La Dee-vina Comedia

The eggs are a good analogy. The Essendon players may argue that because no-one was watching the fridge at all times, the eggs were taken away by someone else. ASADA may have to satisfy the tribunal that even though the fridge wasn't being watched, there is insufficient evidence to show the eggs were not taken away but in fact eaten by the Essendon players. Double negatives abound - but that's the nature of this with the onus on the players to prove they didn't eat the eggs.

Tweet from Mick Warner mickwarner ‏@heraldsunmick 52s52 seconds ago Hird not appealing @superfooty 0 replies0 retweets0 favorites Reply Retweet Favorite More I'm guessing Mick doesn't even realise the pun he's written.

Colin, there's a technical flaw in your argument. To be a "frat boy" requires one to get into a "Fraternity" which can only happen if one gets into University. I'm not sure Moloney and Sylvia have what it takes to get into a University.

Mind you, shockingly inaccurate. Kicked 7 behinds that day...to go with his 14 goals. Just imagine any of our players having 21 shots for goal in just one game.

Interestingly, I think the opposite. ASADA has had no choice politically but to take some action. My suspicions are that TB4 is their best chance which is why they've gone with that one over all the others. Given that it appears that the evidence is non-physical (ie, not a positive drug test result, but matters such as interviews, purchase orders and chains of custody), getting a case on each substance would be difficult, time consuming and potentially very arguable. I have no idea whether ASADA's case is watertight or not - but I can see the possibility of a less than solid case being pursued for political reasons. I suspect ASADA would rather try and fail than be seen not to be pursuing the matter at all.

More likely, the Judge will consider that being traded to Melbourne was punishment enough. Of course, we think otherwise. But if that's what His/Her Honour chooses to believe, I'm fine with that. In all seriousness, and speaking generally and not specifically about this case, I would have thought driving while having a licence suspended should be dealt with harshly. It was suspended for a reason. Driving while suspended shows a blatant disregard for the law. Edited for spelling

I can just see Demonland's administrators trying to work out how to get every player on the banner during the season while working under the following restrictions: only 120 changes allowed rookies only get on there if a listed player goes on the LTI and one player has to be the substitute and can only come onto the banner after Round 17

Thanks for your service, Pig Dog.

Don't think he'd be the only one. i suspect anyone under the age of about 50 might not understand what we're talking about.

Could be just one of those imperial versus metric thingies.

Hey Redleg or any other lawyers out there. Excuse my ignorance, but if he was represented in Court as claimed in the press, what exactly, from a legal point of view, has he failed to do? Was his presence in court for this offence actually required?

And here's the club's official statement: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-02-24/jeff-garlett THE CLUB can confirm that Jeff Garlett was charged with drink driving in July of 2014. As part of this offence, Jeff was also charged with driving on a suspended licence. Melbourne Manager of Football Josh Mahoney said: "Whilst the offence occurred prior to Jeff joining the Melbourne Football Club, the incident is obviously very disappointing. We have been working closely with Jeff and are pleased with the progress he is making at the Club in terms of his welfare and behaviour. However, his failure to inform the Club of this incident and him being unaware of his scheduled court appearance is extremely disappointing. "This is a clear setback in terms of the way the Club became aware of the issue and ultimately Jeff is extremely embarrassed about these actions. “The Club will continue to gather additional information before deciding on the appropriate course of action.” This matter is now before the courts and Jeff will accept the outcome of the judicial system.

3AW Melbourne ‏@3AW693 3m3 minutes ago .@melbournefc recruit Jeff Garlett will face court next month after failing to show up for today's appearance for drink-driving charges.

Is this the first time this year that Watts has joined in actual training rather than just running laps?

Sounds like the name of a kosher deli.

I'd rather he was a top 5 pick but scouts rated him top 50 worthy.

I think the key point about an indigenous representative is valid, though.That Michael Long happens to be a former Essendon player shouldn't be relevant. However, I suspect that in the minds of the AFL-loving public it will be. There are plenty more great indigenous choices, though. It doesn't have to be Long. What about David Wirrpanda, for example?

For what it's worth, and without extending the debate, I think whenever team's seriously transgress accepted rules, the punishments should primarily be directed to the individuals who make the decision to break the rules. I agree that clubs also need some form of punishment so that they do not benefit from the crimes committed, but meaningful (ie, longterm or lifetime) bans should be "offered" to those individuals proven to have been culpable.

You make a good case. I wasn't, however, trying to compare the magnitude of the "crimes" (using the word loosely). Rather I was attempting to equate the competitions' supporters' response to the "crimes". When determining the response of supporters (not the Tribunal or any courts which might be involved), in my opinion what should happen should not be judged solely on the negative aspects of the last few years but Essendon's contribution to the game, the State of Victoria and the nation as a whole. There is cultural fabric that needs to be considered. Essendon has been part of a lot of good that the AFL and before it the VFL has brought to our society. Should Essendon be removed permanently from the competition I believe there would be irreparable damage to the competition and in doing so probably significant damage to the weaker clubs, like ours, in the washup.

Make it four. I'm strongly in the camp that Essendon might have to be punished but they should be allowed to get their house back in order. For those calling for Essendon to be excised, imagine the debate if supporters of other clubs wanted Melbourne to be delicensed or moved to Tassie because of the combination of tanking and seriously poor on-field performances. For the last few years (up until the end of 2013) we have been the competition's embarrassment.

I just like the fact that you can identify particular, individual mistakes. In previous years there would have been too many to recall and then comment on.

Tweet from Ben Guthrie: "The Dees' intra club match at Casey Fields has finished up. Salem BOG. Hogan and Garlett dominant up forward. Billy Stretch impressive." Only one man's opinion, of course, but with three of the four not having played a game for us and the other only playing a few cameos in 2014, it's a comment I like a lot.

As a matter of interest, I tried dividing 106 by zero on my iPhone. It gave the answer as "Error". Not sure now why it's called a "smartphone". Maybe it's better at languages than maths.

...and which reminds me of this story

Ben Guthrie on Twitter: The Demons are going through their final prep ahead of today's intra-club at Casey. There will be 3 x 20 min q's. No wonder we have a maths crisis* in this country. Three 20 minute quarters. Hmmm. *Note: We may or may not actually have a maths crisis