Opinion 2018 Non-Crows Discussion - Part 2: Tom Doedee, Rising Star Nominee & Port's New Major Sponsor

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I hope they do take the AFL on. It will **** up their relationship with the AFL. If they think they’re getting the bad end of the stick now, it will be nothing compared to how they’ll be treated in the future.

It’s one thing complaining umpiring decisions are a bit crook / they’re out there for everyone to see.

Unless Port release the entire video then there will always be that doubt.

So , go for it Port - and watch any support you enjoy over and above other teams -and yes, I’m talking your China crap - disappear !

Take your best shot! Worked a treat with the GC jumpergate!

The AFL are piss weak though, so I doubt that.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Untitled.jpg

Riddle me this, Batman

9 disposals
6 clangers
DE = 78%

I understand there are non-obvious metrics that go into these numbers but prima facie it appears wrong

there shoudl also be a stat for "put Luke Parker on his arse"
 
View attachment 487326

Riddle me this, Batman

9 disposals
6 clangers
DE = 78%

I understand there are non-obvious metrics that go into these numbers but prima facie it appears wrong

there shoudl also be a stat for "put Luke Parker on his arse"
Frees Against
Dropped Marks
Non-disposal obvious Errors

well, that seems pretty subjective...
 
View attachment 487326

Riddle me this, Batman

9 disposals
6 clangers
DE = 78%

I understand there are non-obvious metrics that go into these numbers but prima facie it appears wrong

there shoudl also be a stat for "put Luke Parker on his arse"

Clangers includes frees against and dropped uncontested marks. It's not a metric of ineffective disposals, in fact most ineffective disposals are not clangers
 
Just went for a ride through the I’ve lost my faith in kinkly thread over yonder. I think the bath water is starting to taste a little bitter for some.

Silent J as entertaining as usual and I wonder which sinking ship old mate Tribey will jump on next..

It’s worth the read if you’re bored
I was bored last night and went over to their threads to have a read after saying I wouldn’t ever do it again a couple of weeks ago..

Geez, the rubbish that is written over there and the delusional victim mentality is actually scary..

Not only that, after spending around half an hour perusing their threads I think my IQ had dropped about 40 points.... I believe their utter stupidity may actually be infectious.
 
Clangers includes frees against and dropped uncontested marks. It's not a metric of ineffective disposals, in fact most ineffective disposals are not clangers
When Danger breaks form a pack and kicks it 40 or t0 metres into space instead of the leading player nearby, is that an effective kick?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 
BT is a family friend of the Lever family.
He was drinking with Lever's father and Jake at the Intercontinental after the preliminary final win against Geelong.
BT was always pumping up Lever's tires on air. Wait until Jake plays some good football, BT will be unbearable.
Even worse, I reckon when doedee plays a bad game (and it will happen, everyone has them), I expect BT to sink the boots into him
 
BT is a family friend of the Lever family.
He was drinking with Lever's father and Jake at the Intercontinental after the preliminary final win against Geelong.
BT was always pumping up Lever's tires on air. Wait until Jake plays some good football, BT will be unbearable.


Loved when Carey was aking BT why he was not pumping up Gallucci like he does others.
 
View attachment 487326

Riddle me this, Batman

9 disposals
6 clangers
DE = 78%

I understand there are non-obvious metrics that go into these numbers but prima facie it appears wrong

there shoudl also be a stat for "put Luke Parker on his arse"

The problem is the AFL only display a small portion of the stats they collect, clangers include free kicks conceded, 50 meter penalties conceded, dropped marks or fumbles under no pressure and a disposal or deliberate knock on that goes directly to an opposition player.

An ineffective kick or handball isn't necessarily a clanger unless it goes straight to an opponent. So he had 7 of his 9 disposals be effective, he had 2 free kicks against, not sure where the other 4 clangers came from as they are not displaying all the stats but I am sure those who hate him can probably pinpoint where the other clangers came from. :p
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Being a single employee of the AFL, Michael Christian will become a puppet of the AFL's agenda of the day. Making him the sole match reviewer was a deliberate move to 'bring it back in-house', as they said at the time. I guess they breathed a sigh of relief when Trent Cotchin got off for the grand final and AFL House resolved never to have such a close call again. Now Gill just has to make a phone call and give a direct order to Christian as to what outcome the AFL wants.

Should just hire Vince McMahon to do it!
 
When Danger breaks form a pack and kicks it 40 or t0 metres into space instead of the leading player nearby, is that an effective kick?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

If it's a 40+m kick to at least a 50/50 contest or better it's effective. So even if he misses the target it's probably counted as effective.

However Champion Data also record long kicks to advantage, where the receiving player takes an uncontested mark. So he wouldn't get one of those recorded.
 
Brian Taylor's personal response at Talia was childish and immature.
Talia was answering a specific question put to him about Jake Lever and he answered honestly in the context of that question.

I was watching 'The Jump,' a basketball program and the host Richael Nichols made a very salient point.
Nichols said, "We can not start criticising guys for answering the question we ask them otherwise they'll stop answering these questions we ask of them."
If you are going to show a grab of a player answering a question that is somewhat judgemental have the decency or candour to first show the question.
 
Carey loves baiting BT... it’s great... Carey knows BT is full of shit the majority of the time..
This exchange was great:

CAREY: “He’s (Tex) been voted by his peers, the last 2 years in a row as best captain in the competition, by his peers BT. Has that ever happened to yourself?”

BT: “No.”

CAREY: “Exactly.”
 
Found this somewhere :rolleyes:

"Guys like Selwood and Flogarty are great examples of why the biff should be brought back.

Seeing those types clocked off the ball by a guy like Barry Hall can only be good for the game.

I know it is in the best interests to move on from thug acts, but fwits like these guys shouldn't be allowed to get around like they do on a field with no repercussion."

What century are we in again?
 
I was bored last night and went over to their threads to have a read after saying I wouldn’t ever do it again a couple of weeks ago..

Geez, the rubbish that is written over there and the delusional victim mentality is actually scary..

Not only that, after spending around half an hour perusing their threads I think my IQ had dropped about 40 points.... I believe their utter stupidity may actually be infectious.
workers-in-radiation-suits-wash-off-contaminants.jpg
 
What century are we in again?

It's at the heart of that sorry club.

I went to countless games in the 80s where the opposition was four goals up at halftime. Port's vaunted gameplan, talent and whatever-the-****-Port-Adelaide-football-is wasn't working.

They never tried harder. They never changed things up. They belted someone. We used to run a half-time book to see which opposition players would be smacked into next week because they were on top.

And that would fire them up.

Fast-forward to now, where you can't belt your way back into the lead, they're more than a tad confused about how to arrest their slump. Because their MO - which they've used since the 1950s - is now taken away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top