binman

. Interesting point made in that article. Asada put forward that ess and hird agreed to a joint investigation and subsequently a huge amount of info was collected (which etc now want put aside). They argue that if ESS had raised their concern then they would have changed their approach.

the key is to be consistently delusional.

Not a glass half full kinda guy? But i agree we could get smashed if they really come to play as i feel like we're hitting the wall a bit. That said if they are a little off and we are really on, an a day that might be a slog (remembering they had a slog last week and only beat bullies by 13 points at home) we might cause an upset. So much better this year, even though we have only won 4 games i go thinking a win is some chance rather than last year we're avoiding a thrashing was the best you could hope for

Was a forward as a juniour iirc. I'd like to see him half forward

As if you would criticize them - to their face - you keyboard warrior!! .....sorry about that i had a sudden dose of the Satrys

it was an absolute shocker wasn't it. He made some point criticising what he called the football commentariare (or some such thing) that made no sense whatsoever. Who edits that paper?

we were well beaten by a much better side.

out of bounds on the full

there wasn't a story a month ago. She was wacking gil for not coming out and defending Harcourt not being silent on the ESS/asada court case. Bb where I do agree with you is that as you say she perhaps conflates the governance issue, which as you say they have been pinged for and the prohibited drugs charge. To be honest I find myself doing the same sometimes

It makes me laugh how often dank makes some threat to take people and organizations to court and sue them. Three in that interview (Harcourt, asada and Ziggy) to go with his numerous other threats. Talks a good game but yet to actually follow through. A big mouth who is all talk. Didn't he ququetily withdraw some action the other day?

not quite sure what you mean caro was premature about the afl not making comment. They were accurate when she made them and perhaps were a factor in gil making the comments in the article you posted a link to. By the by the quotes attributed to gil are slightly innacurate as he said caro about half a dozen times as he was in fact responding directly to her questions. Good journalism

Exactly. Hits the post and goes through for a goal then it is a goal. Everything else remains the same. Last week i heard a guy om 3aw call in with that suggestion and that [censored] Tony Shaw and Caro both cut him off and dismissed it out of hand, making the assumption that his idea would be the same as the one trialed in the NAB cup (and not letting him finish). They argued that it would change the game too much. Rubbish. I would argue the rule noted above is actually how it has in effect always been paid. That's to say goal umpires have always missed the odd one that has actually hit the post (rarely the other way i guess). Stopping the play for 2 minutes while someone looks at ridiculous and not useful camera shots that hardly ever change the initial call from the ump is in fact changing the game. Why not choose an option that is free, does not stop play and is accurate as the alternative method (video, hawkeye etc)?

I'm with you Jara. A good article. I like that she criticises both the AFL and Essendon as Rohan Connolly did a few days ago. It really is amazing how unbalanced the Hun articles are. It must frustrate Yobbo no end she knocks up getting awards and got a couple for her coverage of the essendon saga last year. One of her strengths on this issue is trying to keep the focus on the failure of duty of care and the health of the players. I also enjoy her on 3aw.

Some pure troll comedy gold in this thread from Satyriconhome - a poster i have blocked but cannot help but still see given surely he is the most frequently quoted person on DL. The reason i blocked him? Well there was a few but the clincher was his troll behavior and blatant hypocrisy in the thread where seemingly straight faced lauded the overly critical and belittling public comments of Welsh and lambasted posters who had a contrary view. Compare and contrast that position with the one he is taking in this thread in which he once again is the righteous defender of the maligned demon player nee spuds that DL posters have the temerity to criticise on a fan discussion forum. Gold #don't feed trolls

I have been thinking exactly the same thing actually, particularly in regard to Blease.

. I reckon saying absolutely nothing is the right thing ATM. One to comment means dancing to the efc's tune. Two what do they have to anwer to. Nothing new has happened. The conference was in 2013. Its only in the news because the hird Murdoch PR machine has decided to air it now to advance their own agenda. Three - and to mind the best reason - the silence from the afl must be infuriating to little, hird and their media lap dogs. Finally it gives the story no credence or oxygen. Good strategy I reckon

post neeld ironic?

Doc Thompson reckons one of their drugs helps treat cancer. So all good then. If you have cancer. Chemo helps treat cancer also. I wonder if doc Thompson reckons that would be good for their players also

I disagree, his legacy won't be too badly trashed.

I have some vague recollection of a sports conference in Johannesburg and the issue being discussed. The funny thing abut Harcourts comments is they are completely spot on and his views are shared by most footy fans. Its actually refreshing to hear comments from an AFL person sans the usual spin

I thought i had seen something somewhere saying the above and just scanned a hard copy of the Age and realised it was in the Rohan Connolly article WJ posted earlier in this thread (not a bad article btw). The relevant quote is: 'Suspended Essendon coach James Hird’s lawyers on Wednesday used Harcourt’s speech, which managed to escape public attention for eight months and may otherwise never have emerged, to support their claim that a joint Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority-AFL investigation was illegal.' The video is from November last year. How long has Hird and Essendon known about it. One presumes it didn't just fall in their laps now. Why haven't they jumped up and down about it before now if it is such a big deal? Perhaps they considered it an ace up their sleeves for use in just such an emergency. But the fact they have likely known its contents for some time makes Little's furious indignation seem a little hollow. As Connolly notes 'shining a glaring light on the most ill-advised sports science program imaginable again does the Bombers no favours in a moral sense' and reflects how desperate they - and Hird in particular - are to embarrass and attack the AFL. Link to article here

Wj am I right in thinking this video has surfaced because hird introduced it as evidence in the current hearings to prepare for the case in August?

Wj. Big kudos. I'm loving your posts on this issue. By far the best and most useful stuff I've read on this issue. Not trying to be ironic but getting good reliable info from what is essentially an alternative media source shows why mainstream media is under so much pressure and also shows up how poor much of it is

Yes, clear to supporters. But not just to supporters, clear to the wider football world (fans, media, other clubs). I think taking opportunities to reinforce externally what is valued creates a framework and set of external expectations that supports developing a strong culture based on those things valued (hard two way running, team defense, team first attitude etc). Roos has been at pains to reinforce these values externally (as opposed to to internal discussion with players) and has said he wants it to be clear to all and sundry what the club stands for and what people can expect week in, week out when the dees play a game. Think of the bloods culture at the swans or the perceived attacking, corridor focused approach of the cats or the defensive pressure of Freo. These approaches are highlighted all the time (in the media, by fans etc) and i would argue this reinforces the desired culture and makes it harder for players to stray from it. Just the fact that dees fans expect all players to gut run both ways this year and can identify when a player doesn't is evidence of how external pressure can reinforce a club culture It might be a long bow but perhaps one motivation for such honest players appraisal is to contribute to creating a set of external expectations that support the development of the internal ones.

Yeah fair point. Perhaps they are critical rather than scathing, which is perhaps why i can't quite make up my mind about them. That said a couple of player reviews have been pretty close to the line between scathing and critical i would have thought (the Evans one a case in point) They certainly make good reading and do have the benefit (which is perhaps the aim?) of making a clear point about what Roos demands from the whole list and what he values.