frankie_d

What number is Gysberts?

Blease off with knee/leg/ankle injury. Byrnes run down from behind. North streaming out of defense. Howe just marked and goaled! Hogan has had more impact than watts. Terrible disposal. But it's just the NAB cup folks. Don't worry... Update. Howe mark and goal #2!!

FROM THE PRESIDENT Don't know how to feel - we rolled over, but cleared the air, did we?

From The Run Home twitter feed McVeigh says he had to google what GHRP-6 was - had never heard of it or laid eyes on it if they're taking GHRP-6 then 1) they're doping 2) they're in big trouble with WADA

I know a bit about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_androgen_receptor_modulator this is reliable and accurate the aim is to get selective androgen responses (so liver not affected and testes not shrunk, but muscle bulked up, if the target was muscles) In clinical testing Enobosarm (Ostarine, MK-2866, GTx-024) - affects both muscle and bone, intended mainly for osteoporosis but also general treatment for andropause and reversing muscle sarcopenia in the elderly and for cachexia in cancer patients.[10] BMS-564,929 - mainly affects muscle growth, intended as general treatment for symptoms of andropause LGD-4033 - pharmacological profile similar to that of enobosarm <If> it's this stuff, then they're gone - totally rooted.

Very happy with the new wearer of "my" number!!

It seems to me that CW is either making this up, or getting fed by the AFL investigation or people close to it. I may be late to the party in recognising this - but I just can't believe any organisation would leak like that (other than major political parties and their spivs). It's beyond belief if, in fact, the AFL is leaking.

Wilson's latest effort - Demons: shock & awful Just a whole lot more abuse, really - having a free hit. Whilst it's tempting to have a whack at her, better to let this all cool down and then act. Her writing is more lurid, less evidence based (unless she has the emails, she only has hearsay), and more sensationalist than ever. Lost what little respect I had for her,

Of course, the difference with the storm case (like our salary cap cheaters) is the there is chapter, verse and a book of accounts that demonstrates the breach of rules. So far, we haven't been charged with ANYTHING by the AFL / AFL commission. If we are charged with breach of some rule then the Club will seek advice (legal and other) about both the substance of the charge and the procedural fairness of the process that led to the charges being laid (e.g. entrapment?). Then a response will be developed. In the case of a breach of the salary cap regs, with evidence in black and white, taking it on the chin may well be the course advised - in the case of tanking, the whole think might be a murky shade of grey, and we may be advised that a challenge is sensible and required. Sponsors, I am sure, are being kept well informed!

Every word has a wig on it “The Board of the MFC is concerned to ensure that the MFC is treated fairly and properly. The board will fully co-operate with an independent, lawful and transparent process." Good statement

not to be compared to RDB, or Ox, or the sainted R Flower, but one of the quiet men - Peter Walsh - never saw him make a judgement error, great poise of half back - quiet and did the job - love to have about 10 of him. of course, we traded him to Port for one M. Newton !

interesting - I'm no fan of CS (far too much management babble and believed his own "Whiteboard Wednesday" drivel), but if this is internicine warfare from previous / jilted execs or board members, then we're royally screwed. A pox on both their houses. Perhaps the loss of Jimmy has allowed the jilted pricks to surface and cause trouble that they never would have if he were around to deal with them? What a mess

From the Flanagan article "However, this week's report that there was a tacit agreement among the coaching staff not to win games takes the matter to anew level. If proven, a grey issue turns into one that's black and white. " Not too encouraged by that...

A lot of Google searching doesn't bring up the Constitution of the Melbourne Football Club (the Club) anyone have a web link to an online version?

Less supportive, it is understood, were some Melbourne players who spoke up at three-quarter time and vowed to try to win anyway, which they nearly did. What a sorry affair. It's the "anyway" that changes the whole thing around... and we only have Caro's word for that - but again, if true, is really bad news, and tell us much about CS + CC + DB + the board - if the players were trying to win ANYWAY, then the whole management structure (pretty much intact, I note) needs to be fired out of the barrel...

From the age " Less supportive, it is understood, were some Melbourne players who spoke up at three-quarter time and vowed to try to win anyway, which they nearly did. What a sorry affair. " If (if) this is true, those running the club then, if they're still around,have to walk out the door. It's sickening to think that the players would have to speak up. In opposition to something (directive, culture, whatever) that made losing the desired outcome.

Given that perception is reality in the world of media and advertising, I wonder how our sponsors are feeling right now?

I'm concerned if those who made the errors (= monumental [censored] up) are still at the helm. Lots of players gone (no complaint from me) but where's the governance renewal. Whiteboard Wednesday, anyone?

One of the reason's that 186 won't be something that we should just "get over and move forward". Things were rotten, and despite the new FD best efforts (100% support from most of us here on D'Land), a stench still surrounds those managing the events around that day. I don't want to see us get any penalty (for all the reasons mentioned above - everyone else was doing it, the AFL turned a blind (or, rather, wide open) eye... but I don't believe the governance of the club was in good hands then, and nothing has effectively changed in that area since. A few people walking out the door might make a big difference.

Here's a thought - how about we do both - look forward (and I 100% support the current FD), AND (gosh!) look back and see what we might learn for the future. You know... "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"

This. Looking over the shoulder has it's problems, but "whiteboard wednesday" and "the red and blue print" and "we know the way to the top is through the draft" don't make for pleasant viewing. In terms of public face, CS seems to have pulled his head in. I still worry about our governance, though. If it weren't for 186, then would we have Neeld/Craig? The board, in my view, have been asleep at the wheel for far too long.

Morton after the game "The truth is, my team mates didn't trust me. I knew that I so much work to do. And they were true to me" Don't tell me culture doesnt matter.

When Hawthorn had a bad run for a few years, names like Brereton and Dunstall came on board. Serious players with serious cred. It would be sad if we have import that to our club, but we just might have to. I am not optimistic, but will do all I can (like everyone here).

Watts is bringing back lots of bad memories. Intensity lacking. Sellar 5 contested marks up forward.

Time for me to put my hand up. I have the deep suspicion borne of being there in 64 and seeing little since to make me smile. I expect us to be done over by all and sundry. When he looked grumpy, the ghost of HWFUA kept on niggling at me, and I thought he was gone. I was wrong, couldn't be more happy about it. Go Dees!