deejammin'

With all due respect, I’ve heard your opinion, you’ve heard mine. MFC chose to get rid of Watts, we both support them and hope it was the right decision. We’ll see what happens with the season ahead. For what it’s worth though if you don’t care what Watts does/has done you had decided you just wanted him gone then I’m not sure you’re in a position to judge objectively whether it was the right move or not. I’ll happily stop posting on this now, there’s many other exciting things for us to talk about, hopefully even agree on.

4 goals is a decent return from a second forward who can pinch hit in the ruck. Cameron Pedersen’s best is 3 for example. I think he would’ve been handy backup for Tmac and Cam at the very least. I’ve made my point, we’ll see how it goes. I hope it was the right call. As for Sylvia I had no qualms with him leaving and was wrapped to get Bernie for him at the time. You’re clearly the type of person who plays the man not the ball.

I think we have to play Pederson for Tmac as we need a back-up ruck. I think we probably intended on playing both TMac and Pederson round one if they were available. We have excellent depth in mid size forwards and small forwards but are very thin in KPF/Back up rucks. We are now an injury away from having both Pederson and TMac out and needing a Weideman etc in for second tall forward/backup ruck. That was my only point, I have no problem with trying a smaller line-up but having only two KPF will put a lot of pressure on Gawn and Hogan. WE can always go the Grigg/Richmond route and have Petracca or a mid sized player play back-up ruck I guess. The downside would be the risk of injury.

I think it is definitely Pederson and Hogan as our KPF the only problem is when Pederson goes into the ruck do we have just Hogan forward? Does Gawn rest forward? Is this enough rest for him? Is this sustainable for multiple rounds with only two guys? It also makes the idea of rotating Hogan through the midfield more difficult. We may need a third tall (Weideman or Smith) anyway. However my point was more if we sustain injury/suspension to Hoges or Pederson we may need Weid or Bull very soon.

Geez a second or third key forward who can kick 6 goals and give off a few would be handy if Tom McDonalds foot injury keeps him out for an extended period... I said it when we traded him and I see no reason to change, it was a silly decision to trade away a talented player capable of playing as a second or third forward when our KPF stocks are so thin. We are now down to Hogan and Pederson for round one, any bad luck with injury or suspension and we will be forced to play Weiderman or Smith. I hope those guys play as well as Jack will for Port or we’ll look very, very silly.....

Geez if this hot spot does it’s usual thing for us and keeps Tom out for months then our key position forward stocks are very thin. We need Weid and Smith to start firing...

The idea that so soon after such a massive scandal that brought the sport into disrepute, threatened to ruin 3 seasons, was found by the head WORLD anti- doping body to have been against the rules of world sport, that [censored] off, frustrated and bored the fans to no end and that may still have a large amount to play out with regard to the health of the players involved and their families long term, (let alone the impact on the integrity of the competition during the period doping players were aloud to play)... the idea that so soon after all of this the AFL would even consider letting Hird have ANY official role within the sport is beyond astounding, the fact it is a coaching position is just beyond stupid! What an immoral farce this league has become.

I always hope to not get Pannell against the dogs. He deserves a premiership medallion after his efforts last season.

Great post. The one against Hogan was so ridiculous and the other two while maybe being technically there were very harsh. All three decisions were the result of the umpire (I think they were all first AFL gamer number 14, he's so inexperienced his name isn't even next to his number on the umpire site yet, did the VFL grand final last year, another schmozzle) pulling the trigger too quickly with no care for the player. When it comes to such a large penalty umpires need to be sympathetic to the players.

It's bizarre. Footy Classified showed all 5 last night and in only one does Gawn have a straight arm. I've paused them all and if this is the rule they are quoting they clearly got 4/5 wrong.This clarification is not clarification at all, it's more confusing as he didn't break the rule at all! We should get an apology, but we won't, they'll claim it's always right as they always do.

The umpiring was horrendous and one sided today. We were legitamitely smashing St Kilda in the first half yet they had the rub of the green on free kicks and had a few questionable ones get them goals. Then the 3rd quarter was totally baffling and some of the most biased, one sided umpiring I've ever seen. The Max Gawn decisions weren't just a weird rule of the week thing, they were a weird rule of the week, only being enforced in one game, against one player thing. Not only do the AFL have to stop this tinkering with the rules mid-season that leaves players, fans and clearly umpires confused, but they need to explain better to the players BEFORE the game what the new focus is and how it will be enforced. Clearly Gawn and Longer had no idea what frees were getting paid for, but bizarrely Longer could shove Max in the front or face for no penalty, whereas if Max put an arm up to protect himself when Longer jumped on him it was a free. It was totally pathetic and the only reason St Kilda got back in the game. 5 easy centre clearances is what it gifted the Saints and that is massive in modern footy. As for the general umpiring the reason missed decisions hurt us so badly is our contested style. We rely on winning the ball honestly in the contest, or winning it back from tackling (HTB), incorrect disposal or turnover. When umpires constantly miss HTB, drops, throws or players holding the man at stoppage it allows teams to get on the outside and pull apart our structure. Numerous times today we nailed holding or dropping the ball in a tackle only to see it illegally get out to St Kildas runners and let them go forward. We were held, jumped on high and in the back all day for no free We also had numerous times where we won the contest but had wrong free kicks gave the ball back to St Kilda. This hurts us far more than teams who slingshot from the back and rely on intercept and turnover for obvious reasons. It's the main reason why bad adjudication kills us for playing a good game style and must be fixed! Some of my favourite terrible decisions were: All the Max ones, just complete trash The Jetta one, so so wrong. In the third Petracca nailed a tackle on Geary who dropped the ball yet was awarded holding the man as we streamed into goal. Then a minute later Bradshaw was clearly held in their forward line without the ball, no free, nails a tackle and the player tries to kick and fails to in the tackle, no free, St Kilda goal. Umpires need to be full time, highly paid and only focussed on umpiring all week, with strong performance review and thethreat of being dropped if they fail to meet performance criteria. We have players, coaches, administrators who all live by the sword with their performances but the people who hold the integrity of the sport's rules within their grasp are part time moonlighters with no culpability. It's baffling!

