Is the strategy of the ALP to win the next election going to be to go to the election calling for a Carbon Tax?

Being unwilling to remove it suggests that its ALP policy and something the LNP will no doubt get plenty of use out of in the next election campaign. Nothing like handing yet another term to Abbott on a platter...

It may not be so bad a policy. Unfortunately most of the community seem to think that the Liberal government were just planning to scrap the carbon tax and that was that. They did not seem to realise that it was being replaced by a nonsensical Direct Action policy where polluters were going to be paid to pollute. Once this happens, watch the mood of the electorate change somewhat.
Btw, most of the economists in the world now support an Emissions Trading Scheme, agreeing with the Labor policy.
Cheers

Why should people with the cash get here when other more worse off refugees have to wait in camps because of the cue jumpers.
Stupid post!

firstly, if you are going to call someone stupid, at least make sure you can spell queue.

when you say "afford" to get here, most of them literally spend their whole family's life savings to get one family member out here, and then hope to bring the rest out when they save up enough money. this is how desperate they are.

and im not sure about you, but if i had a shot at not living in a refugee camp, i would do whatever i could.

there was a show on SBS called go back to where you came from, i encourage you to watch it. they depicted a sudanese lady who was in a refugee camp in kenya, where they literally slept on the floor under a tarp. no clean water. they got rice once a day, but quite often the gangs of men would come and steal it from her just after she got it. her and both her daughters had been repeatedly raped. if i remember correctly she now had HIV.

but yet you are telling me she should sit there and politely wait her turn? put yourself in her shoes for a second. what do you think you would do? would you sit there and be like fk me, i better wait my turn? of course not, you are going to do everything you can to get to safety.

and before you say well you could catch a plane here, well thats more problematic than you think too. if you are being persecuted in your own country, you cant exactly rock up at the airport with all of your id cards etc, you are basically waving a massive sign saying come and kill me!

so thats why these people travel overland from places like afghanistan, to pakistan, india, malaysia, indonesia.

the problem then is, none of those countries are signatories to the UN refugee convention, which means if they are caught they can be deported straight away. so you cant jump on a plane at any of these countries either.

so what are you left with? paying some people smuggler your whole life savings for one shot at a country that will have you. but lol, jokes on them, we send them off to squalid conditions in papua new guinea never to set foot in australia.

and before you say well there is plenty of other countries they can go to, well yes thats also true. but do a bit of googling and you can find places like turkey, jordan and greece are straining massively with the problem of refugees.

i read somewhere (ill have to find it) that the official population of greece is 10 million or so, and they have 1 MILLION refugees or other illegal residents. now that is a problem. a few thousand arrivals into one of the richest countries in the world is almost a non issue, unless you want to politicise it for your own gain, which is what abbott did with his "stop the boats" mantra which appealed to the lowest common denominator in australia, white racist bogans who believe they own the country and forgot that them, or one of their previous generations also came here, a lot of them in similar circumstances.
I didnt call YOU stupid, your post was.
To infer we only allow certain cultures and religions in this country on refugee status is a stupid comment.
The lady you refer to has probably had to stay put, as all the QUEUE jumpers have taken her spot.

So do you QUEUE up at the checkout or just push in because you think you are more important than evryone else?
Sorry but all refugees have to wait their turn!

Unfortunately you are showing your total ignorance of the asylum seeker/refugee situation by talking about queues. What do you think happens?? Do you think that people in refugee camps take a number and all form an ordered queue?? Does each one get given a number between 1 and 6 million?? Do they then compare the length of the queue at each camp throughout the world and work out what camp should have a refugee leave next?? There is no such thing as that. It is unfortunately mainly luck (or bad luck) that dictates how long an individual spends in a refugee camp. Some may be in the camp for 20 years, some for 10, some for 5, some are lucky enough to spend only a month or so there.
Additionally, in many countries there are no refugee camps at all. For instance, those leaving Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria (so in other words 90% of people seeking asylum in Australia) have no camps to go to. The only way that they can flee their horrible circumstances is to have all their family members save up the ($2 000 on average) money that it takes to go on a boat and risk their lives in travelling across.

Cheers

I will just make four quick comments this time (unusual for me to be brief and quick *grins*)

Re the documentation issue: Asylum seekers are generally leaving their country of origin in a rush because of persecution. They are not going to wait six months to apply for and gain a passport!!

