binman

It did. And their first for the game arguably (papley mark, setting up a crumbing goal). I can't recall another, but no doubt there was one. Given the 666 rule they would be frustrated they only got three goals from 17. I'm.not saying its great, or not a concern. Only having four is a worry, as is 13 differential obviously. Viney out must be a factor.

True. But as is often the case for teams we play, the swan's entries were almost all messy, wide and shallow. . Because they blanketed lever, which was smart, we couldn't rebound as well as we have done. But even so, their centre square clearnanced generated bugger all scoring opportunities.

I didn't pick up the roos tagging him. But at the ground tonight it was clear the swans did. Though really double teamed him, with Sinclair looking to help Heywood. Smart. And really limited how damaging Lever was. But you pay a price sacrificing a forward to negate a defender.

He will be a star.

That joke is so old Freud told it at his first conference

Happy freud day

Surprised harmes got the nod ahead of number 32. I wonder if they will run him as a hard tag on Kennedy, their best mid and even at his stage of his career arguably their most important player. Shut him down and they will really struggle getting it out to their outside players. Which will really help to negate their strengths and desired game plan. Not surprised melksham stays in. Laid 3 tackles last week and his pressure was better. And is arguably our most damaging kick.

Mothers?

An old school journalist who has good contacts and cultivates and maintains those relationships. Reporting on rhe politics of football has it place, and is an important part of the reporting of football. Particularly as it relates to scrutinising the league and clubs. As stakeholders fans need to know there are some checks in place. Which is a key role of the press. And she has been the best at this for the better part of 30 odd years. Tough, uncompromising and writes well. In short good at her job. And has to do that up against two of the most sexist, patriarchal, boys club work cultures in Australia - footy and journalism. The problem now is that reporting on footy politics dominates the coverage game. And, is in turn dominated by ambulance chasers looking for 'scoops', clicks, and gotcha moments. And gossip. So much puerile gossip. This new wave take the trump approach - flood the zone with [censored]. Some will stick, some will get traction some will prove to be correct. But much will be bull [censored], which if actually called on it, the 'news breakers' will deflect and blame their source. But they hardly ever get called on it. Because the flood the zone strategy is very effective. So much rubbish, so often mean there is no time to analyse, or question, just move onto the next bit of gossip. There are a million examples. Tracc to pies just one recent one, which could well have been a strategic leak. Because a strategic leak is counted as a source these days. And never questioned. There will 5 more such examples today. Four of which will relate to the pies. And Caroline has to wade with the gossip mongers and amateurs in this zone flooded with [censored]. Must drive her spare.

Agree. The best in the business. And not coincedentaly, a qualified journalist

Just tommorow night's game

Who would know. But looking at the AFL crapsite there is this tile ATM: https://www.afl.com.au/matches/team-lineups It says underneath the tile: announced 6:20 EST. However, it doesn't indicate which day. Of course

Agree on all points. I watched all of the Casey game and was underwhelmed by Harmes' performance, as much as anything by his approach to the game. Sure he got his touches and looked a level above. And i get that it was a low standard opposition and low pressure game. But for mine he lacked intensity, and worse burnt teammates in better positions shooting for goal a couple of times. Which is a really bad look for a senior player wanting to get back into a team that has made selflessness a foundational principal. As you suggest he fares very poorly in any comparison with number 32. Agree he had a more rounded game, but also played with intensity Harmes lacked, was selfless and went full throttle from go to whoa. And whilst the opposition were not much chop I was really impressed with his decision making and execution. I'd be shocked if that performance is not rewarded. I think Harmes is limited player. Can be relied on to play his role, which is a real positive, and is fit, but i don't think he is in our best mid rotation. I don't think it is a coincidence he plays his best footy when tagging a gun opposition player who takes him to the ball. And its possible that he might come in tot the team only when there is that sort of role or him

From the fox article linked above: NSW Health has declared that anyone who visited the Azure Cafe during that time frame is a casual contact, meaning they must get tested and self-isolate until receiving a negative result.

#the footy media is crap as it is a big boy's club full of bonehead ex players and hopelessly conflicted peanuts like eddie, player managers, board members, club employees etc etc Does my head in. Example 97, 562: This morning on RSN old mate Brad Johnson was on. Of course he was asked about Tracc's seven year deal. In between joking with another ex football bonehead (and current AFLW coach) Daniel Hartford about how brilliant it would have been to be offered a 7 year deal and how quickly they would have accepted it, he opines that 7 years is too long and 4 years is the 'sweet spot' for top shelf stars like Tracc. Fine. But here's the kicker. That answer came after his response to the first question he was asked. The question (paraphrased) was: would he be happy for the dogs to offer Bontempelli (whose contract ends this year) a 7 year deal? The answer (paraphrased) was: chortle, chortle, [censored] yeah! Lock him in for as long as possible. Sign him up for life! So the dees (and other clubs) should offer a generational player a four year deal. But Johnson would be thrilled for the the dogs to offer their best player a seven year deal. And is this ridiculous contradiction pointed out to him? Of course not.

That's nothing. Viney trained with the hawks before he was drafted too. Also told to cool it because the players were super worried they would get hurt The difference is Jack was 11.

This is only the case for close contacts. Which longmire and his merry band of assistants are not

What a coincidence. I directed my on call work crew to strip the Cabots they just put on my deck at my chalet at Thredbo and replace with the Woodcare "Dexpress" Merbau. Then asked them to do the same for my little shack at Wye River.

Indeed. And the problem is that if there is very little spread or an outbreak does not occur it is easy to say 'see, what an over reaction' . This is similar to the challenge of getting traction for effective prevention policies across community the social wellbeing spectrum, particularly health policy. It is hard to sell an absence of something. Easier to treat the symptom than address the cause. Cheaper too. In the very short term. Which unfortunately is what government is often focused on short term success increases their chance of reelection. Much, much more expensive in the long term however.

I watched it after you posted. Tracc was in good spirits. Hard not to like him. But what he actually said was 'that usually happens often. Which didn't sound as funny as your edit. And was grammatically and linguistically headache inducing.

Disagree. Number 32 was, in my view, best on ground by a mile. Weed was good and worked hard. But he benefited from a woeful defence and the ball coming in under no pressure. Missed some gettable shots. And frustratingly applied little forward half pressure and I can't recall him laying a tackle.

No risk of that!

I'm in the camp that one week probably wasn't massively unfair. But i did think he also might of just copped a fine based on it being accidental not careless. Or some such. But I'm also in the camp that an appeal was a total no brainer. I mean the only downside I could possibly see is burning 10k. Which of course is easy for me to say. Even if we had lost the appeal, you could argue we still get some press coverage for our sponsors and some we're a top club, don't mess with us vibe for our fans. But the reward for winning the appeal is the clincher. We are a better chance of winning this game now. And for any number of reasons that is worth WAY more than 10k.

Big call, but agree. Trac is the sort of player you build a club around RDB is a great comparison, both in playing style but also star power. Dusty is an obvious companion too, but no less accurate for being so. The genius of dusty is how he performs in the big games. Three Norm Smiths is mind blowing. But he has also played a lot of top shelf, game changing games in other finals and big home and away. To get to Dusty's level that is what tracc has to do, which of course means having the opportunity to play in big games. But i have no doubt he will be desperate to prove himself in such games. Where he does differ from Dusty is he gets more of the ball. A lot more. He is averaging 30 odd possessions and is weapon all over the ground. Whereas Dusty is really a forward who has bursts as an on baller, particularly at center bounces, (from which he almost always goes forward). He doesn't really go into the backline at all. Welcome by the way.

Refreshing.