In that case. Why wait? Get him out there!Jake Lever is actually..... 23
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
In that case. Why wait? Get him out there!Jake Lever is actually..... 23
8-10 weeks according to the man himself on AFL tonight
Lever or hannan?
Right on time for our R11 clash against Adelaide in Darwin8-10 weeks according to the man himself on AFL tonight
Took me a few goes at reading that hahaRight on time for our R11 clash against Adelaide in Darwin
May's gonna be dull btw - games in GC, Perth, and Darwin, and our one home game is against GWS.
Vanders - TBA... dreaded off legs
Lever - could be back in 6 weeks (training report says he looks ready to go right now)
Joel Smith - Out with groin
Preuss - test
Harmes - test
That was weird of them. He was noticeably in pain and limping around the joint. It’s not like we needed to win. Come to think of it, it’s not like we did win.Joel Smith has every right to egg the coaching team or fitness member that sent him back out in the JLT. Crazy
Dave Misson back to his usual tricks. So glad he's leaving end of year. How many ******* foot injuries?
Especially since he was bloody close to being a lock for R1Joel Smith has every right to egg the coaching team or fitness member that sent him back out in the JLT. Crazy
HoreReading all these articles about which players will make for their AFL or club debut this week, feels a bit weird that our side most likely won't be debuting anyone. Good really, but a bit strange with the may suspension being the only downer.
No need for name calling.Hore
Playing devils advocate with the Joel
Smith injury, we were already 2 rotations down in Harmes and JKH. They “sacrificed” resting smith for fear of getting another soft tissue injury to a player who played too many minutes. So you would have two injuried players instead of one in smith
Playing devils advocate with the Joel
Smith injury, we were already 2 rotations down in Harmes and JKH. They “sacrificed” resting smith for fear of getting another soft tissue injury to a player who played too many minutes. So you would have two injuried players instead of one in smith
I haven't seen it written anywhere, but I have a feeling that the AFL issued a directive after Richmond played with 17 on the field. They would have been pretty clear to the clubs to not do that and would have mentioned large fines for 'bringing the game into disrepute' or some bullshit. I would still have rather we copped the fine than further injury to JSmith.Then we should have played with 17 men like Richmond did in the JLT last year. Even if he didn't make the injury any worse by staying out there, there's absolutely no sense in keeping an injured guy on the field in a practice match.
A mate of mine was on the bench area during that game ... Gil was absolutely fuming about it apparently, and substantial threats were made if Richmond were to “ take the piss out of this” I think it went. So I’d say you’re absolutely rightI haven't seen it written anywhere, but I have a feeling that the AFL issued a directive after Richmond played with 17 on the field. They would have been pretty clear to the clubs to not do that and would have mentioned large fines for 'bringing the game into disrepute' or some bullshit. I would still have rather we copped the fine than further injury to JSmith.
We also had the option to play three extras, but we elected to send Viney, Jones and Melkshake to play with Casey to give them extra minutes. We chose that. So you can bet that the AFL would have pointed that out when laying out the fine.
A mate of mine was on the bench area during that game ... Gil was absolutely fuming about it apparently, and substantial threats were made if Richmond were to “ take the piss out of this” I think it went. So I’d say you’re absolutely right