Secondly, re the risk of terrorists coming in via boats: There is pretty much no likelihood of a terrorist coming in this way. They have resources available to them and are not going to take the risk of a risky boat journey when they can use other means.

Thirdly, re asylum seekers coming by boat taking the place of those processed offshore via refugee camps: Australia is the only country in the world that only has one intake pool. We lump onshore and offshore asylum seekers together in the one figure. Every other country has a separate pool for onshore and offshore. All Australia has to do is change to two pools and the argument of those coming by boat taking the place of those from refugee camps is totally gone.

Fourthly, the argument put forward of not allowing asylum seekers to come by boat because of safety concerns is total hogwash, only made up by those not wanting them to come at all. All one has to do is arrange with Indonesia to have onshore processing carried on over there and have asylum seekers flown over instead of come by boat. This is a cheaper alternative to Abbott's Military Campaign (the only world leader to ever see the issue of asylum seekers as war btw!!!). Abbott has to come clean with the fact that this is what Indonesia asked for instead of the military intervention!
Cheers

More than 90% of boat arrivals were found to be genuine refugees, compared to 44% of plane arrivals

A pretty good article on the governments own website, which the libs have repeatedly contradicted by doing such things as calling them illegals when they are not, and discriminating against boat arrivals in preference to plane arrivals.

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/AsylumFacts
We are trying to discourage people from getting in unseaworthy craft and trying to make it to Australia. Its a lot more dangerous than getting on a commercial airliner i would think? Therefore you are correct, they are processed differently.
To fly here you must have some supporting documents. Yes they may be bullshit but at least they lob with something that immigration can deal with.
Boat arrivals in some/a lot of cases have bugger all.
There must be a process or are you saying everyone who lands here by any means, and says they are a refugee we should just let them stay. Our population would explode in no time! Who wouldnt want to live here?
I think you missed my point!

Your words make it sound like most asylum seekers in the world are trying to get to Australia. We have an extremely low percentage of the world's asylum seekers try to travel here. I think from memory we are something like 44th in the list of countries that asylum seekers are heading to. Yes, there needs to be processing carried out but surely not the 30 years that some are facing!!
If we carry out the processing a lot quicker, you will find there would be less trouble in the processing centres too. Heck, if I am going to be behind barbed wire, cut off from the rest of society, for 30 years I think I would go bonkers too!!
Cheers

Sorry, Bennymacca, I should have realised that you were drawing a distinction as I have pretty much agreed with all you have expressed on here. You seem to have a very empathetic and compassionate nature, a wonderful thing to possess.
Cheers

At least the Army have come out and stated that it is not the policy that has reduced the number of boat arrivals but the fact it is typhoon season at the moment. Numbers are down at this time every year.
Cheers

This cracks me up

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/human-rights-commission-opposition-call-for-independent-inquiry-into-manus-island-detention-centre-violence/story-fni6ulvf-1226831228987

Iran summons Australian ambassador
Meanwhile Iran’s official IRNA news agency is reporting the country’s foreign ministry has summoned the Australian ambassador to protest the death of an Iranian who sought asylum in Australia.
The Tuesday report says the ministry’s consular director, Hosein Mirfakhar, expressed Iran’s “protest and discontent’’ to Paul Foley about the asylum seeker, who died during a violent protest in a detention camp run by Australia on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island.
The Iranian official sought changes in the treatment of asylum seekers, said IRNA.
The report did not identify the asylum seeker, who died from head injuries.
In recent years, Iranian nationals have been among the thousands of people who seek asylum in Australia. Many have attempted to reach the country by boat, mostly from Indonesia.

So.......these people are leaving Iran and seeking asylum here because of some religious or political persecution in Iran, yet their government is protesting about their treatment here?? :rolleyes: That is completely f***ed up

Agreed that it is pretty much a case of the 'pot calling the kettle black'. However, the fact that you are acknowledging that people coming from Iran seeking asylum are indeed suffering persecution will hopefully have you agreeing that they should actually receive asylum in Australia.
Cheers

Does the Convention state whether an intended refugee can choose where they want to claim status?
Don't get me wrong - I actually believe in allowing more refugees, but I have no pity for queue jumpers that think they have any rights at all.
Here's a thought: bp2 and I talk to our Govt friends about beefing up the overseas "processing" assets to halve the waiting time for those that do the right thing and wait their turn, and how about if we were to double our "legitimate" intake (those who apply properly).
Would the Govt be able to take some moral high ground about their tough stance on the queue jumpers (which I believe is supported by the majority of Australians) or would the vocal minority still want anyone who tries to enter this country to be awarded refugee status?
BTW, anyone who overstays their visa should be deported whether they claim status or not. They lied to get in, they can suffer the consequences.

