monoccular

I think you are right re "getting games into the kids" though M_M beat me to the punch re Saints being further from success that us. Riewoldt will not be there when they next "enter the window". Many of their other top echelon are aging. The Doggies have developed their list and youth particularly well over recent years - remind me, who was their coach last year and what is he doing now? :-) All of those newbies you mentioned have played some really good (though perhaps inconsistent) footy and could well be selected ahead of those older "depth players" you named on merit alone.

And WADA have their own rules of evidence, I understand. I doubt if they will put up with this [censored] regarding chain of evidence. "Did you order the drug" "Well, yes" "Did you get it" "Not so sure, but we did inject something that we thought may have been it" "GUILTY" !!!

Surely a club should not be able to delist then rookie players banned by ASADA or WADA. Makes no sense to me. They should be delisted immediately, and having served theiir sentences go back in the pool like a newbie if anyone is prepared to take them.

That has been one of my biggest negatives about our teams for years, especially under the latter part of the reign of ND, and under DB and MN - it is gradually coming good but still a long way to go. When they do PTFO and run it looks a hell of a lot better, and we score.

I haven't yet seen the game - but would "resting" Gawn at FF whilst Dawes was rucking at least have stretched them a bit? Would he have been able at east to raise a 20 metre gallop to a contest? If the interchanges are reduced as much as some say (40 a game?) a ruckman may well have to "rest" up forward, as may some of the mids of course.

plays for North, and another for Gold Coast. Relevance? yet footy is a winter game! At least for now for us - hopefully very soon it will also become a springtime game

I may not be correct, but I thought that I detected a bit of tongue in cheek in Biffin's post. I certainly hope so.

Is that so we can go and play a most frustrating game instead of watching one??? I hope someone does, assuming he is selected in the team that plays us. Knowing the Dees however, the players will take your advice literally and we will play him into form :-(((

Well, both did have "off field issues" so there was al least some similarity.

I asked on another thread - does anyone have any info at all on just what is wrong with VDB's foot?Disappointing news if he is for a prolonged layoff.

From your picture, FITB, looks more like "picks and chews"!

Many looked unwell??

Couldn't agree more - Fitz has played some good games NB Footscray. If he had been fit today and played a blinder for the Scorpions I would have been really [censored] off. As it was he sounds as if he was another of the stricken. ect!!?? I know it was depressing at times but that sounds pretty radical. Maybe you meant etc? have you ever had to go to work with the flu or similar illness?

If you read carefully it is said that a large number of players were ill - too many to leave them out, Given Jack's major turn around recently, and the (apparent - I haven't yet been able to see the game) poor / insipid performance of him, and as I understand such regular contributors as Nathan Jenes and Bernie, maybe give some consideration that some were not physically up to playing but had to. To anyone who has ever had flu or flu-like viruses, would you feel like or indeed be able to walk let alone run around on a footy field for 2 hours at peak performance level?

I have seen Lynch make a turn within the radius of the 50 m arc, which sets him apart really.

one can only hope - have you heard this as fact from somewhere, or speculative?

A bit like Goddard moving from the Saints to the Druggies searching for the ultimate prize :-))

Sorry you had to endure that, KC, but your observations are appreciated. Looking forward to your usual summary and list of better players. Thanks

chook - thought for a moment that you were referring to stuie going missing too often. Many would say not often enough :-) But I agree re Garlett - he has contributed a lot. One poor game (possibly related to illness don't forget) does not merit his being dropped. Silly knee-jerk suggestion.

He played a signifiant part in our unexpected win over the Bulldogs, and IMO could have made the difference when we played the Druggies and Daniher was unmatchable. Similarly today (though of course he was unable to play for Casey either due to the illness , the effects of which so many here do not seem to understand.

antivirals, maybe?? Estimated 40,000,000 in the 1918 pandemic - more that the whole death toll of WW I Now I am not saying that whatever some of these guys had was that bad, but 'flu and 'flu-like viruses can sap all energy. As I mentioned elsewhere, if just one or two had this they could be replaced, but if as has been suggested 18 or so did then obviously there was no option than to play them. Not good for the team performance, and certainly potentially harmful for the individual both short and long term. see above re ?how many were stricken. How many fully fit were available? (The Scorpions MFC players sound as if they had a bad day too). Sometimes [censored] happens. vide supra And someone asked re 'flu shots. Bit of a +/- in a way, as they are usually not available until about mid season, and they can make some get mild 'flu symptoms for a few days. They don't give full protection but usually result in good modification. All that said, I don't know what the health or immunisation status of our players was today - do you? And, yes; 'flu a'int the common cold, though that will even take maybe 10% off a top athlete's performance, which at top level sport is more than enough to enable for example Carlton to beat the Hawks, were the latter badly stricken. We here don't actually know. Not making excuses, just saying that the team's performance may have been effected, especially at the start and the end.

Surely it will depend a bit on who was 'under the weather' today with the virus, and if it was as widespread as rumoured then it may be a matter of last man standing. Also I haven't seen the better player list at Casey, though it seems the team had a shocker - again, maybe, partly virus induced. If on player is viral, keep him away and don't ff. play him: if many are there may sometimes be no choice.

Yet your next 4 votes went to mids! We're the rest that bad?

That is pretty unfair on Jones and Bernie. Reportedly Jones was one of those with a virus, and to say he was having a sook is offensive after all he has given us. Maybe Beenie was also one of those afflicted.

Which is what I was getting at.