Satyriconhome

So I take it by that you are a bio chemist, and I'm not, I just read things, I have tried to back up my statements, but obviously not to your exacting standards, for that I do apologise, you will still not change my opinion though I think Melksham will be a good pickup, obviously Goodwin rates him, has over 100 games experience, stats (not everyones favourite) indicate a pretty consistent player

Fish oil? No, have a look at some of the advertising, Hawthorn have won the last three premierships because they take Swisse?

Desirable...........there is a billion dollar vitamin supplement industry in Australia thriving on the same type of claims, every persons physiology is different, so the effect may be different, you can buy powders over the counter that increases muscle growth, they are not banned

I may be being pedantic, but SWYL said they were playing like supermen through juicing up, others infer the same thing, so what you are saying is that the substances are not performance enhancing but an aide to recover from muscle injury, so therefore if it is a medical benefit and not a performance enhancement then surely it shouldn't be banned as it actually helps an athlete recover quicker from injury and get back to competing, something that most sporting bodies would welcome rather than discourage? You are sort of making my point for me about the agencies

I have an Essendon supporting colleague as well, said the same thing when he left, turnovers, maybe just group think like we get on here Goodwin likes him as a player, that will do me When I had a chat to Jake last pre season, said the parachute harness sometimes chafes, but he does enjoy the waterboarding

You have answered what I have been asking, you said 'peddling' which is exactly right, and your ad above says 'desirable'. there is no scientific proof that any of these substances work, they may as well be selling snake oil, my point about Dank conning, there are all sorts of medicines, potions, oils, tablets in both the open and black markets that claim to do things There has to be research into performance enhancing drugs by credible organisations, otherwise what is the point banning them, again my point, as to why they blanket ban anything they have no idea about

There is no scientific evidence for a lot of these 'performance enhancing' substances, that is why I say the agencies just ban them anyway, it is a lazy way out, and gives them a justification for their existence A lot are the substances are experimental and may enhance performance, but as I have said before each athlete's physiology is different and you need individual programs not just blanket injecting All the players involved should have asked more questions, but when the captain and leadership group acquiesed, the rest followed

i don't abuse or name call SWYL, I leave that to others, anyone can have an opinion on here, but if you have, you should be able to lucidly explain why you have reached that conclusion/opinion. I have little time for posters who just say my opinion is rubbish or delusional without saying why, everbody else thinks otherwise is not a reason, that means everybody has taken the rumour/conjecture/[censored] presented to them as fact, which as Iv'a says is fraught with danger, and leads to hysterical reaction Show me in writing where is says that the substance the Essendon players supposedly were injected with, is definitively performance enhancing and not just banned, and I will accept it gave the Essendon players an unfair advantage ,

Nobody is saying they weren't trying to cheat, it is whether it was successful and what level of culpability the players had and whether the millions of dollars of taxpayers money poired into agencies, is like a lot of other government agencies, spent on themselves instead of the task in hand

The soft tissue injuries resulted from young players being overtrained by the 'Weapon' the fact the players were quite good has no impact They were charged with taking a banned substance, show me the scientific research, from a reputable source, that says thay substance does enhance performance As every athletes physiology is different if you are going to be a drug cheat you have to have an individual program tailored for you specifically, not blanket injections and let's see what happens Dank, Robinson and Hird had everybody conned including the agencies

I never state that precious, others attribute that to me I always preface my conversations with players with ' I had a chat to' I am under no illuusions unlike others on here Sorry to disappoint you but I am fiercely anti drug, which is why I find the approach of the agencies tasked with eradicating drugs in sport farcical I always enjoy posters who have to resort to childish comments as they don't have the wherewithal to debate an issue And your stand on drugs is?