Dear Jimmy,
I would love to see a lot more asylum seekers enter Australia as well. I fully support you on that. However, what is 'doing the right thing'? There is no access to 'refugee camps' for people coming by boat. There is no such thing in their country or in neighbouring countries for them to go to. So, what are they supposed to do?? Travel to Africa?? Even when they get there, there is no 'process' which asylum seekers go through. Those who manage to come to Australia from refugee camps are not sent in order of arrival in the camp. I can only support your viewpoint if we allow those from refugee camps to be 'processed' in order of arrival. However, as you well know, this does not happen.

What I would like to see happen is 'processing centres' be established in Indonesia so that asylum seekers do not HAVE to travel by boat, taking their life into their own hands. By the way, when you say they pay a lot of money, they pay little. The average amount is less than $2 000 and this is normally put together by a family community to send ONE member out. On average, each person contributes about $100.

Cheers

Pretty much agree with all of that

Yes, it does get pretty worrying when even Chinese officials, with a valid reason, condemn Australia's human rights policies.

and I'm really going to listen to them about human rights :roll: Ever heard of Tibet?
This really is getting ridiculous when you have people listening to the Iranians and Chinese criticising us about human rights.
I wonder what the Khmer Rouge have to say about it.

Jimmy, you are right. Australia's treatment of asylum seekers IS ridiculous.
Australia is the only country that has stated it will never allow asylum seekers travelling by boat to step foot on its land.
Australia is the only country that has gone into another country's sovereign waters to turn back boats of asylum seekers.
Australia is the only country that has set up detention centres in other countries to accept asylum seekers travelling to it.

Yes, it is ridiculous that China accepts a lot more asylum seekers than Australia does.

Chinese officials have no leg to stand on when it comes to its human rights record overall. However, it is a very sad indictment and really a crying shame when they actually do have a reason for criticising one of our international policies.

Am confident you will love it. Cruises are amazing opportunities to do as much or as little as you like. I tend to go on the ones that visit a lot of ports, allowing good opportunities to see a range of new places. You spend most of the day exploring, then come onboard for incredible food and great entertainment. Have taken three cruises in the last nine months, two to China and South Korea and one around New Zealand. Am cruising the Mediterranean in July. My Asian cruises were with Royal Caribbean and my New Zealand and European one are with Celebrity, owned by the same business as Royal Caribbean.

Cheers

There are a couple of things that could be done, that should've been done.

Both Port and the Crows have the same restrictions, 15 top up players each, no top up players to have played state league football for the last 3 years, top up players have to be under the age of 23.

Other things that could be done if this didn't make it more even is remove the exception of a leadership player and increase the salary cap of each SANFL club - hard to do when clubs are financially struggling but you could increase the dollars we get from the new afl reserves clubs to directly go to each clubs salary cap.

The first suggestions would do it though imho.

Agree very much with this. It is bad enough that six clubs let the Power and Crows Reserves into the competition, destroying the integrity of the competition. However, by allowing one club to still retain their SANFL players (or a number of them) and be boosted by having all AFL players available to them made it a farce. The suggestion made re having top up players only and with these having limited, if any, SANFL experience, is how it should have happened.

Cheers

Have a friend who used to support Glenelg who surprisingly changed his allegiances to the Crows Reserves. Sent me a Christmas card telling me how much he is looking forward to his side constantly beating Central, something his former side rarely did *grins*
Guess you can't really blame a Glenelg supporter for changing! :D

Have tried to stay away from the Politics forum lately as I tend to have my blood boil when I read some comments on here (and I have a feeling that mine would have the same effect on other people).
However, I am not sure why Abbott is madly looking around for other countries to host asylum seekers if no asylum seekers are coming anymore. It just doesn't seem to make sense to me. Or, is he actually anticipating a whole lot more asylum seekers coming, knowing that his 'turn back the boat' policy will not work once the weather is improved and they are out of typhoon season.
Even if it is working, it really just means that Australia are expecting the rest of the world to comply with human rights legislation whilst we don't. It is just shifting the problem to another country. The number of asylum seekers in the world won't decline just because Australia refuses to do its part. It really is a terrible stand by the Australian government.

