binman

Bontempelli looks a star doesn't he. Huge for a mid and will fill out even more

Heezus bb are you serious? Credit where credit is due. Good job mfc. Sounds like all did a top job

Oh...

%100 agree nasher. However I'm wondering if you meant to post this in another thread. Can't see many puns in this one

Watched the game today for the first time. The toump was terrific. Not sure where this tackle stuff comes from. One he laid some great tackles himself. Two yes he got caught with it a couple of times but so do m Jones and viney (who seems to escape critisim because of his attack on the ball). Instead of the photo of him being tackled we might have equally referenced the play where he brilliantly avoided a tackle and won the ball in the forward pocket setting up an easy goal. Class

Ta, i looked yesterday but it wasn't there

Replay available at http://bigpondvideo.com/. Note it will only be at that site for perhaps rest of today. Go to AFL TV tab on sport video. Bigpond only has last 2 games up. The other option is AFL live pass but even you get a four week free trial you have to enter credit card details and if you don't cancel it roll over into weekly payments after 4 weeks

Anyone know if there is replay somewhere?

Though ones got a dodgy knee and the other a dodgy foot. She might have done us a favour

Just read it. Incredible. Warner has shredded what was left of his reputation. Even if true - no particularly if true - surely you have to back up a statement like 'The maximum two-year ban will not be imposed because of the unique circumstances surrounding the two-year investigation.' But no he adds nothing to that sentence, not a single explanatory justification or note. He also says that 'The players have been provisionally suspended since infraction notices were issued on November 13. Any bans would be backdated to that date.'My understanding is that whilst that is likely is not a certainty, its up to the tribunal He goes on to say 'A six-month ban would sideline players to May 13, missing the first six rounds of the season. But ASADA could push for a one-year ban.' Could push for a one year ban? Apart from the fact that the tense is wrong in that sentence (the AFL and ASADA have made their cases as to penalties i think) on what grounds would they be pushing for 12 months. By the rules 12 months is a minimum sentence - and then only if the tribunal accepts the duped defense and halves the automatic 2 year ban. The only way it could be less under the rules is a discount for a guilty plea and/or significant cooperation and those horses have well and truly bolted. The article ends with a list of the bombers first six matches, implying missing six matches is the most they'll cop. Pathetic. Do the Hun editors really think such rubbish will influence an independent tribunal? Or is the game to set up the faux angst the Hun will almost certainly foment with 1-2 year penalty? Wind up the poor delusional bombers fans and play into the conspiracy EFC as victims narrative. Pathetic. The Hun should be called out. Or at least not be able to call themselves a news paper.

I always loved this logo. Not sure why. He does look like a Derek. Derek the accountant

Yep good call. It was will also be their mechanism to land on a suspension that does not trigger appeals from ASADA or the players

Yep good call. It was will also be their mechanism to land on a suspension that does not trigger appeals from ASADA or the players

I guess that means they should review their current strategy of having membership sales at all games and should most definetly not bother having them for sale at the Family Day on Sunday

Hopefully they have a permit for the gazebo they set up

Exactly the same....but different

It was normal training day that started at an abnormal time (to allow people to come at watch it). So not a normal training day then.

For crimes against the public service

You're not afraid of hyperbole are you.

I don't understand where the sweetheart deal is in my hypothesized scenario. The penalty i set out is in line with the WADA penelaites. The only wrinkle is whether WADA would accept the duped argument and halve the penalty. The backdating ASADA have already said is a possible (ie to the time of issuing of notices in November last year). The EFC losing 17 of its (best) players for a full season is huge so it would satisfy WADA and ASADA i would expect (but not the Hird media club). The players will be furious but will accept it to get it over and done with. Besides you have previously said you agree with my guess on the outcome

Dees2014 i think your predictions are way too doomsday. Ess won't fold. Won't happen. There won't be any appeals. There may be legal action from players but it will be settled out of court. But as you say we will see. I do agree that the likely penalties are 2 years, which will be halved to 12 months under the being duped clause. By end of March they will already have served 5 months (except for Fletcher and Watson - silly boys), meaning they will have seven months to go, which will wipe out this season but mean they are right to resume at beginning of next pre season. The AFL will allow the use of top players. No more than 17 will be required (and possibly as few as 13-15 if they run with a reduced list) so whilst they will not be competitive they will still field a side. And be back to full strength for 2016.

TDI,I'm guessing your last job was in the public service not the private sector. I hope PJ is a more attuned to basic market pricipals

That may be true (ie questioble returns). But it certainly isn't for merch. One employee to sell both to the true believers

Where does the quote from PJ come from? Makes things worse not better? A permit? Ooh big problem. $1000 only for set up? And that's a problem? Six memberships and some goodwill? Please

As the Fonz would say - Exactamundo. And the Admin should have made it a priority given such a move would have been a perfect way of operationalsihing key planks of their brand new Strategic Plan