nutbean

Someone on thread mentioned JKH as being a loner and stand apart from the group (can't find the actual post). I live in oakleigh and was walking the dawgs tonight past the Oleigh chargers ground. They were training and I got talking to a trainer about the next gun from the chargers. What he told me I found very interesting. Even though they are two years apart JKH and Dom Tyson went to Trintity and both captained the chargers (did not know that). He said they knew each other both before and after Tyson went to GWS and were friends and JKH was over the moon to come to the demons because "his friend Dom was at the MFC. My first bit of inside gossip - make it of it what you may.

he can seriously play the game

I will say his dreamteam points have been decidedly underwhelming - trade him for pick 20 and Sylvia for mine.

He should be thrown in jail and the key thrown purely for being at Zagami's

RIP Tommy Will always be known as the man who invented the 25 letter alphabet - "runnin, kickin, hand passin"

I dont think his decision making is bad as some suggest but he does need to clean up a bit of his disposal skills.

I wasn't really talking about physical development ( although there is also that) - I am talking about development of skills and developing of necessary attributes to play AFL - following instructions and growing as a footballer - the continual education for footballers necessary to take them to the next level.

pay both...pay none - dont care - just consistency

Roos admitted he made a mistake in subbing out Tyson. In context, out of context, any context - for under 20 games Tyson has been a revelation. No knock on Jetta ..but please,,,,,,

You can argue good decision or bad decision but if they paid the cross decision then Byrnes should have got one as well.

What irks me is that universally demonlanders recognise that development almost stopped under the Neeld regime. We also recognise that Roos, Stone and co will develop players. We have seen improvement from a few on our list that were previously written off. Yet people keep harping on about how Mckenzie played under Neeld. BB is right in that McKenzie may have lots ahead of him now and won't make the cut. Happy to give him until the end of season so I don't look like a dill like most of the demonlanders who wanted Dunn gone.(there plenty of those !)

Other teams may want him when he wont have a contract. You can't talk to players when they are under contract - I am under no illusion that managers of players are contacted before contracts are expired to test the waters/lay of the land/subtle and not so subtle inquiries.

Other teams may want him when he wont have a contract. You can't talk to players when they are under contract - I am under no illusion that managers of players are contacted before contracts are expired to test the waters/lay of the land/subtle and not so subtle inquiries.

Other teams may want him when he wont have a contract. You can't talk to players when they are under contract - I am under no illusion that managers of players are contacted before contracts are expired to test the waters/lay of the land/subtle and not so subtle inquiries.

I am well and truly sitting on the fence after getting well and truly scorched by Scully. As has been said - he is not a free agent so to get to Freo it is going to cost plenty if thats what he wants.

So I'll bite - if you now think we have an elite coach and an elite player developer - something obviously missing before then why are you so quick to write anyone off ? I agree that many seem to have gone past Jordie and if he cant become more rounded then we may well see him moved on. All he can do is work on what he is told to do -which maybe completely different to what his previous coaches have told him. You are 100% correct we do have a new team in place and one preseason and 6 games is not enough for me to be writing anyone off. ( Note - Pederson, Bail, Jetta etc ) - and that goes for Jordie as well.

He also did something on Saturday night a few times that showed me he is growing in confidence. Most of our midfielders who grab the ball in the centre throw it on their boot immediately. A couple of times at least Dom opted to run with the ball and drove it deeper to a contest. A much better outcome than a blind kick in hope ( a blind kick in hope is still better than no clearance at all !)

Will come the time when we take on the rugby union rule - the ball can only be played when you are on your feet. Cross was blindsided when he slid in - to me thats the difference ( and I also felt the Byrnes one was similar). But you are right either pay neither - or as you have said - pay both.

I hope the decision was overturned because common sense prevailed - not because the appeals board thought the decision was right but "people power" didn't.

They still have a way to go on the sliding in rule - Cross got pinged for sliding in when the opponent came running in from the side at the last minute. Again there has to be some common sense - when a player chooses to slide into the contest, sees the legs and takes them out then that is what the rule is intended to stamp out. With Cross, the player came from side unsighted. It got worse that there was a similar incident 5 minutes later down in our forward line that did not get awarded. (I dont think either of them should have been awarded)

On reflection they must consider whether they have right reasoning power for the job. They had to decide on balance of probabilities whether it was a brace or a bump. At worst, they should have decided that there is doubt as to which one it was - therefore not guilty. That they could conclude that it was a bump amazes me. They weren't sold out by the system. They just reasoned badly. People power doesn't run the judiciary but people power certainly shouts at the top of its lungs when there is incompetence and thus injustice.

His first tweet was ridiculous but read his article again. I am far from an apologist for the hack journalist that is Barrett but he said it was the Tribunal/MRP thinking that someone gets hurt someone must pay. Up until the appeal he was absolutely right - that was their thinking. The problem with his article is he did not reach the conclusion that most others reached - judge the action not the outcome.

Problem has been that we have inexperienced coaches that have been thrown into a cesspool. Little resources and a poorly run footy club with a close enough good enough culture. Changing the whole culture of the place is as an important a task for Roos and Jackson as the everyday priority of winning games.

I disliked Barretts tweet that the Tribunal got it 100% right However.... If you re-read Barretts article - he was expressing thoughts that a lot of us thought. That the MRP and Tribunal doesn't care about actions - only the outcomes. The tribunal rules thats if someone gets injured then someone must pay. Lots thought here that the appeal board wouldn't overturn the decision. What I disliked about the article is he didn't then reach the obvious conclusion that the philosophy is wrong - the philosophy should be judge the action then if guilty take into account the outcome. Last night the appeals board took a step away from outcome based decision making.

He was right about supporters frothing at the mouth. we were ! But for a very good reason Which has now been rectified.