I agree totally with Bennymacca btw that the Labor Party's policy is just as bad as the Liberal Party's. Both of them make me want to cry at times, with the lack of compassion they are showing.

kickinit wrote:great day for footy and a great weekend for the PAFC.

We need an 'unlike' button in this system!! *grins*

Now to the important thing:

Brad, you have been a champion player and ARE a champion man. Thank you for the wonderful contribution you have given to the Doggies in your playing career. Wishing you all the best for your future career as a husband, father and businessman. Also hoping we will not lose you completely from Central. Your knowledge of the game will be wonderful to pass on to younger Doggies.

Unfortunately for Symes this wasn't the first head knock. Maybe that needs to be taken into account as well. Yes the game has changed but was it that bad ? Least he didn't cop gutless ones from behind or in packs .Ironic.

Yes, it was that bad!!
Wishing there was a dislike button for comments. An atrocious comment at a time like this.
At the same time, there is no way I would want anyone to try to seek revenge on Grocke. That doesn't solve anything. I am sure that Grocke's conscience is giving him enough trouble already.

Wedgie wrote:Eagles 11.9 75
Norwood 10.12 72

Frees:
Eagles 19
Norwood 12

James Allan the leading disposal getter with 25.

A lot closer free kick count than when we played them In Round One when it was 27 frees to 12!!
The Eags are obviously playing in front and not giving away silly free kicks.
Cheers

The score in this match and the relative positions on the ladder demonstrates what happens when one of the best junior development programmes takes on one of the worst. Obviously some recruits in each side too, but I reckon the foundation of the comp in the near future is going to be even more about producing 15 sound league players from within your club at any one time. Centrals haven't done it and are starting to pay the price of leaning heavily on recruits recently (as are Westies).

It does make it hard when your local zone has only half the number of juniors playing Aussie Rules as many other zones.
Cheers

Gee, sorry for selectively using the actual budget which only goes to 2017. Silly me, reading the actual document. Wot wos I thunking?
Obviously (due to my sudden loss of education) I should just listen to the "majority of commentators and analysts" and not read the damn budget myself. Maybe a couple of you should read it for yourselves. (BTW, I actually posted the 2013 budget but none of you picked that up)
Maybe I'm wrong though. Should I be looking at Table 2.4 that shows overall payments to the States?
http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp3/html/bp3_03_part_2b.htm

However, the real disappointment kicks in in 2017 when the actual amount of funding being provided for health decreases by a whopping $50 billion over the next eight years. Jimmy has selectively only worried about funding until 2017, this avoiding the truth about the decrease in REAL spending.

So, you're worried about 2017 onwards? When's the next election? "Before 14th January 2017 "
When Labor get back in, they can give it all back. You're worried about a period in the next term of government. They can change the budget just like this Government have. That is the right of every Govt.

I'm not being selective - I'm just being real and not listening to the hysterical like Koutsantonis who probably wrote his script before the budget was even handed down. Cutting 600 beds when he's getting more money than last year.

Its all a huge con. These cuts to the SA Health expenditure budget were in last years MYBR:

Commencing in 2013–14 $116m
To commence in 2014–15 $100m
To commence in 2015–16 $106m
To commence in 2016–17 $ 57m

So, there were going to cut their expenditure by over $1b pa by 2017 anyway

Just shows how much you actually read on here bp2

????? The link you posted on your previous page was to the 2013/14 budget, which of course was set by Labor.

You then gave, on this page, a link to Table 2.4 which did come from the 2014/15 budget delivered by Joe Hockey. However, this is only a selection of the budget. To give the true picture you need to look at the ACTUAL FULL budget for the Commonwealth Department of Health. If you do (and I hope you do) you will find that there is a total DECREASE in spending of over $8 billion planned by the Liberal Government over the forward estimates.
How can you say that I don't read when there plain and simply is a decrease in spending proposed by the Liberal Government on health of $8 billion over the next four years and then a further whopping cut of $50 billion over the eight year period commencing in 2017???

