Bluey's Dad

I'm not sure I follow. There is too much debt and therefore the government must be run like a business? Is that it? I understand cutting waste and inefficiencies to reduce debt - that makes perfect sense to me. But if you go too far with the business angle you end up losing sight of the people who live in the society being governed. You can fire employees from a business, you can't fire citizens from a society.

This is extremely disturbing. In an exclusive interview, Dr Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data – the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) – of ‘insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximised warming and minimised documentation… in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming pause, rushed so that he could time publication to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy’ This is not how science is supposed to work. As someone who's defended action on climate change in the past, thanks for posting. This is the only article I can find on Dr Bates and this issue (others are simply repeating this one and linking back). I've never heard of the Daily Mail though, and it seems to be an exclusive story. Are they reliable?

I don't get why people think governments should be run like businesses. Governments should be run like governments. Businesses are just there to make money, that's their aim. A government, or a good one, is there to administer for a public good. A business can fire shitty employees, and evaluate them on the benefit they bring to the bottom line. A government can't just cast aside a shitty person, it has to govern for everyone. A business can operate without compassion. A government without compassion has failed its people.

It's probably in his Feminist hat. He just can't find it because his head's too big.

I think someone said it already happened with a multi-page spread in the HUN when they returned to training. I was certainly rage-filled after reading an Age article on Heppell somehow being more qualified to be captain after completing his goddamn MANDATORY SUSPENSION FOR DRUG CHEATING. You're probably right though, their first game will be far worse than anything we've seen so far. We need a place to rage.

He couldn't possibly have known. He is after all, a Top Bloke and Feminist.

No, but symbolically it does make a statement about the contrived nature of the AFL, and Watson himself - who said one thing and did another. You're right the physical medial isn't a massive issue in of itself. But what it says about those surrounding the issue I would argue is quite significant. The fact that he retains the physical medal is a sly acknowledgement that the AFL don't actually believe he's a drug cheat. It's wrong, and it send the wrong message. It also undermines the symbolic value of the other two (legitimate) medals.

Says he'll give it back. Doesn't give it back. This is 100% consistent with the way the entire journey has unfolded.

You're probably right there DC. Sometimes it takes a while to brew up a big steaming pile of [censored].

Make one of them Captain. That'll really show the kids what happens to drug cheats.

Agreed, with the addition that they should also not be rewarded. I find the idea of Heppell as captain because he's "grown as a person" whilst being banned for drug cheating sickening.

So apparently, serving time for drug cheating is a good qualification for being a leader: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dyson-heppell-renovated-rejuvenated-and-ready-to-captain-essendon-20161124-gsx1vl.html The Heppell who returned to the club's high performance centre only a few weeks ago was the same laconic-talking, mop-haired favourite of the fans, but consequently, one perhaps even more suited to assuming the mantle of Essendon's next captain than he already was. Angry rant incomming. IDGAF if serving a year out for being a drug cheat helps you 'grow' as a person and gives you 'perspective'. If the club is serious, it should not be rewarding this behaviour by giving one of the 34 the captaincy. Apply your new found [censored] perspective after sport Dyson. You don't deserve to be captain. You failed your team when it mattered most, your character has been shown to be lacking. If you're a better person now, fine. But Essendon, or any club, simply cannot reward or condone your behaviour or lack of moral fibre. Go write some [censored] up self-help book about overcoming adversity, or get some speaking gigs and get paid a heap for it. I don't care. But you do not deserve to captain an AFL side. You have served your time and deserve to play AFL again. Nothing more, nothing less. You do not deserve to be rewarded for your actions. You said, explicitly, on AFL 360 a year ago that you knew what you were injected with and were ok with it. So you, as a person, a [censored] human being, contributed to the distress of Hal Hunter and his family because they STILL DO NOT [censored] WELL KNOW WHAT IT WAS, AND TRIED SUING THE CLUB TO FIND OUT. But no, you can't tell anyone what it was, because it was banned. God forbid you tell Hunter, lest it expose to the world what you knew and when you knew it, increasing the public knowledge of your culpability. Give me a [censored] break Dyson. And Rohan Connolly, GAGF too. Don't write this [censored] and then call yourself a journalist you [censored] cheerling [censored] merchant. Either report on just the facts, or take a proper moral stance. This fluff bs is unacceptable. Apologies if any profanity gets through the filter, and for the considerable lapse in forum etiquette. I'm just really really angry with this story.

Feminist

lol last time we went down this road Iv'a, it got pretty heated. Although I agree with what you've stated, I don't trust that there's not some little wink-wink nudge-nudge deals happening to inflate those civil settlement payouts in exchange for the players taking a lower in-cap payment. The AFL has said they will monitor the situation to make sure this doesn't happen, although as you say, it's a different jurisdiction so I don't know how they check it all without being able to see half the equation. Also, I wouldn't trust the AFL to monitor a primary school hallway.

According to this, only 18 have settled: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-supplements-saga-bombers-settle-compensation-with-18-players-20161122-gsupyp.html So they've got 16 left to go. One could infer that these remaining 16 may cost more to settle, since they haven't reached payments already and may be more litigious than the previous 18. I assume Jobe is one of the remaining 16, and his payout would probably be higher than anyone else's because of giving up the Brownlow.

Indeed. It's quite alright to BE stupid and corrupt, but to appear so is the cardinal sin AFL house.

Bah. The fact that this is on the AFL website is telling. They're positioning for a break. The biggest argument 'for' ASADA in that article is that it gets the AFL funding from the government. The AFL isn't some super special snowflake sporting organisation. It doesn't need different rules. What a [censored] joke article.

Titus O'Reily is my spirit animal: http://titusoreily.com/afl-releases-draft-good-bloke-policy/

What do the betting agencies do in situations like this? They're part and parcel of the AFL experience now, according to the ever increasing levels of advertising.

lol, so basically: - Award is for best and fairest - Some people think the drugs means I wasn't fair - I TOTALLY AM FAIR THOUGH, LOOK HOW FAIR I AM I'M HANDING BACK THE MEDAL It's like his statement is worded so that people will think the action of handing the medal back in of itself qualifies him to earn it. Still, glad he did it though, as he should have done. We can finally move on.

I really wish I could find the compilation for you. The search continues.

A while back someone did do a photo compilation showing the differences between one season and the other. I can't remember where I saw it, but if I can track it down I'll post it. I also recall commentators at the time making remarks about the size of his thighs.

They called their draft forums "Essendon is not appealing draft board". I lol'd.

As much as I'd love to get Hibberd for second round next year, he probably is worth 29 this year. If we get him for 29, I think it's a fair deal.