Perhaps Jobe's Brownlow is in a storage facility with the extensive documentation of Essendons drug program, fully filled out ASADA forms listing all the "legal" substances taken and letters to Bruce Reid asking for details on Thymomodulin?If only Jobe had looked for it earlier this all could have been avoided! .....Alternatively perhaps Jobe is an unrepentant drug cheat.

Happy to have different views mate. I tend to think CAS has more integrity than Essendon and the AFL and nothing I have read, heard or seen makes me think Essendon are anything but guilty. Im a diehard Melbourne man however and now he's here I'll be barracking hard for Melksham as I do all our players.

Saty I think it's disgusting that the whole thing has been reported and discussed in such a biased way that the whole issue has been distorted and an obvious attempt to cheat has been treated with sympathy rather than the objective view it deserved. I don't think or mean that anyone is disgusting, sorry if I offended or upset anyone and I'm sorry my words could be interpreted that way mate. I would have been better served by saying "distressing".

I also think they are guilty clearly. And I understand that the younger players faced a tougher circumstance than players like Jobe. But the treatment of this issue in the media and by some on this forum, being so desperate to excuse the players at every turn, never admitting to any of the facts of the case, has been truly disgusting. Its interesting to note the difference in the way our media has treated the Essendon players who couldn't come forward for fear of senior players and club champions versus Russian athletes whose families are threatened by a dangerous regime. Those poor poor Essendon players.

I can imagine it. But ultimately it's the same argument as the Nuremberg trials, doing something you think is probably wrong but accepting it and doing it because those more senior tell you to is actually not an excuse. I don't doubt the younger players were more naive, or heavily influenced by those senior players, but ultimately when it comes to drugs in sport if you take the substance and don't report it you have no leg to stand on. A lot of Essendon players could have been saved a lot of time and money if just one player had been brave enough to report. Some players clearly said no, look at Zaharakis. (Sorry Ted tried to quote you and got my own)

Interestingly none of the Essendon players managersor the AFLPA were kept fully informed by their players on the program at Essendon either. So while I see your point, the players only have themselves to blame, they were fully able to fill out their ASADA forms, speak to Bruce Reid or speak to their managers but chose to maintain secrecy for a competitive edge, that is not innocent behaviour and I don't see why so many are so keen to excuse it.

It seems to me young AFL players say no to their bosses all the time. They say no to contracts, they say no to staying if they have a better offer, they say no to giving the club an idea of their intentions, some really talented players say no to different roles, they say no to staying an hour away from their hometown, we had one who lied to a club champion who was dying of cancer for a whole year to take a big contract. The good ones say no to booze with friends, unhealthy food, staying out late, etc etc. But when it comes to saying no to taking an enormous amount of injections that contravene your ASADA/AFL training, aren't administered by a doctor or nurse, aren't told to the club doctor or put on ASADA forms before matches it's all of a sudden impossible to say no. I think you should get your hand off it.

Wow, you are a hair splitter aren't you. CAS the worlds leading authority and top arbiter of doping in professional sport found to a "comfortable satisfaction", CAS's determinant of guilt for all its cases that "all players were significantly at fault" for violating the code by taking a nominated banned substance which was Tb4. You can argue legal wording semantics all you want but the result is the same. All doping cases worldwide are judged by comfortable satisfaction, this is the standard by which guilt is judged in doping in professional sport. Tb4 was the substance the players were accused of taking that violated the code. The highest court in the world on drugs in sport found to the worldwide standard for the leading code in drugs in sport that Melksham and his colleagues took TB4. Melksham= Banned drug cheat

Great post, I missed this before I posted my less detailed one above. Got fired up by the ignorance of Saty's comments on the subject and skipped ahead. Beautifully put Bing.

Thymosin Beta 4 has been categorically proven in numerous research studies to promote advanced healing in human muscle, organ and bone tissue. A simple google search will provide you with all you need. It's main medical function when administered in the large injected dosages like the Essendon players received is to help with the quicker healing of heart tissue after major heart attacks, it also promotes the same kind of rapid healing in all muscle tissue. It is banned because the majority of increase in athletes fitness comes from making small breaks in muscle tissue due to excercise and having them repair stronger. Tb4 speeds this process up to superhuman levels. Saty I respect your love of the Mfc and your enormous contribution to most threads, particularly training. But Jake Melksham was found guilty of taking Tb4 in large dosages to aid his athletic performance at a time when it was banned. He is a drug cheat, he's done his time and will be welcomed back by MFC supporters but no amount of blurring lines because you are unaware of details of peptides like Tb4 changes that fact.