You now try to change the subject to looking at the State budget. This thread Is about the Commonwealth Government, not State politics. Don't try to change the topic just because you know you are wrong.

Now, please stick to topic and tell me whether there is an increase (as you claim) on spending by the Liberal Government for Health over the next four years or, as everyone else knows, a decrease.

Cheers

Cheers

Did a 24 night Mediterranean cruise through Holland America last year- the most amazing thing I have done without a doubt.

Rome the highlight, Venice and Santorini a very close top 3.

Monte Carlo was a highlight too (visited there 3 days before the 2013 Monaco GP)- took a tour of the track which was pretty cool. Their casino is something else, my 5 euro chip adorns my cabinet proudly :lol: $-)
How much is a Mediterranean cruise like that worth Valleys? Would you have to do a cruise that long to see everything or are there shorter Mediterranean cruises? Say 12-14 nights?

Believe it or not- we paid $4500 pp for our trip. Reason why it was so cheap- we were the first tour group booking through Phil Hoffmann for this particular itinerary. I think the same itinerary this year is priced around $6000pp.

In my opinion, Europe is so diverse and so large, you could spend 6 months over there and not see everything you want to. We spent 1 month and took in Barcelona, Monte Carlo, Marsielle, Rome, Florence, Venice, Naples, Dubrovnik, Ephesus, Instanbul, Santorini, Corfu, Athens, Katakolon, Lesbos amongst others.

Here is something similar: http://www.cruiseabout.com.au/product/Europe-Mediterranean-3125641

If you consider something like it TDK- do it properly. Not saying for one second that what Pag's inlaws to be are doing isn't a great option, but for me, Europe is such a magical part of the world, 12 days IMO just isn't enough to take it all in!
Have told them that as well mate. If you're going to pay to fly all the way over there, stay for as long as you can.

Agreed, would love to do longer than I am on my one (leaving in 19 days... but not counting... *winks*). As it is though, I am leaving Adelaide three hours after teaching my last class for the term and getting back 18 hours before teaching my first one for next term... so am squeezing out every moment of the holidays *grins*

As it is though, we get to see some wonderful places: Rome, Naples, Sicily, Athens, Santorini, Mykonos, Rhodes, Ephesus. A great thing about it is that the ship is docked from 7:00am until 6:00pm in each of those ports, resulting in pretty much a full day in each, hopping back on board for a wonderful meal and great entertainment.

We are also having three days in Rome after the cruise (one street away from the Vatican) and three days in Hong Kong.

The cruise itself works out very cheap. $2 400 for a balcony cabin for 10 nights. They are also throwing in the Classic Drinks package (worth $700 each) and $500 onboard credit. It pretty much brings the cost of the cruise down to $1 450 each, or $145 a night. Not too bad for the ship rated third best cruise ship in the world *smiles* Can hardly even get a hotel room for that.

Cheers

Jimmy,
This article from Business Insider may assist you:

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/these-two-budget-charts-show-how-much-money-joe-hockey-is-cutting-from-hospitals-and-schools-2014-5

I hate coming here and having arguments but I do want to get these points straight.
I have a feeling you are the only person in Australia who believes that the Education and Health budgets have actually been INCREASED under Abbott. Even Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey have publicly stated that health and education funding has been decreased by the Commonwealth, moving the responsibility for funding to the States.

Cheers
(still your friend)
Bulldogproud2

Thanks,
heading to the airport in four hours for it now!!
Cheers

The Dark Knight wrote:One week now until my missus and I go on our holiday This week can't go quickly enough!!

Have a wonderful cruise, Dark Knight - I know you will *smiles*

My next one is just a little one: Pacific Islands, including Fiji, on Celebrity Century on November 19.

Cheers

Agreed.
One other thing that really irks me at the moment is the belief that the 'turn back the boats' policy is for humane reasons and saving lives. However, it has just meant that asylum seekers have had to seek alternative destinations. Australia has in the past had large numbers coming from Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. Now, unfortunately, they are forced in many cases to travel to Europe, risking far more dangerous and longer journeys. Thus, the 'turn back the boats' policy is definitely not humane and results in more deaths of asylum seekers, not less.
However, we all know that the Australian government doesn't care about this. All they want is for them not to come to Australia, they don't care about what asylum seekers are now forced to do. With Abbott it is a case of the three wise monkeys: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24636868

An update on Central's comings and goings...

