Preview Brisbane Lions vs Sydney Swans Sunday 21st June 1:10pm @ GABBA

[anotherletdown]

With a goal or a behind?

A behind, even a juggernaut needs to build momentum with small steps

 

[anotherletdown]

Any possibility this is Rowbottom's burner account on X just posting for shits

and giggles? Nobody could be stupid enough to actually believe what they are posting.

Another player in the team I suspect

 

[anotherletdown]

Back on secondary-topic…
Surely Brian from Family Guy rates right up there ?!

And just to show my age, Hong Kong Phooey more than worthy of a mention -
The all time best at solving crimes inadvertently.

Cartoon dogs are cool and alĺ... but Lassie is the GOAT

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Watch Charlie Cameron

23

Charlie Cameron

Age

30

Ht

180cm

Wt

76kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.1

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

3.7

3star

M

3.0

3star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

9.6

2star

K

7.9

3star

HB

1.7

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.7

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

9.6

3star

K

5.4

2star

HB

4.2

4star

M

1.4

2star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.2

4star

get off all because he’s a “top bloke”.

 

[McRobie]

3 weeks, hmm, half thought he would get off.

I think his and Bedfords 3 weeks are laughable and troubling.

 

[Syd]

Cartoon dogs are cool and alĺ... but Lassie is the GOAT

On topic,


Best cartoon dog ever

 

[MF]

****ing bullshit and the Bedford one is even worse. They are punishing tackle outcomes, not player actions at this point. Wouldn't be surprised if the ultra soft Heeney suspension drove them to crack down this week.

Cameron should play, especially as he was useless last time we met.

We had Cunningham last time. He's the reason we rarely get troubled by small forwards. He's basically blanketed Cameron every time we've played

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Cartoon dogs are cool and alĺ... but Lassie is the GOAT

Was Lassie ever a cartoon though?

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

What a joke, those sort of tackles happen half a dozen times a game. No slinging action. The only difference is the resulting concussion, which is going to happen in a contact sport. Don't cry when one of our players is wiped out for a final for something similar.

The AFL is just covering their butts legally when players start suing them for CTE.

This is no doubt part of their reasoning (but not rubbing out someone for intent with their elbow still won’t look good in courts).

I think the main element of their reasoning is mothers and fathers choosing what sport their child should play. If players are causing a bloody nose or concussion, the parent doesn’t care about the intent - they only care about the outcome and that it could be their child. For the AFL, this risk is existential to its future.

However, it only compromises the professional game. If they are going to punish for outcome, they should at least also punish for intent to avoid absurd inconsistencies, even if it means more players are rubbed out.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

We had Cunningham last time. He's the reason we rarely get troubled by small forwards. He's basically blanketed Cameron every time we've played

I hope we take our time with brining Cunningham back so that he is safe to run out finals.

He is one of our most important players structurally - small forwards kill us when he is not in the team.

I think we should be training up Campbell or Wicks to backup / replace Cunningham.

 

[dosser]

Had a vivid dream we won the grand final. 160-100 against Geelong, but I forgot it was on and turned on at the end to see Grundy celebrating and Wicks had kicked 6 goals.

I woke up before the medal presentation so cannot name the norm smith winner.

I think you are on to something. Two nights ago I dreamed I had my motorbike stolen and when I looked out at the carport the next morning there was no motorbike. In fact, I haven't owned a motorbike for about 40 years! Spooky.

 

[The King!]

I think you are on to something. Two nights ago I dreamed I had my motorbike stolen and when I looked out at the carport the next morning there was no motorbike. In fact, I haven't owned a motorbike for about 40 years! Spooky.

Sounds like a job for Scooby doo- to get us back on topic

 

[Donza]

Watch Charlie Cameron get off all because he’s a “top bloke”.

Putting on my neutral hat, The cream, the bone, the white, the off-white, the ivory or the beige one.

