword in that headline "occurring"? Perhaps we should be grateful that the predictions/models have been wrong (assuming that is definitely the case) and that we have more time available to us to reduce the effects... it certainly doesn't mean we should abandon the treaties and not take preventative measures.