INS:
Cohen Pettit (West Broken Hill)
Shane Walker (Renmark)
Nick Gallard (Renmark)
Jesse Kemp (Kimba Districts)
Chris Jensen (Belconnen)
Connor Hargraves (Yarrawonga)
Tom Stevens (Echuca)
Clinton Voight (Eudunda)
Jackson O'Brien (returned)
Tim Meulendyks (returned)



OUTS:
Brad Symes (Retired)
Scott Dutschke (Retired)
Ryan Williams (Victoria)
Josh Glenn (Gold Coast)
Johan Wagner (Port Adelaide)
Tim McIntyre (Warrnambool)
Ben Nason(Glenelg)
Cameron Milne
Dylan Hewett

Some big outs there Williams in particular has been a very good player for Central. Won't underestimate the new recruits though have too much respect for the CDFC

Although they are big misses, the only ones on that list who had good seasons and were regular league players were Ryan Williams, Josh Glenn and Cameron Milne. McIntyre was inconsistent whilst the others played very little league football.
The new breed, although young, seem to be very promising. The list includes a couple of Mail Medallists as well as a player rated by Brett Fevola as 'an AFL star in the making'. Additionally, Jackson O'Brien is coming back a very determined player, one hoping to really produce the goods this year whilst Tim Meulendyks is returning and looking the goods.

Cheers

Old mate Ferg stepped up again!!
To be fair, Ferg has had a fairly decent year. Until the last shield match, he was definitely the pick of our batsmen - quite often the only one to make runs.

Including today's knock, 729 runs at 48.60, including 3 centuries and 3 50's.
Next best out of the current players is Cossie, averaging 36.
Prior to the last match, Ferg was averaging 58.6

Can't blame him for SA's demise.

Cheers

stan wrote:The greatest weapon that the Government has in getting re-elected is the opposition leader.

... and the greatest weapon the Opposition has in getting elected is the Prime Minister.

Sad state of affairs.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:New party being proposed

The Jackie Lambie Network

Wonder if that will result in Sam Kekovich changing his advert supporting lamb as the Australian thing to do.

Good luck to one of my former (and best) students, Dillon Mullins, who will make his league debut this round if he avoids the cut.

Bounce of the ball wrote:Lairds last game ? Will the dogs hang on or realise he may not be the future with the game now ?

Laird is set to go on next year. With a very young list, he has done very well to get them where they are this year.
Cheers

im glad there is finally some international attention to this cause, it may force us into doing something about it
The article did state that the policies are working but then did raise a few good points.

My issue is that tbe "stop the boats" is been a political war front when really its not about vote winning, yet of course its tunred into one.

But the point is there too that if you can stop people getting in the water then yes his will save lives. However if your a hurd fleeing the violence in Syria then its probably safer on the water than on the ground and that needs to be taken into account.

As many have always known, turning back the boats results in more deaths at sea, not less. It is a push factor, not a pull factor, that results in asylum seekers coming by sea. The wars and conflicts throughout the world are what has led to the huge amount of asylum seekers and internally displaced people throughout the world. 'Turning back' the boats is a misnomer as it simply redirects asylum seekers to other, more risky pathways.

I found it very ironic when Tony Abbott commented that it was the fault of people smugglers that the three year old Syrian boy died and that this death confirmed the wisdom of his policy. After all, he did not travel on a boat arranged by people smugglers - they came on their own boat, independent of any people smugglers.

As Bennymacca commented, the right way to try to help asylum seekers is to organise the processing of them in Indonesia and Malaysia, then enabling safe passage to various countries of the region. This should be done according to the capacity of the country to care for them.

I also wish that Tony Abbott could see the hypocrisy in wanting Australia to be involved in bombing Syria, leading to more deaths and/or people fleeing and seeking asylum... and not allowing any to come to Australia.

you mean back stabbed by the current labor leader !

In the same way that Abbott was backstabbed by the current Prime Minister... and Abbott backstabbed the current Prime Minister when he was Leader of the Opposition. Oh, what a wicked web politics leads!

I would be quite supportive of a Turnbull-led government if it was Turnbull-led. However, sadly, Malcolm has already turned his back on all the things that divided him from Tony - he will make no change to the gay marriage agenda, no change to asylum seekers, no change to the climate change policy, no change to the republican agenda - except giving Water to the Nationals via the Dept of Agriculture (a retrograde step).

