binman

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.

Which would be fine if in fact Roos comments were not hearsay and the quote by Robbe57 potentially incorrect. I have watched all of the Roos 360 segments and i freely admit i might be wrong but the only reference i can recall where Roos discusses watching Casey is him (on a couple of shows) mentioning doing so via 'the tapes'. I have to say i have enjoyed the Allison reviews however i have no doubt the MFC players would not feel to wrapt about how scathing they can be and i am not as comfortable with them as i initially was. It is worth noting that in Arrow's post about this he didn't say the players were in revolt or anything but that a couple were not super impressed. And nor would they be. For those that say they should toughen up i take up Nutbeans well made point - if MFC players in the two's are subjected to honest appraisals why not the seniors? You could argue that such honest appraisals might give opposition teams a leg up but i don't reckon that argument holds much water given the amount of opposition scouting and analysis that goes on.

The haters gonna hate

well good they have admitted they were wrong but cad you quite rightly say big game changers. The bail goal came at a crucial time in terms of the bulldogs getting momentum, obviously cost us that goal but also another when dunn elected not to run it over in the last. The Murphy one followed on the heels of the bullies getting a holding the ball call in the middle of the ground and if paid Barry would have had a shot from 50. The dunn one was probably less important as I think we got the ball but there was only 90 seconds left and it would have allowed us to set up properly. In a six point game appealing. To be balanced however it must be said the free that gifted jamar a goal was very sticky touch wood and should not have been paid

yep he was calling me sweetheart which I found very amusing. Watch the footy sweetheart was one of his phrases along with a few other creative ways to use it. Also said something about who my puppet was. Couldn't work that one out. As my mate said (my puppet?) isn't waiting for the evidence the right time to make a call? I made the error of engaging with a moron. No winners there

here

fair enough

Rf I obviously have not made myself clear. I have never said we didn't make a mistake taking the toump. I have said we will not know for years. Is he a better player than wines ATM? No? Will he be in future? Maybe. Simply put history tells us that is folly to make definitive statements so early in player's careers and is a sure way to look silly.

RF, this is what i don't get. When you say the sooner 'we' accept we made a blunder drafting the toump the sooner 'we' can move on who is 'we'? DL posters, the MFC, Roos? What do you mean 'move on'? The irony of course is you and some others clearly believe we made a blunder yet it is the same posters who seemingly find it impossible to 'move on'. How about you accept nothing can change history so 'moving on' is the only logical conclusion. What's done is done. Or do you feel the need for a chorus of DL folk to agree with you that we made an error? Which by the by will to be possible to answer for some years. Case in point you could swap the names Watts and Natanui a few years back on DL and exactly the same discussion was being had. Except there were even more people saying we made an obvious blunder (and some who were so strident in their views they simply could not countenance alternative views). I guess there are still quite a few on DL who still think we made a blunder but i'd be guessing the numbers would look pretty different today.

Spot on hardtack. The bullies are at least a year ahead of us in terms of development, a point made a number of times by Roos this year. They have a much better mid field and are a terrific clearance team. The're so strong in the middle that they could afford to let Cross go - one of our best mids this year. The dogs are a better side as was evidenced by the fact that despite the same number of wins the bookies had them as clear favorites. Lets not forget the week we beat Essendon (a bottom 8 feeder at best) they beat the Maggies who are every chance of making top 4. Do we have a top 4 scalp? No. So despite a very poor first half a 6 point loss to a better side is no cause for cliff jumping.

AS Roos has said we need more quality mids - particularly big, strong ones. Its crazy really, if you look at the top sides they have up to 10 players who play through the mid field and most of them are strong clearance winners. We have the 3 you have mentioned and Cross. We need 6 more. Some we already have (Trenners, the toump, Salem, Riley, Michie) but still we probably need at least 3 big bodied mids at he next draft period and ideally, if we can engineer it through trades, a plug and play one in the Tyson mould

That's funny, that's what the bloke near me yelled after saying the rule had been in place for years. He also said it happens all the time when i doubt there's been more than 4-5 paid in the last 3 years. Funnily prior tot the call he was yelling for holding the ball which seems to suggest that in his view Bail was under some sort of pressure

Spot on Nasher. Some pretty sertious over reaction in this thread - but each to their own. My take? Negatives: Apart from a bright first 5-6 minutes (which we failed to convert into goals) we were woeful in the first half, on a par with how poor we were against the bombers. Poor decision making, rubbish kicks and poor set ups and stoppages I was surprised to red during the week that we were 18th in clearances. Not for long though. They smashed us at stoppages in the first half which is a real worry. It was obvious watching it and i saw the stats and half time and they reflected how badly we got beaten in this area (can't remember the numbers but is was a huge differential) I thought Roos was out coached in the first half and the the doggies had it on their terms The forward line took a while to adjust to no Frawley If Dawes was a keeper he would be called iron gloves The bail decision was the worst decision i have seen this year. No small feat given the standard of umpiring this year. Made more annoying by the fat that when i bellowed my disgust two even louder bulldogs fan yelled i didn't know what i was talking about and that had been a rule for years. Morons. The same two btw who screamed at the throwing decision (a t the far end of the ground) in front of our goals. A decision that was subsequently proven correct by a crystal clear replay on the score board - and when i pointed that out the response was along the lines of 'nothing like waiting for the evidence to make a call'. Moron The bail decision got into the head of Dunn who cost us a goal for not rushing it through When we got the lead we should have moved heaven and earth to ensure they couldn't clear the ball from the next bounce. They cleared it and that goal was the real winner Positives: I'll give more positives later but one that stuck out for me was that we were 37 points down in stoppage time of the 2nd quarter. 37. And we headed them and should have won. In the last 5-10 years year that would have translated to a 10 goal loss. Like the game against Essendon we showed terrific resilience to force our way back. The loss is gutting but that is progress. The losses will sit in the bank and can be drawn on in the future as can the fact that we can fight and get back on terms. We lost that game in the second quarter not the last.

who is trying to justify picking toumpas? Is that the point of rabbiting on about toumpas in a post match discussion thread? OK I get in now. How about those who are annoyed we chose the toump start a thread, call it echo chamber and complain to each other

I could have picked any number of ridiculous posts to make my point that there is serious amount of rubbish in this thread and for that matter dl . So many stupid, illogical definitive statements that it makes my head spin. Cannot stay composed and pinch a win? Except for a game 2 weeks back where we did precisely that. And for gods sake what has toumpas got to do with anything. Those who seemingly acannot accept the fact that the toump is a demon rather than wines etc what point are you trying to make? Or have I missed something and you can go back in time? Is the critism for the toump, the recruiters or the club? What relevance does it have in a post math thread? I'm with nasher on this - such rubbish makes DL hard work

Good review kc. The dees can't afford a stand alone team so the only realistic option is to as you say invest in Casey and make it work. Kc would it work for the dees to take more control and the scorps becoming the Casey demons? It seems to box hill hawks are more integrated with hawthorn. Is that right?

Well mine were JL solo

I agree. A working class mid is something to be