Carlton Supporters Club

Too kind LN, compared to coaches and experts I'm a dumb ass, but I would have planned and would have put in a truckload of work into ensuring Keays and Walker had minimal impact.
Watching the replay, gee we dropped a lot of marks. And we had our chances to to either hold onto to the 16 pt lead or seal it when they came back. Owies stubs a toe, Charlie drops a marks, Zac W dropped spilled the ball which resulted in Mudguts (dead set Fogarty is fatter than me) picking it up and drilling a pass to the top of the square, Adelaide goal.
As Vossy said, we have got a lot right in the dyeing minutes if the first 4 weeks, we farked up the last few minutes this week. C'est la vie.

I agree. Although I don’t think you're a dumb a$$. More of a well informed passionate observer of all things navy blue! 😉

And what, they didn't know these blokes are pacy? They didn't know Keays was going to kick 3 or 4? They didn't know Walker knows a thing or two about playing FF and kicking straight? Shame on them because I'm a dumb ass and I knew all the above.

Weitering gave up on Walker 3-4 times and allowed him to take uncontested marks.

He could take a  picture of a bruise on his leg from another time he got drunk and fell over.

Yep, saw that, he just plain gave up the chase.

It wasn't just pace. There was one where Newman stopped running after his man thinking the ball was going out but it didn't and his man ended up setting up a goal.

We lost a bit of focus and didn't respect them as much as we should.

You might need to fabricate some corroborating evidence and set up some eye witnesses first. 

You must have extraordinary powers of observation to determine people’s intent from a couple of seconds of CCTV footage.

And yet eyewitnesses at the nightclub and security at Parliament House gave evidence that clearly contradicts your assessment of Higgins and Lehrmann’s state of sobriety.

Unless you sat through the entire trial and carefully considered every piece of material evidence and every sentence of testimony from Higgins, Lehrmann and all of the witnesses, you’re not really in a position to dispute Justice Lee’s findings.

Of course you can have an opinion, but it’s not worth much in this particular context.

  Mr Fairweather recalled a general smell of alcohol but did not think that the visitors were overly affected (by which he meant slurring, falling over, vomiting level drunk) so as to be refused entry (Fairweather (at [29]–[32], [62])). He considered the scale of intoxication to be “very moderate” and not “heavily intoxicated” because otherwise he would have refused entry (T1172.4–27). Mr Fairweather, although an experienced security guard, was not a breathalyser in human form. He said at the time they were “half pissed” (Ex R69). I have no doubt his evidence was given genuinely, but without prolonged examination and complete information as to what had occurred earlier in the evening (and although Mr Lehrmann may only have been “half pissed”), he mistakenly but honestly underestimated the extent of the intoxication of Ms Higgins. Similarly, Ms Anderson realised Ms Higgins was intoxicated after she observed her struggling to get her shoes back on coming through the metal detector (Anderson (at [27]–[28])) and later recorded this observation in her incident report (Ex R67).