Yes, a Turnbull-led government keeping true to Turnbull's personal beliefs would have been fine. Sadly, all we have got is an Abbott government that practices better elocution.

Cheers

Congratulations to all at West Adelaide for gaining their spot in the Grand Final so comprehensively yesterday. Both the Eagles and Bloods deserve to be there, having been undeniably the top two sides all year and I wish both teams all the best. Personally, though, I would love to see a West Adelaide premiership. 32 years is a long time between drinks and they thoroughly deserve to break their drought.

As for my beloved Doggies, a fantastic second half of the season that saw us climb seven spots higher on the ladder than many predicted mid-season. If we can keep the team (and coach) pretty much together next season, I can see good times ahead. Very proud of the spirit shown by the boys this season. What the boys lacked in skills they very much made up for with team spirit and work ethic.

As for those who said that Roy was past his use-by date, I don't think any other coach could have got these young boys to where they ended up. Truly the right coach for Central!

Cheers

Cheers

A thoroughly deserved premiership to the Bloods. Congrats and enjoy... makes the 32 year wait worth it all for them!

Dutchy wrote:Kane Cornes returning to the Bay in a development coaching role. Ben Moore returning to join the senior coaching panel.

Some good moves down the bay

Where, at the Grand or Lennies??

You have sort of answered your own question though. The reason he jumped (or dived, in your opinion) was to try to avoid contact. If he did not 'dive', as you basically say, there would have been contact and the result would have been a red card to Reddy. Agree?
In saying that Kamau's action was to avoid contact, how can you possibly give him a foul??

Looked like a massive dive to me as well. Played for quite some time and never once did I feel the need to swan dive to avoid a tackle. Always far more effective to hurdle the leg.

The key thing is that Kamau was definitely taking action to avoid the leg - no one seems to have any doubt about that. He should only have been fouled if he had 'dived' for no reason. He was not trying to falsely convince the ref that there had been contact. Those are the circumstances in which 'simulation' is said to occur. In this case, if Kamau took no action, serious contact was definitely going to occur. No matter whether you look at it as a 'jumping' or 'diving forward' action, there is no question about simulation. As such, the only action a referee can take is to call the foul against Reddy. Under no circumstances could the foul be legitimately given against Kamau.

This seems to be the opinion of all those 'expert' commentators.

Cheers

The irony of all this.... supposedly done to improve the Redbacks' chances of winning Shields.
SACA hierarchy must be praying hard that we lose the final next week... or the timing of this decision will look to be the most foolish decision made by any sporting body ever!!
Hardly that dramatic when it could be the 1st one in 20 years.

Agreed... a decision to reduce the number of teams would have looked fine at any time in the past 19 years. I am not arguing the pros and cons of the overall decision to reduce teams. However, out of all the possible times to make the announcement, this is the one that is ironic!
Cheers

How does it not concern Adelaide? You lot have continually slandered the Club and insinuated that they received preferential treatment from a SACA Staff member. Far as I can see it does concern ACC........ Our club accreditation is far from perfect but it does score very well after sailing pretty close to the wind for a couple of years things are on the improve and with a bit of luck perhaps the successes of the early 2000's will return unlike your flash in the pan success 1 time in the last 50 seasons.

Mean while you wonder why your club is getting singled out? How about stop poaching other club's juniors to prop up your First Grade Team and heck while you are at it get a full compliment of junior sides as it stands presently as all the other clubs currently fulfill......

Heater, I wish you would stick to facts. You normally do. West Torrens was the only club last season that was fully home-grown (apart from 1 interstate player). All other players who played A Grade had come up through West Torrens juniors. Unfortunately no other club, including Adelaide, can say the same thing. Hence, I have no idea why you are picking on West Torrens re this.

As for junior sides, West Torrens actually have more teams in SACA-run competitions than any other team, having also an Under 12 team in a SACA comp.

Re success, West Torrens have played in 13 Grand Finals in the past 50 years (the period you are talking of), have won numerous Club Championships, had five players selected in the same shield match (a SACA record) and won many junior premierships.

If the only criteria for success in your eyes is winning the A Grade premiership, then unfortunately your life, when it comes to cricket, must be a pretty unsuccessful one. (as would the life of all if they applied your criteria)

Cheers