Slartibartfast

Thanks fella's, really appreciate the effort.

It's an opinion Matt, live with it.

It's better than most. He's got 14,000 odd recorded. The mind boggles.

Thanks, that makes me feel better.

Wasn't it Barrett that reported that he'd miss the first 6 weeks of the season and DL went on a Barrett witch hunt? Just asking.

Misson had a terrific record at Swans and Saints, I think he's very good. What most here are frustrated about is the setting of expectations only to have them broken. Hogan was a chance for R1 apparently but is now looking like mid season. Garland was having his operation "now" so he'd be right to go round 1. He may play R6 despite "going really well" in all the injury updates. I think most appreciate it's a contact sport and the injuries players get will take varying times to heal but I think many are frustrated at unrealised expectations. One or two weeks variation in an estimate is fine, Garland and Hogan are months out. That disappoints, particularly as they are very important players.

LOL. Gotya, thanks.

Oh, and Chap, he's played 3. Round 1: Round 2 And Sunday makes 3.

Fair enough, but why the different rules for JKH?

Can someone explain why we are so in favour of JKH staying in the team but loath to bring in Salem. The reality is JKH has played some nice little cameos but not performed well. Salem has now played 4 or so games at Casey and done well. If JKH is in the team then Salem should be as well. If not, JKH should also be at Casey learning the ropes.

And Bennell.

According to reports Riley was very good as was Harmes. Both played midfield. See Demonology for a report on the game.

You've been disagreeing for about three pages of this thread. Do you reckon we've got your point?

Love Flanagan but fail to see the brilliance in the article. His offering on the Demon supporters resilience a week or so ago was exceptional and a different class to this one.

Jamie Bennell played really well last night keeping Wingard quiet and rebounding well. His speed and ball skills were eye catching and he got a fair bit of it. Good to see him do well but sad it's not with us.

I think it must be a bit like Viagra. No pain associated with the problem but fixing it makes the world of difference!

It depends on what chance you're talking about. If you're talking about the people I've mentioned I've ignored more chances than you could imagine. But I like consistency from posters on their attitude to issues.

Shall we talk about Schwab, Neeld, McLardy and Lyon then? You seem to have changed your tune.

Yes. It's probably why they didn't take him.

Thanks Webber, that give me hope. From your knowledge does the injury Trenners has present in the way you are describing? Do you think it's highly likely/likely/unlikely that when his foot has healed he'll regain his pace and acceleration? Appreciate your thoughts.

Let me try and put my question more simply. If it wasn't hurting why would it effect his kicking and pace. If it was hurting why was he playing?

How did Jordie train, after all, no Jordie no Melbourne.

TBH I don't get it. Has his foot been an issue since 2012? Has it stopped him pushing off (acceleration) and his pace (speed) the whole time? If it has then the mind boggles as to why he was played and if it hasn't then he's just slow. I really hope I'm wrong but I can't see how this changes much in terms of his physical abilities.

I expressed some concern about this a couple of weeks ago and was flippantly dismissed by RPFC who said "The Tassie chestnut...groan." and then followed up with " I can be arrogant and dismissive and I apologise with my last one with regard to the proposed Tasmanian team. You will have to excuse me on this issue - this is one rare subject with which I have inside knowledge on the status of their bid. Having to hear about the closeness of this team to eventuate has done my head in on here for a few years now because I am related to the consultant used by the Tasmanian government to lobby the AFL for a team. It was effectively abandoned when the GWS decision was made, and then the earth was salted when they re-upped their deal with Hawthorn for 2012-2016 at $18.3m for the 5 years. The Hawks saying goodbye to that money is one of the many obstacles that a revived Tassie bid will have to overcome. And the government will have to make moves pretty soon if they want to revive it." So I'm absolutely confident we can rest easy as RPFC has insider knowledge of this issue and has promised to chase it up and let us know if anything changes.