Dockett 32

Well done and I'm with you on this, but with 9 blokes on the list 180 or under ( mostly lightly framed) I wonder if we have this right.

"seems that opposition players were just exercising a "duty of care" to Dangermouse whilst he recovers" Would seem that way DC. Colin Sylvia may have covered it in his twitter message on the subject. But who knows , maybe the Dangermouse is an OHS basket case and has 'huge AFL payout later' written all over him, or perhaps as he was just being trounced by Beamer and Trengove the week before, he simply thought he needed a mechanism to call it a day? Either way I bet his mother is so proud of him kicking 6 goals 6 days later, while Jack sits in the stand. Lets see how the match review panel perform tonight. Is it the sling ( chicken wing) tackle thats a problem ( if so there should be a few holidays), is it the head thats the problem, could it be both? Should be a hoot. Why do I have this feeling however that I'll be disappointed with their performance?

Seemed like no one wanted to lay a glove on Dangerfield. Perhaps they couldn't take a chance he'd be concussed again.

"Who is responsibile for choosing those players?" Good question Harrison. I don't think its the board.

That's harsh. I very much liked what I saw last week and this week it seems everyone wants to sack him. I'm sure a mid term review will be coming up and the club will analyse the total football dept closely. I would expect they will require an improvement in the second half or the story will write itself. Personally I don't understand why we 9 players on our list 180 or under. I like running payers but I like them Judd or Griffin size.

Well they played with attitude last week and blitzed. I would be surprised if what was dished out to their mate didn't galvanise them even more. If we're all [censored] off how do you reckon the players and coaches feel? They will want to take their anger out on someone I reckon. Have a feeling what the pre match address may relate to.

Totally [censored] off like everyone else. Congratulations AFL you just created 35,000 (40,000 if JS gets his way) angry new MRP experts on the warpath watching for the next unjust episode. Dug a nice big hole. AFL quite happy to, unjustly, hang a good young kid out to dry. Hope they also hang their heads in shame when they put the medal around his neck one day. He's a tough kid and will become stronger for this. Redleg was right - 4 minutes to reach a verdict. Somethings rotten in Denmark and was from the outset. P.S. Looking forward to the next time we play the laggers.

Galbally warming up. Only had symptoms of concussion.

Geez, I thought he was near death.

Maybe Beamer is guiding Greeny on 'Twitter' apology. Anderson's a circus!

"the job ahead which is to overcome the adversity of the decision and the injuries that afflicted us during and after the win against the Crows." Yes despite our anger and pain, I think this is right. We just don't have time to dwell on it the pathetic injustice. Don't worry this preceedent and stupidity is going to hurt other clubs as well long term, we've just taken our pain early. Bizarre ending to what was such a good win and I hope the players grab the positives out of it and stick with the script. Also hope the media continue the good fight on this, it's a serious issue and shouldn't be left to die on the vine.

"It's important we don't go back into our 'Passive Shell'." +1

Good points you raise Redleg. If the match committee or Tribunal have been externally influenced on the decision then that is a very serious matter indeed, even more serious than the totally inept decision last night. If prior collusion were to be the case, there should be immediate resignations as the boy simply did not get a fair hearing. 4 minutes doesn't look good. Heat is on the AFL on two fronts now - The ridiculous report and the contempt shown to assessing the contesting evidence.

Wonder if James McDonald will be popping into the club this week?

Must be the night for unconvincing matters.

"so the MRP are now officially working ass-backwards... assess the gravamen of the injury - > if serious, charge player regardless of actual action..." Thats the sort of result I'm coming up with. Still unclear on any field umpire involvement however.

That Dangerfield did not return to the field because of concussion - combined with a damning post-match report from Crows medical staff - did not help the 19-year-old's cause. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

"Hey, I was crook as a dog and bedridden, nothing made me grin more but I wish I could have gone!" Possibilty of forgiveness Striker but only if you were unable to walk. I wish a few others would reorganise schedules and get behind the club and the players. Mothers day has a morning and an evening and covers 24 hours, or it used too.

Good one Walshy.Liked it.

Footy can be a tough challenge, but at the same time it can provide opportunity.

I'm thinking no weeks, but am happy to let JT make the call on the slur against him. Did the umpires refer this to the MRP as they surely saw the tackle?

THE MFC showed fight on field this week, I trust we will do the same off it. We must defend this kid, it is a very serious charge against his character and can impact in many ways. No one wanted to see Dangerfield hurt, I imagine least of all Trengove. Probably an unfair analogy but one wonders what Kennett or Eddie would be saying if JT were one of theirs.

Tks Redleg. There has to be doubt re the negligent accusation under the circumstances. 325 points!! That's probably more than the combined career total for Cambell Brown and Jarred Waite and will take another three weeks off total competition suspensions to catch up. Something is very silly here. Does not stack up.

Frawley will probably go to Thomas so I suppose he's a 50/50 chance with Col Garland. Maybe Riv if available, but I'm not sure of his injury status. The bloke who tore us appart last year was Harvey as I recall, so I hope they have a different plan for him this year. However I have digressed.

"A medical report from the Crows deemed contact between Trengove and Dangerfield was of a high impact." This is a new one for me. What came first, the AFL report or the medical report and how are they related. Is this a new can of worms that anyone can open if a player gets hurt? Can somebody please help me out with an explanation?