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.

Paul little vs demetriou cage fight til the death!**** lifting, he boxes.
Tomorrow could be a watershed moment in AFL history...or not, just my guess.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Wait, so they deleted the other 130+ points, or just changed parts of the first two points?Oh and this version seems a little more realistic yes?!!
But probably wouldn't make for such juicy reading huh?!
http://www.essendonfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/Essendon/Club HQ/Revised statement of grounds.pdf
It is my belief that Hird has the respect and confidence of the President of one of them.
The other was also, at some point, attacked doggedly by the AFL over a supposed 'drug culture' that they had apparently cultivated, which they still refute on the basis that 'individuals were acting on their own'
So Collingwood and West Coast. If Adelaide can side with Essendon then the AFL has the four most powerful clubs to contend with.
Yes there is some subtle but serious difference between the charge sheet's Statement of Grounds.So, version 1 of the 'grounds' says we took banned drugs.
Version 2 says no such thing.
Which one does the AFL believe ?
Are we moving to theGold CoastTasmania?
So Collingwood and West Coast. If Adelaide can side with Essendon then the AFL has the four most powerful clubs to contend with.
Did someone say break away? Having 10 powerful clubs distributed properly across the southern states that can financially prop up two teams in the north is the best way to equalise the comp ... not to mention a fair draw where everyone plays each other twice.
Don't think Collingwood would side with Essendon imv with this case.
From the AFL's own charge sheet, 2 employees at Essendon believed they were on TA65.
Matt Finnis not happy
It is my belief that Hird has the respect and confidence of the President of one of them.
The other was also, at some point, attacked doggedly by the AFL over a supposed 'drug culture' that they had apparently cultivated, which they still refute on the basis that 'individuals were acting on their own'
Wait, so they deleted the other 130+ points, or just changed parts of the first two points?
