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 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 !)

Not that you don't want pay someone their worth but the benefit to Melbourne if he signed a two year extension would be that it wouldn't be an expensive exercise. If the footy department believe he has got what it takes to develop into a really good footballer, extend the contract whilst his price is low. I reckon it is a risk after 6 games ( even though he has shown plenty) but an acceptable risk.

Then perhaps demonland is not the best place for you ?

So you think supporting a club means you are therefore excluded from expressing opinions critical to players ? Following your logic, if you shouldn't criticise the players then you shouldn't criticise the management and the board ? And by that logic when you as a member see a totally inept board ( sorry for being critical), at the AGM you must sit on your hands as voting against them is voicing criticism. If you voiced your opinion saying that over the top rants and personal abuse on players is not on then I agree with you. But this forum is set up to voice both praise and criticism. I applaud Saty's loyalty to players but at times feel it is a little misplaced - of late he has moved more to the centre and expressed opinions on Tappy, Strauss and Blease that if they cant get out and play AFL they will be gone by years end ( damning from Saty !). There are posters who criticise here with some intellectual rigour to back up their criticism - they don't go over the top and abuse and that's fine by me.

what a jidiotic way of spelling it .

if I play my cards right, I might get a Freddie Clutterbuck tonight. ( neh...dream on)

Nonsense ! I have seen his highlight reel - he doesn't knock doors down - he kicks them in. If you think that Viney is tough - watch this space.

To be accurate - I don't think many are bemoaning the delisting of Magner. There are a few ( who in my opinion rightly) are mystified as to why he wasn't given more of a go when his form at Casey and our complete lack of a midfield warranted senior selection.

I don't see it but trust that others in the football department do. I don't buy the argument he is the 4th rookie selected. Either a player has a reason to be on the list or he doesn't. I personally don't see it myself but obviously others do.

goes back to that same old argument - talent vs development. I have no idea whether a lot of the boys we have picked had any talent to start with. I do believe we have been very poor in developing as even our success stories have reached a good level but never any higher. Therefore I am going to give a clean slate approach to Nev and see what he can do in one year. I have not seen anything yet to give me great hopes except a fierce approach to the contest - maybe the development boys can teach him to find the ball more.

I was sitting in the front row on the boundary and a pack formed right on the boundary line and Jack was sitting in the seat next to me waiting for the ball to come out.

I have been reading all the very bad humour - you guys are such dags

Well without being flippant -I so want the Dees winning to become my preferred drug of addiction.

I suppose being uninitiated in drugs my key questions on alcohol vs drugs is the concept and affects of moderation and secondly the road to addiction on alcohol vs drugs. I can have one drink and I can work, drive and interact coherently( some may question this !) .Can the same be said for taking a drug ? Unless I am mistaken there are degrees with alcohol - I have one drink and it has a tiny impact on me. An almost imperceptable degree of calming ( taking the edge off). Can you get the tiniest bit stoned on drugs ? More importantly is the addiction question ( which I honestly dont know the answer to) - take 10 guys and give them one beer everyday for a month - after the month how many could stop without any affect - how many would be on the road to becoming alcoholics. Now replace the beer with say ice. With zero insight or knowledge I would suggest that affect a month would be the % of ice users that are moving to addiction be much higher. Thats why I question the equality of the terms social drinker and social drug user. Again I will put in the big disclaimer of not knowing and just throwing out my unsubstantiated thoughts.

I rarely drink (lucky to have 10 drinks a year) and dont do drugs. I understand the devastation that alcohol can cause. My mind tells me ( with absolutely no data at all !) that the percentage of social drinkers becoming alcoholics would be significantly lower than social drug users becoming addicts ( and the discrepancy would be even more pronounced if you take weed out the picture). There is a perception that social drinking is ok and we dont make the immediate link to alcoholism whereas social drugs (excluding marijuana) has an association of "dont go there - you are flirting with extreme danger" ie addiction. Am I right ?

I agree with the first paragraph but would add the phrase, stupid, arrogant or the invincibility of youth. Its only your last sentence that I wonder about. I do wonder how much of the Cousins arrogance and bravado is just front and if he just dismisses his demons or if he is even able to .I wonder if the knowledge of what he has become does torment him.

I looked up the definition of addiction - the state of being enslaved to a habit or practice or to something that is psychologically or physically habit-forming, as narcotics, to such an extent that its cessation causes severe trauma. I dont think anyone choses this. He chose to take drugs in the first place. Taking drugs in the first place is the mistake. His downward spiral has been because of his addiction not because he has just chosen to repeat his mistakes. There is no black and white in this very sad issue.

For the first 40 years of my life I had never met an addict. My partner of 8 years has someone close to her that is an addict and I can see exactly what you are saying. There has been compassion and help in large doses but the problem is the impact it has on those close to the addict. The lying, the manipulation, the false dawns of "being clean", the constant roads to recovery followed by relapses and the betrayal of family members trust. I have compassion but fully understand "the struggle with compassion" for those who lived close to it.

Someone on these boards mentioned earlier this year that Davey would get straight back into to the team after injury as he had a clause in his contract that he did not play VFL. I was was sceptical at the time because I couldnt believe that would be the case and horrified in equal measure in case it was ! I am glad to see that it obviously not the case and the message is clear - do what is required or play for Casey.

I know of a lot of business who act on instinct, experience and gut feel to make large decisions (without outside input) and I dont have a problem with that. But to suggest spending copious amounts of money on research/consultants to justify your position - bad business 101 UNLESS it is necessary to get consultants/research to give opinion etc which you already know the outcome to give a better understanding to people who dont have a thorough understanding. Consultants are frequently used in private equity world for the express purpose

Never read such a load of hooey in all my life. Recipe for failure - if a business needs research and consultants to justify predetermined decisions then there is fundamental flaws in the business and its management. ( and a huge waste of money) Management may have a "gut feel" or "instinct" but you would hope that a business would go to the expense of procuring what you call "official research" or "expert consultants" to get an unbiased and untainted view. Management should have no preconceptions that view will either solidify what you instinctively know or give you information and "expert" thoughts that may show that your instincts are just plain wrong. (Don't send me your resume ! )

they call me Nutbean "two sheds" Jackson

I shouldn't be posting here.