binman

Mine was in the 3rd q (I think). Viney gets a head high free as he streams forward with a center clearance. Barely slows down, plays on immediately and runs out of the square and puts the ball on a leading jkh's chest. The future right there. Jamsrs mark and Tyson's goal weren't bad either!

Not here saty. There is no way Roos will drop Terlich, no way. Running out of credits? I must be watching a different game to some others because he's done nothing this season but add credits to his bank. One of the first picked on form but given the importance of a settled back line is an absolute week week out lock.

Funny article from Barrett. By his logic Hodge should have been suspended last year when he accidentally broke Murphy s jaw. He wasn't. Surely that case is precedent for this one as in that case it was determined it was accidental as it is in this scenario. Realistically he only had one other option which was to run into Lynch front on. If he did go front on he may well have caused even more damage to lynch(and almost certainly would have hurt himself in such a hit) as he may have hit his head flush with his chest. He might have broken his neck in such an incident. Which would be ironic given he likley would have escaped being charged. In any case his decision to turn and brace is consistent with OH&S legislation where one of the most important principals is your first duty of care is to yourself. If he didn't turn his body to protect himself he may well have ended up with one player with a broken neck or smashed face and one with a chest full of broken ribs or internal organ damage

Gleeson is a huge football fan. I think he barracks for the blues or tigers but i heard him interviewed not long before he retired as chief steward and he said one of the things he most looked forward to was being able to go to the footy

That doesn't make sense. Of course the impact was high and once found guilty he should have copped 4 down to 3, which is what the rules proscribe and therefore not unreasonably severe. If you are looking for a possible disincentive for not appealing it would be a concern that they determine he got off too lightly.

oh please. By one account he did so to highlight his clean record so they could give the lowest possible penalty

I could not agree more. So much for bawdens promise of transparency and clarity about the rule. Also how on earth did they determine impact was medium?

I get people are upset but having a shot at Gleeson is rubbish. Read the above article to understand why. And by the by it is really stupid (and sadly typical in recent times where knee jerk is the standard reaction) of people to bag him out for his question to Viney asking if he could have spun out of the way. One it is his job to prosecute the case. Two Bond (who was at the hearing) said in response to dimwit Healy and Russell's incredulity about Gleeson's comments (he's got no idea, has he ever played etc) that in fact it was clear he was only half heartily suggesting it as an option, said it with a slight grin and was actually giving Viney the opportunity to clarify he had no other option (a dorothy dixer that Viney accepted). Context not apparent in tweets from Schmook. Bond was actually quite forceful in his comments and made it clear Gleeson was doing a good job. It's one thing upset demon fans not understanding context and being sucked in by social media quite another for so called journalists and media people to not get it. Des Gleeson is the perfect man for that job and it really annoys me to hear stupid unwarranted criticism. He is a bloke that deserves a bit more respect as reflected in this quote: 'It is no fluke Des Gleeson was known for his integrity when he carried out his duties in one of the highest offices in the horse racing industry. For 35 years Des was a race steward and he did his job so well that he spent the last 12 years of his career as Victoria's chief steward.' http://www.moynegazette.com.au/story/1238365/profile-des-gleeson/

And i doubt mids get many more disposals on average. Its the back half whose numbers would have increased given they're the ones doing much of the chipping around (with some midfield help)

In good form there Saty. Liked this line: 'Asked Dave Misson about Watts, said he will be fine, which could mean he will play or be out for 6 weeks' Thanks for the reports guys

good comparison. Also a left footer, which is a big plus I reckon as it gives him a bit more time.

Wayne Carey on tf reckons he'll get 5 weeks. The others agreed. What carp

no he won't (rest him). No chance. In an interview on dee TV stone says assuming his form is good he may well stay in the side for the rest of the year. He may never be dropped.

The same goes for Terlich in my book, in much the same way that it used to for Dunn and more recently Bail (who by the by has proven why it would have been folly to drop him and why a coach would not drop him). Jones, Terlich and Bail are all best 22 and will not be dropped. They play their role, gut run both ways and are fierce competitors. Byrnes is the other one some people are calling to be dropped but as others have noted players are judged by Roos on their capacity to play their assigned role and i'm assuming Byrnes is doing that. he stays. Roos has also said that players will only come up from the twos when they are absolutely banging the door down and have played 5-6 weeks of good to great footy (eg Jetta). From the reports from Casey there doesn't appear to be many in that category.

I agree. I am assuming they've looked at it and said 'jeez we don't know, let the tribunal sort it'. And spot on,we can contest it without fear of copping an additional week

No changes, unless injury forces them.

Good post. If indeed he has decided he is going your hypothesis would be very Roos like (and smart) even though he has said previously in such a scenario (knowing a player is going) he'd play him in the magoos. The Hawks would love him given Lake might only have another year. It would be a terrific almost like for like replacement (though Lake is a better player, albeit one near the end of his career). Still i'm not convinced he's gone. We can pay him some good coin and by all accounts he is a loyal bloke. I think he is overrated by non dees fans (ie by those who don't watch him each week) TBO, but i would love him to stay - even if we pay a bit overs (which i doubt would bother his team mates too much given his service) and we miss out on the compo pick we would otherwise get. Great vote of confidence in the club and he is a super popular teammate by all accounts.

That's awesome Clint, just terriifc - many thanks. Just about to watch the HD replay on my new 27 inch monitor. Ta

Did we win?

I've always wondered about that. Lets say a non believer lives a positive life full of caring and sharing, it wouldn't be very christian to refuse them entry into heaven. I mean its a bit churlish to say - look you've been terrific but given you don't believe me you can bugger right off

I'm with you on that Jabberwocky.

Who asked you (insert emoticon here)

As if a mere disciple could predict the ways of the Zen master

Well i certainly was in the should be dropped camp. That said i'm strangely happy that Roos has decided not to. For one thing he played a complete dead bat to suggestions he might be dropped and immediately took the air out of the watts wrong with watts clamour. I am of the firm belief that Watts problem is related his confidence. Dropping would have reinforced to him that he is no good. But also perhaps going back to the twos would helps JW avoid scrutiny. I know this is a bit of a contradiction of my previous point but maybe playing under the glare of of senior footy is more helpful than running around at Casey. I trust Roos to take the right approach and if this it it then terriifc.

It felt like 233 goals!