Discussion 2023 General AFL Discussion

[Saint Ray]

I've met Kennett he's a campaigner.

I have met him too. I thought he was an a-hole

 

[Saint Ray]

Agree

Like how in the feck does Pickett only get 2 weeks earlier in the year when he basically launched himself like a missile at the opposition player and here Mansell does little more than turn and brace for contact and gets 3?

Well, Siciliy got three weeks because he has form. Just back from the week's suspension for his hit on Caminiti.

 

[Saint Ray]

I didn't think there was anything wrong with his tackle either but when McCluggage went down with a head/neck injury I knew he would be in trouble.

For the good of the game and for my Supercoach team I hope he gets off without a suspension but I have less confidence in him getting off than Butler.

Not what Lewis said on 360. Glad he was wrong. Dead wrong in fact

 

[bergholt]

Agreed. I'm happy to protect the ball winner in that a player shouldn't be penalized where there is genuinely no prior opportunity. I'd hate to see a situation where the ball is on the ground and no one is prepared to pick it up.

Would never happen regardless of rule changes, it's a strawman.

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Just saw a bit of footy classified, Cripps had a total of four kicks for the match against the Bombers, none of which hit a target, or indeed were considered an effective disposal!

And then I heard Matthew Lloyd very matter of factly say Essendon should make finals now after that win. I do think he's getting a little ahead of himself there, in fact I'm surprised someone didn't pick him up on it.

 

[George]

 

[Dard Ball Get]

DEPRESSING

 

[Dard Ball Get]

In tears.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

In tears.

View attachment 1712744

 

[luca77]

DEPRESSING

View attachment 1712730

Do I see us trending up there, right at the very end? Promising!

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Kinda forgot but happy to realise we have Thursday night footy tonight. Can't see Port losing at home but Geelong have some good players coming back in to the team, Dangerfield, Duncan, and Holmes, so might not be as one sided as we think.

Just having a bit of a look, the Cats had better get their act together pretty soon, they have a fairly difficult run home. Their last six games are against Brisbane, Freo, Port, Collingwood, St Kilda and the Dogs.

 

[CursingFijian]

Kinda forgot but happy to realise we have Thursday night footy tonight. Can't see Port losing at home but Geelong have some good players coming back in to the team, Dangerfield, Duncan, and Holmes, so might not be as one sided as we think.

Just having a bit of a look, the Cats had better get their act together pretty soon, they have a fairly difficult run home. Their last six games are against Brisbane, Freo, Port, Collingwood, St Kilda and the Dogs.

Yeah they’ve got a very tough draw.

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Yeah they’ve got a very tough draw.

May get balanced out somewhat by their home ground advantage but they'd better get a move on if they want to play finals.

 

[gringo2011]

May get balanced out somewhat by their home ground advantage but they'd better get a move on if they want to play finals.

When I did the ladder predictor I had them missing finals. They at least have players back now.

 

[CursingFijian]

When I did the ladder predictor I had them missing finals. They at least have players back now.

I hope they miss finals along with Richmond, Bulldogs and Swans who look cooked.

And I wouldn’t mind seeing Stewy Dews boys edge out Fremantle for 8th spot.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Half a chance that whoever sneaks into the 8 will come up against the Cats at Cardinia.

 

[gringo2011]

Half a chance that whoever sneaks into the 8 will come up against the Cats at Cardinia.

Not many finals at Cardinia unless it was an interstate team.

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Half a chance that whoever sneaks into the 8 will come up against the Cats at Cardinia.

I'll be very surprised if the Cats earn a home final.

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Another inconsistent application of the rules this year in my opinion has been the hands in the back in a marking contest. Last weekend alone in different games there were a few very similar looking incidences of it that were adjudicated differently. I find it frustrating to watch as a fan on the couch, the players must get frustrated too when different umpires in the same game call it differently. There's holding your ground if players are backing in to you, but imo we should never see two hands in the back. As a kid playing, two hands in the back was/is a big no no, drummed in to you very early. That shouldn't be diluted. There are other ways available to keep your opponent away from where the ball will drop, without having two hands in the back. A push in the back is a push in the back (even if it's only one hand).

 

[StFly]

Another inconsistent application of the rules this year in my opinion has been the hands in the back in a marking contest. Last weekend alone in different games there were a few very similar looking incidences of it that were adjudicated differently. I find it frustrating to watch as a fan on the couch, the players must get frustrated too when different umpires in the same game call it differently. There's holding your ground if players are backing in to you, but imo we should never see two hands in the back. As a kid playing, two hands in the back was/is a big no no, drummed in to you very early. That shouldn't be diluted. There are other ways available to keep your opponent away from where the ball will drop, without having two hands in the back. A push in the back is a push in the back (even if it's only one hand).

View attachment 1713186

Funnily enough, this is one of the rules that isn't ambiguous as hell or open ended with "if in the umpires opinion a square is a circle" as prohibited contact b has;

"Pushes of bumps an opposition Player in the back."

With intention of a player whose sole objective is contesting the ball shall be awarded every intention to do so, then in marking contests in which case same intention just mark instead of literally every contested situation, b is again;

"unduly bumps or pushes an opposition Player."

Out of those two statements, the only thing not really defined or open for interpretation, is what is unduly pushing or bumping a player and what is applicable for those same things to be legal? A bit like the rando talk of "I hate slaps and like boxing" in the sense of both are bumps and pushes and one ump might think "I like both, play on" whilst another thinks "slapping is for bitches" and whistles. This is an easy fix though as they just need to define undue bumps or pushes, can put it under prohibited contact by expanding 18.3.3 so it's all in one location and ruling, as 18.3 is that prohibited contact first statement and 18.5 is the second marking statement.

So for me anyway, that free kick is not a book one, it's a that ump is clearly taking the piss and possibly gambling on result cheating by making wild guesses and breathing into a device that can cause sound.

Cause I mean, say you're standing ground and someone is backing into you, 18.3.3 says you can use your forearm, so you raise it to brace. Player B backs into you to try and take front possie, they position as such to push into you, all weight shifted backwards. Human mechanics indicate that with your forearm, you're going to push their back, human mechanics also indicate, an umpire 40m away is not going to see any of that.

If Player B then laughs hysterically and supermans forward, that umpire is going to blow a whistle and it'll be against you as your forearm will have moved forward just because physics is a thing and you matched his forced of him trying to body you out of position, and that force is no longer there as that player laughed and yeeted himself forward to show a push.

So it all comes down to the umpire for those calls, and we all know they need to do better.

 

[pluggeranddoc]

Why is Cox always in the middle of the s**t talking lol

What would you expect from an inhabitant of the country that made it possible for Trump to ascend to it’s highest office?

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Didn't really catch the details but it sounded like Petracca was being the knob.

 

[bergholt]

I'll be very surprised if the Cats earn a home final.

I still think they're going to get good in the next few weeks. Tough draw though - still have to play 1st, 2nd (twice), 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 13th, 17th.

 

[Plugger35]

Should be good game tonight, hopefully Port get up, sick of Geelong always playing finals and they will be dangerous if they get there at full strength.

Those Cats campaigners are like Jason Voorhees in Friday the 13th though, just when you think they have been killed off, they rise from the dead again.

Didn't really catch the details but it sounded like Petracca was being the knob.

My money would be on Cox being the knob in that exchange, Cox is a known shittalker and all round flogbucket like Nathan Murphy, Petracca isn't.

 

[Diehard Saint]

What would you expect from an inhabitant of the country that made it possible for Trump to ascend to it’s highest office?

And to add insult to injury, elected a dementia- ridden old man to succeed him.