No Oppo Supporters 2021 General AFL Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Both were not far from Normie that day...Hanners may have been robbed!

I was certain Hanners would get it. I think he was robber because he was so young, ROK had a very good game, and got plenty of the ball, but in terms of influence and impact on the result, Hanners was ahead imo.

edit: just watched the clip, Hanners had 2 very important touches in the last two minutes alone. Definitely robbed.
 
I was certain Hanners would get it. I think he was robber because he was so young, ROK had a very good game, and got plenty of the ball, but in terms of influence and impact on the result, Hanners was ahead imo.

edit: just watched the clip, Hanners had 2 very important touches in the last two minutes alone. Definitely robbed.
I am in that clip was sitting right in the back row of the olympic stand!!
 
I was certain Hanners would get it. I think he was robber because he was so young, ROK had a very good game, and got plenty of the ball, but in terms of influence and impact on the result, Hanners was ahead imo.

edit: just watched the clip, Hanners had 2 very important touches in the last two minutes alone. Definitely robbed.
The decision to go to Jets and not Marty was not one of ROKs better ones that day!!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The decision to go to Jets and not Marty was not one of ROKs better ones that day!!

He was lucky it worked out in the end, but yes, very ordinary kick.

That moment where Mattner hunted down the ball and worked it out of bounds is one of my favourite moments of the GF.

Hanners was so clutch that game, the goal he kicked in the 4th was a big team lifter as well. He was absolutely robbed!
 
The decision to go to Jets and not Marty was not one of ROKs better ones that day!!
ROK owes Matty free booze for the rest of their lives, I reckon. Matty saved his & our arse with that chase down on the wing.
 
ROK owes Matty free booze for the rest of their lives, I reckon. Matty saved his & our arse with that chase down on the wing.

Mattner still dont know how he got through that season with a degenerative back and hip forced to retire a few rounds in 2013 due to crippling pain.

Then produced that tackle.
 
Free kick analysis regarding the 2016 GF. Interesting thread, he's good with the Free Kick determinations/opinions.


Holy moly 9/10 of the red one are against us. A bullsh*t 50 from a bullsh*t call in the 3rd quarter.

I don't really want to read this, it just confirms how much momentum was taken out of our hands.
 
"It's not always the ones they call, it's the ones they don't"
Going by this guy the free kick count should have been
24-19 Doggies way - with 1 less 50 to the Doggies and 1 more to the Swans

It's interesting to see there was definitely some missed for the Doggies (which plays into the Doggies fans hands) but to go short in saying it didn't favour them is just playing politics.

To put it in perspective:
-For every 5 free kicks which should have been awarded to the Swans we were awarded 2
-For every 5 free kicks which should have been awarded to the Doggies they were awarded 4

Maybe we still would have lost, but given a fairly officiated match I firmly don't believe so
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This is available to EVERY CLUB IN THE AFL including the Swans, there is even a separate Additional Service Agreements or ASA Cap of $1.2 million per season in addition to the normal salary cap of $13.2million for this very thing. This is set out in Sections 11, 12, and 13 of the AFL Players CBA if you actually sit down and read it - https://www.aflplayers.com.au/app/uploads/2020/12/AFL_CBA_2017-2022-1.pdf

But I guess it's easy to believe the conspiracy if you really want to.
It is but the club can have no influence in the deals between third parties and players. That is one of the clauses. But many years ago a certain Cats president used to personally set up players with contracts through secondary companies linked to his company. This is technically breaking the rules because he was a club president. But his statement was that he had nothing to do with the running of that particular company, even though his family ran the company.

The club can have no influence or direction of third party deals and this is what Cats do and so did Hawks. But there is no paper trail. It is along the lines of a board member or CEO saying to a player manager 'hey you might like to check this mob out for a sponsorship'. Of course the particular mob were already in on the deal. If you believe this doesn't happen you are deluded. I have some fairly strong info that was happening at Hawks and Cats. In Melbourne this is easy.

But in Sydney, a very hard market, it is much more difficult for the club to set up third party deals. Not that our club would. It would be breaking the rules.

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
The ASA is expressly for club associated organizations, for instance QBE as a sponsor of the club could pay Buddy for appearing in advertising and that amount would count towards the ASA cap. If there was a wealthy swans supporter who had a business but with no links to the swans they would be able to contact a players manager and offer some sort of ambassador role to that player and since the role was not offered through the club it would not count to the ASA cap.
This is exactly what I am saying. Clubs are barred from involvement in third party deals

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
and any Independent Agreement HAS to be approved by the AFL General Counsel in accordance with the Rules of the CBA.
Yes and if the AFL thinks there is no link between the third party and the club then it is approved. By this I mean the third party does not sponsor the club. The club can have no involvement in these deals. But how are the AFL to know? If the sponsor in the third party deal is not a club sponsor but supports the club how does the AFL find that stuff out? It can't. Not unless there is, a paper trail and the AFL senior council decides to get a court order to examine records of conversations carried out by employees and elected representatives of the club.

Cats were fined two years ago for breaches of the salary cap. Why did they breach it! One of the player sponsors had become a club sponsor. That is why.

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
The 50 to McLean was dogshit (pun intended) and was the worst call of the day by far. I recall a Grundy mark being called a drop and was spewing at the time but I never saw if that was correct or not.
 
Don't really know how you can judge which calls were right and wrong now when the rules and interpretations of the rules have changed so much since then?
Hard to go back and understand how the rules had been interpreted over the whole year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top