Dr John Dee

The irony he refers to is presumably of the Alanis Morissette kind, not the actual kind.

He said 'by your apparent definition', which is in any case sweeping and offensive to many of the posters here (or clearly intended to be). But, like Jack's original question about the 'Cronulla decision', the point clearly goes right over your head. That's not surprising. You intervened in this thread admitting that you hadn't read most of it but dismissing some/much (we don't know, that's how generalisations work) of it with your snide 'ambulance chasing' remark. Since then pretty much any comment on here that you disagree with has been met with borderline (sometimes not so borderline) antagonism. Just say what you have to say and forget about the strange ratio that you seem to have in your head that anything you say has merit only if it 'defeats' someone else. Whether you're an ambulance chaser or not and by your definition or not, you're certainly becoming a thread clogger with nothing to say that hasn't been said pages and pages ago. But you wouldn't know that because you haven't bothered reading them.

Not with that reference to young ladies, he won't.

I don't disagree on their right to defend their members, but usually the full membership of a union is entitled to a say in this sort of thing and I'm just wondering whether that occurred if indeed EFC are no longer paying the players' legal fees.

I suspect they'll be on a fishing trip, looking for some evidence that was too inconsequential or irrelevant for ASADA to pursue but can now be used to suggest some sort of failure on ASADA's part detrimental to the players' interests. When one loophole closes, find another ... and they would seem to be more interested in loopholes than the truth. The article linked in a post above suggests, though, that it's the AFLPA's lawyers who are trying this on. I thought it was Essendon that was supposed to be paying the players' way. For those more in the know, does the reference to the players' association's lawyers mean that the fees of honest players are now being used to pay for the defence of potential drug cheats? I thought too that one of the players' lawyers was posturing a while ago about having seen all of ASADA's evidence and not needing to read the brief. I wonder if this change of heart means that they've actually looked at the material now and are a bit worried by what they've seen.

It's not just the bottom, the cap is pretty dodgy as well, a distortion not due simply to the fold in the paper. But the other thing that intrigues me is Dank's reference to an amber bottle dated July 2012. This, I presume, is not that bottle. At least it doesn't have any legible date. The only relevant numbers seem to be 1202, which could only be the year in question if it's a palindrome of the Monty Python 'Dead Parrot' sort (the case for the Norwegian Blue being alive is probably far more credible than anything Dank is likely to produce).

Would that be the man they called Kierkegaard, who just sat there biting the heads off whippets?

PS although it probably goes without saying: we left-handers/footers (of course they're not necessarily the same thing anyway) aren't a race, we're just 'differently abled' as our American cousins like to say.

Those would be the same left-footers who are forced to shake the right hands of all the dignitaries at the premiership ceremony, deferring to an ancient droitist prejudice.

Telling spelling. 'Quixotec' sounds like an excellent name for the company that Jimmy might need to start once he's been bounced from the coaching job.

And you weren't bowled over by the heady aroma of hubris? When they've actually achieved anything beyond a few years of pillaging the draft their opinion might count for something.

Nah, more like a French farce. Wikipedia gets the terms of what's been going on thanks to James and Tania pretty right: "... a farce is a comedy that aims at entertaining the audience through situations that are highly exaggerated, extravagant, and thus improbable. Farces are often highly incomprehensible plot-wise (due to the many plot twists and random events that occur), but viewers are encouraged not to try to follow the plot in order to avoid becoming confused and overwhelmed. Farce is also characterized by ... the use of deliberate absurdity or nonsense, and broadly stylized performances."

They didn't need one. The players coughed up when they saw what evidence ASADA had and made a deal. Anything the NRL needed to do from there was just rubber-stamping as far as I recall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFvXvfUF-Co

I'll be watching and I hope the programme gets the kind of audience it deserves (not easy for the graveyard shift on a Sunday night).

But which one is Gollum?

Well, the bad witch Sycorax has been banished from the island before the action starts. No place for Caro then in Jack's rewriting. Shakespeare, of course, is supposed to have an answer for everything but getting the MFC list right in the next 6 months might be beyond even him. Not Roosy though, I hope.

Very poetic, Jack, although Mr Hird's lawyers may want to talk to you about unauthorised usage of the word 'magician' in relation to an AFL coach. Indeed, I suspect Mr Hird may have some more general claims to authorship of the works of Shakespeare which you might also have transgressed.

You mean a year at the MFC hasn't?

Exactly, Red. This is an entirely appropriate answer to the bollocks about 'restraint of trade'. If players want to maximise their incomes they can do so by signing up to the AFL and being bound by the conditions of their contracts. But if Chip's second gear performances this year are any indication, what we're getting is in effect a 7 year period, reducing soon to 5.

Not yours either. A dictionary doesn't give 'metaphorical definition(s)' it gives meanings ... unless of course you had in mind Giambattista Vico's idea that all language is metaphorical, which I somehow doubt. But you're a fine one for accusations about understanding language since you don't even seem capable of recognising Adam's basic question about why meanings like 'self righteous, over sensitive, self absorbed' have been attached, metaphorically or otherwise, to the word princess and not to the word prince.

Thanks Bub. And for those of us who did it's a wonderful summary of how he allowed us to take the extraordinary for granted. We won't see his like again. Vale Robbie.

thanks dc. we try to keep up.

When you have an ego as well-developed as James's why stop at being bigger than a club? His announcement that he intends pursuing an appeal officially makes him (at least in his own imaginary, which is obviously all that counts) bigger than the game. The one thing he's not, which presumably he'll find out to his cost, is bigger than the law. Not being a lawyer I don't know, but my hope is that if an appeal goes ahead ASADA might be able to seek leave to continue with the SCNs. If they can't that'll leave Jacques out there on his own, the only impediment to bringing the whole sordid matter to an end. The obloquy that'll be heaped on him from all quarters might remind him about the humility thing, although like you I suspect he's never known the meaning of the word.

Love that image, Bub. Wish I was a cartoonist.