nutbean

Black Books was recommended to me - I have watched two episodes and havent really cracked a smile - anyone else seen and have an opposite view ? Should I persevere ?

No...this is a rich man's Cale (sic)

As a punishment the culprit should be made to bite Hopoate's finger - we know where that one's has been. ( that'll learn him)

Seriously ? I looked at the stats and Richardson was held possession-less for the entire game. I have said that the coaches hold some responsibility. And I believe that a coach like Neeld had absolutely no cut through what so ever. But to suggest that at times this year the defense has worked well and other times it hasn't is the coaches fault ? You are letting the key stakeholders off the hook - that is the players. Pretty simple for me - when the midfield does not work hard enough defensively ( or is constantly second to the ball) and most importantly the ball is turned over your defense is in trouble. Next Monday I will list all games and source of goals as each week there is one constant - Turnovers. Most goals each week come from turnovers. Is turnovers the fault of the coaches or the players ?

I've been banging on about this since the Brian Royal days - whilst the coaches can take some responsibility at the end of the day it is the players responsibility. Whether they are inexperienced or not skilled enough or plain just work hard enough - the coaches can't get the pill and kick it for them.

Sorry to paraphrase you. Hanson's views are not completely isolated and there is a large enough percentage of people that support her to make me believe that her election is a good thing. It means that the spotlight will be ( should be) on what she says and what she stands for. It means that her views will very much be in the public arena and can logically and respectfully ( well semi respectfully) be dismantled. Call me naive, but I like that Hanson is given airtime as I believe that views as abhorrent as hers will unite most sensible and right thinking people into debating and rationally exposing her views for exactly what they are. The immediate impact has been the media time to given to her detractors has gone beyond gone just shouting racist - there has been a systematic highlighting, analysis and dismantling of what she stands for and thankfully this will continue.

This is where the two worlds collide and it will forever thus be hard to reconcile. I work in the TCF industry - on an ideological level I feel we have never been able to compete with low labor cost countries and we should divert our energies into industries where this country can compete. But then what about the machinists or pattern makers who only know one thing ? We can glibly talk about retraining but retaining into what ? What about their jobs that they will lose. I want to see a rapid move to renewable energy and I also am fairly strident in my views on forestry but I also have sympathy for the dislocation it will cause in employment in both the mining and forestry sectors. It is real people losing real jobs. I have less problems with budgetary constraints vs services/care that need to be provided but it is a problem none the less. ( you, HT, have highlighted the unfortunate failing in services provided - or at least - recompense for services provided - it sucks the big one) There is no simple answers to these problems. ( my biggest conundrum comes with taxation - I have no problem with paying a fair ( or even high) rate of tax. To me it is not the tax dollars collected that is my issue - it is the way tax dollars are wasted that girds my loins - note that I do believe there is mass evasion by large companies in paying their fair whack)

I can't believe he is only 25 - it seems like I have been calling him a spud in one post followed by calling him a champion in the next post for ever

Not really - that's why the brain trust picks the team and not the supporters. If the supporters had their way Hunt, Watts and Nev Jetta would no longer be at the club.

I am happy that Jack's signature seems imminent but each contract is completely different - what if we have offered Jack Watts exactly what his manager thinks he is worth on the open market ? What if TMac is being offered half of what another club is offering him ? You say that Jack has accepted the clubs view of what he is worth without a fuss - how do we know that the club has not accepted Jack's view of what he is worth without a fuss ? We just don't have insight to what is being offered and accepted so it is all guesswork. I do like when things get signed with a minimum of fuss - but all clubs will have the same problem that the expectation of club and certain players will not be aligned and negotiations become protracted.

As noted before, kicking efficiency (D/E) is a stat that always needs some context around it. Firstly - your position on the ground has a large bearing - inside mids usually have a much lower D/E than other positions as they are getting the ball in the heat of battle. Secondly - defenders usually have a higher D/E as they are chipping the ball sidewards and backwards - which is an easy kick and makes the D/E figure look better. Kicking efficiency is something than most astute football watchers can judge. Tom was very good by foot on Saturday but over the journey he has made some howlers, missing targets and turning the ball over when under little pressure. ( To me this does not change my opinion that he is valuable footballer who's good outweighs his bad - though he can be very frustrating) I find it interesting watching Tom that when he gets the ball and looks up, maybe a short run and then immediately kicks or handballs then he is usually good - when he starts to think about what he wants to do for too long is when it can go horribly wrong.

wow...just wow ! I really like Hunt but wow.

I never understood this shoulda woulda coulda thinking. "they allowed him to play free", " he was playing on a first gamer" , "if they had kicked straight they would have beaten us", "if X Y or Z was playing we would been spanked", "had we had XXX playing we would have won", "if we play like that against Hawthorn we would get creamed" Bottom line is you can only do what you do. Last week is last week and next week is next week. Your opponent and they way they play on the night is all you judge a player on not hypotheticals - if your player plays off you then that is that - you have the choice to impact or be where the ball ain't. TMac had a pearler of game where he impacted. Everything to the contrary is guesswork and speculation.

No they won't. Teams are drilled to kick to a loose man, run and carry from behind or if neither option is available, dump it down the line to a contest, hopefully getting the ball OOB and resetting. You may want to criticise Grimes for not finding a loose man but saying that good sides make you pay when you kick to a contest is just not correct.

I've got two things to say about that post Why are you picking on Nasher's math ?

I know - hence my add sarcasm emoji..... On a serious note - Interesting to me that so many people place so much store in the who a player barracked for as a kid as a motivating factor for a move. I could not think of bigger thrill to not only be part of a team on the rise but add to that the huge bonus of being able to share that playing alongside your brother.

source ? (insert sarcasm emoji)

No he won't be until he cleans up some of his disposal and decision making errors. He was great on Saturday night. I am definitely in the "must keep" camp as he is a very very good defender. His good far outshines the errors he makes but by the same token just because we can all see how good certain aspects of his game are and just because he has a blemish free night it won't make a history of pressure free brain fades and poor turnovers go away. I absolutely see TMac as must to be resigned. I absolutely can see him as a top 5 defender in the comp. All he has to do is eliminate the bad turnovers as he did successfully on Saturday night. ( I am not talking about the ball being turned over under pressure. Also it does not happen all that often but it is a momentum and morale killer when it happens when he is under little to no pressure). There was one passage of play where he took a great mark and went to ground on taking it - there was a teammate standing dead still next to him and you could see him getting ready to fire out the handball but I was delighted to see him hold back. Keep it simple Tom.

but maybe his disposal has improved ?

This should sticky noted for everyone ! ( Not at shot at you - but this is not an uncommon malady. For what it's worth I suffer from the reverse malady - I would still have Simon Godfrey on the list)

There are 40 players on the AFL list. There are certain players who due to their age and stages of development ( or possibly coming back from injury) may be given a bit more time and leeway. Each player has an opportunity to raise his standing in the club to a top 22 player or as a fringe/depth player. Jetta is an example a player who has elevated himself from fringe to starting 22. If Jones keep playing good football he gets a game - simple as that. At the end of the season we have to let a certain amount of footballers go - that's the harsh reality. Matt Jones is no certainty to get another contract and is no certainty not to. Pretty much the ball is in his court.

I don't see any clubs as a threat outside the WA clubs - I just get a different feel about his desire to go home and the word around Dangerfield last season.

I seriously have no idea who you voted for

Your profile pic is a cracker!

I'm calling it now. Last week he played his second last game ever for the club ( this is fun - I can do this every week until I am right)