The effects are unknown, my point exactly, so if posters think Essendon players had an unfair advantage, then they could be wrong

Yes who says you are right and I am wrong, my point, these agencies are your typical government agency, the occasional win but most the time groping in the dark Of course there are performance enhancing drugs in sport, but the agencies only plan of action is let's ban everything and hope somebody dobs. Even the Lachie Whitfield case only came to light coz an ex girlfriend spoke up Whatever substance the Essendon players took was exoerimental, there is no scientific proof it is performance enhancing, that was the whole idea of the program to see if it did I remember the debacle years ago over caffeine, until it was realised you would have to ingest half of Brazil's output before it had a beneficial effect, as I said groping in the dark. Melksham was guilty of nothing more than naivete, my opinion, if you don't like it, I'm cool with that

If drug detection was an exact science and the agencies actually knew what they were doing ,you would have had Lance Armstrong picked off in his first year and not a whistleblower calling out the Russians. Supposedly the players at Essendon took a performance enhancing drug, again it was self reported What we have seen in the last couple of years is a knee jerk reaction as the authorities try and justify their existence and the money spent Hence my comment about substances being banned because the authorities have no idea whether they enhance performance or not Melksham Hibberd et al guilty of being naive. My opinion, I said SWYL was childish with the constant childish name calling, not the fact that he thinks they took performance enhancing drugs, who says he is right and I am wrong

Another pre season into both Hunt and Salem and the can rotate thru midfiekd and wing. Melksham is a professional footy player he'll be ok, players soend a year out with ACL, reckion he will be one player in top shape day 1

He needs something to trade with, so we would have to trade a big name, does this hint belong in the Hogan thread? All players we think should be traded would, according to some posters on here, have very little trade value, also Goodwin was more bullish about the draft, and Taylors magic around the 40's and 50's and rookie We have already picked up a B class rookie, who if he deveops like Joel Smith, who himself is showing promise, with Hibberd, Melkshan, Lumumba back to full fitness, we can afford to draft kids again

Your continued bleating about the drugs issue is really tiresome The reason a lot of the drugs are put on the banned list, is that they are experimental and the authorities have no concrete proof that they work or not, it is supposition. Your constant use of 'juiced up' is childish, as you have no idea how much and when, if any, that Melksham was given a performace enhancing drug or just a banned substance, and if it did have a significant impact on his onfield performance. Caffeine is supposedly a performace enhancing drug, and I drink copious amounts of coffee, but I still think Usain Bolt has got me covered

You gonna hold ur breath if he isn't, Goodwin wouldn't have recommended him if he didn't think so

You listen to the radio?.........hopefully only when you are travelling in a car WJ, or is it a comfy chair, roaring open fire, a balloon of Courvoisier..and SEN Haven't listened to radio since the days of 3XY in the Seventies

Gee nearly 3 pages, maybe it is Pink doing a bit of self promotion?, which he has achieved, Some criticising a guy who rings into a radio station with some strange ideas on trading etc, glad Demonland is not made of glass

About time you did that, nice little discussion you had there my take I'll wear some of the lookaway moments from the defenders as we get experience into them both individually and as a flexible unit

If anyone is interested had a chat to Goodwin at family day, was disappointef with first quarter and a bit, mixture of nerves, rust and not playing ypour role, still stuck to competing though. Once coaches settled them down was pleased how team stuck .to gamecplan/style, still a bit of work to do, said everybody contributed and played their role.

I think you will find that if last year is anything to go by, Jones or Vince will be sent to the opposition gun midfielder rather than the other way around, with Viney getting the job now and gain dependent on the opponent, hence the need for Jones to build his running up to another level

So what you are saying is that if 5 or 6 of our next level players actually improve out of sight during the pre season and the NAB challenge you wouldn't mind if Jones wasn't a lock for the first round?

Nathan Jones had a bulging deformed disc in his neck that could be managed, but we hardly had any midfield replacements who were fit banging the door down at Casey. Even though we had a healthy list we now know Roos' opinion of some of the midfield 'talent' we had on our list at the start of last season. Now we have what we have all been crying out for for the last couple of seasons, real depth, true some of it is still unproven, but at least it will keep the 'locks' honest Oliver being one of those unproven