hardtack

For the superstitious or numerologists among us, there were three interesting results that would have been perfect except Port had to go and mess it up... Crows 111 Saints 54 Lions 121 Dockers 64 Bummers 131 (see a pattern emerging?) Port 61 (party poopers)

I had a bit of a chat with him as my son and I were crossing the adjoining soccer field on our way back to the city. Lovely guy with a great sense of humour. Let his son take a shot with my camera.

Yeah, he had one of the padded helmet things... with the beanie on top, he resembled some kind of medieval Catweezle type.

Credit for the majority has to go to my 15 year old son Liam; he's picking up the photography game pretty quickly.

The thing is, he is capable of doing it in the AFL as well.

As I commented on the shot, "If it's not, I had a great chat with his doppelgänger ?"

Kennedy had a very good game.

Yeah, would be nice to have a few ordinary players that could bag 4 goals.

Thought I'd spend the afternoon in the hotel room editing training shots (mostly taken by my son) and watching the Casey game. Off to watch the drug cheats vs the Deliverance crew at Etihad this evening; you do these things when you get to Melbourne only on rare occasions. See post below for link.

I think it's Flipovic (sp?) who's running laps at the moment... if it is, he's put on a hell of a lot of muscle since the weedy kid I saw training in January!

Looking forward to finally getting along to an in-season session.

According to Lewis as mentioned in the Age: "He told Fairfax Media the game would have a finals-like feel." it may be a true statement, but not the wisest choice of words given it's the QB game.

Hogan mustn't have gotten through training!

I would have thought that the best plan would be to change a player's approach to the game to remove the chances of being concussed at all. Most other players don't suffer repeated concussions, so what are they doing differently? Even wearing a helmet that "may reduce" concussion, is not going to lessen the long term affects... I don't know for sure, but isn't there a chance that all it is doing is prolonging the players footballing career while possibly masking the longer term affects due to more lesser concussions occurring over a longer period of time; this could be just as bad as a career shortened by severe concussions .

No idea...it was an interesting comment none the less.

No, we don't have a bet because I, nor you, know what they will do. China stand to benefit in terms of trade by stepping to the breach in the accord. Altruism is dead, but if it benefits all parties, no one will be complaining about that. As an aside, it was interesting that even in Pittsburgh, the community Trump use as the example he was doing this for (leaving the accord), the mayor stated that they would continue to work towards the accord's requirements.

No, you have no idea...just a guess. No different to how you view the predictions of climate change scientists really.

Like you, I have no idea, but I unlike you I'll wait to see before I cast my judgement.

Wrecker, I suggest you and your mates head off to the next summit and set all of those so called experts straight. They obviously are not in your league.

Standing up to radical Islam by proposing a ban on all middle eastern countries barring those who coincidentally he has business interests with? Remind me, where were most of the 9/11 attackers from and which countries are on his proposed immigration ban list? You know for a fact that the Paris Accord is a scam... congratulations, you have managed to see what almost every other leader of every other nation on the planet has been blind to. Frankly, I see very little difference between the likes of you and the conspiracy theorists at the other end of the spectrum that believe the 9/11 attacks never happened. All Trump has managed to do is open the door for China and lock themselves out. Let's see how great America is when no-one want to deal with them.

Wow, Lever is a bit of a head hunter.

Corrected

Easy to mislead with a simple sentence. Try this: A few hours ago it was reported that: "Beijing and Brussels have been preparing to announce their intention to accelerate joint efforts to reduce global carbon emissions. According to a statement being prepared before an EU-China summit in Brussels on Thursday and Friday, the new alliance will say they are determined to “lead the energy transition” toward a low-carbon economy." https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/31/china-eu-climate-lead-paris-agreement Or this from the original agreement: "Based on analysis by some of the world’s leading energy institutes, China’s INDC represents a significant undertaking beyond business-as-usual and will help slow the rise in global greenhouse gas emissions. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), International Energy Agency (IEA), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Tsinghua University, peaking carbon dioxide emissions around 2030 would reduce China’s emissions by at least 1.7 Gt or 14 percent from the most optimistic business-as-usual (BAU) scenario" https://www.c2es.org/docUploads/chinas-contributions-paris-climate-agreement.pdf

Yep, sure is: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/01/europe/eu-us-climate/index.html