Its 3 weeks every day of the week.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Beat the Brians and we’ll almost have cemented a top four spot this far out

 

[Jewelsbon]

I think his and Bedfords 3 weeks are laughable and troubling.

Yep totally agree. I always thought the epitome of a good tackle was making sure the opposition player can't dispose of the ball, but if they tackle "ball and all" these days, more often then not they'll get suspended. It will be touch footy soon!
The most laughable thing about this weeks findings is Rosas getting the same penalty as Heeney for an absolutely purposeful dog act!
Talk about chook lotto!

 

[dosser]

The mods haven't suspended me for Months !

Yeah, I don't understand. I keep on messaging them but nothing has happened.

 

[bedford]

Yeah, I don't understand. I keep on messaging them but nothing has happened.

You have plenty of mates

 

[dosser]

You have plenty of mates

In the words of Oscar Wilde, there is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about.

 

[GoTheSwannies]

While I agree that the rules and in particular the MRO's enforcement of the rules have been terrible to this point, and the AFL need to really invest on getting that right ASAP. I'm a little more optimistic about the future. I think protecting players from concussion is paramount, McCartin and Brayshaw would attest to that (granted the majority of McCartains concussions were the result of his own endeavour).

While you'd love the tackler to be rewarded, I'm okay with tacklers being suspended for sling tackles or dangerous tackles. It just goes back to the point that tacklers have a duty of care, and they need to improve on tackling with the right technique.

I generally find that sling tackles and dangerous tackles usually result from the defensive player not being in a great position and relying on tackling their opponent in such a way so as to prevent the player evading the tackle or being able to dispose the ball.

I feel as though we're in a transition period where players will adapt, coaches will adjust their training. And eventually, what we'll have is a more attacking game, where if defenders aren't in a great position, the attacking player will likely be able to move the ball on, and the defender just needs to do better next time.

If the result means we have fewer concussions, then I think that's an acceptable compromise. Players are people, and we don't want players developing cognitive issues when there's something that can be done to prevent it.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

While I agree that the rules and in particular the MRO's enforcement of the rules have been terrible to this point, and the AFL need to really invest on getting that right ASAP. I'm a little more optimistic about the future. I think protecting players from concussion is paramount, McCartin and Brayshaw would attest to that (granted the majority of McCartains concussions were the result of his own endeavour).

While you'd love the tackler to be rewarded, I'm okay with tacklers being suspended for sling tackles or dangerous tackles. It just goes back to the point that tacklers have a duty of care, and they need to improve on tackling with the right technique.

I generally find that sling tackles and dangerous tackles usually result from the defensive player not being in a great position and relying on tackling their opponent in such a way so as to prevent the player evading the tackle or being able to dispose the ball.

I feel as though we're in a transition period where players will adapt, coaches will adjust their training. And eventually, what we'll have is a more attacking game, where if defenders aren't in a great position, the attacking player will likely be able to move the ball on, and the defender just needs to do better next time.

If the result means we have fewer concussions, then I think that's an acceptable compromise. Players are people, and we don't want players developing cognitive issues when there's something that can be done to prevent it.

We also have to remember and we all love the Swans and footy, but these guys play till they are 32...they deserve to have a life after footy that's not full of brain issues. I'm more than fine with them coming down hard on then via suspensions. What I'm not okay with is non football acts getting less like this week

 

[GoTheSwannies]

We also have to remember and we all love the Swans and footy, but these guys play till they are 32...they deserve to have a life after footy that's not full of brain issues. I'm more than fine with them coming down hard on then via suspensions. What I'm not okay with is non football acts getting less like this week

100% agree with that, which goes back to my point about AFL needing to invest into getting it right. It highlights the AFLs failure to manage this properly.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

100% agree with that, which goes back to my point about AFL needing to invest into getting it right. It highlights the AFLs failure to manage this properly.

Needs to be a clear distinction between a football action and a non football action. It's very simple. Non football action start the table at 3 weeks.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Putting on my neutral hat, The cream, the bone, the white, the off-white, the ivory or the beige one.

Its 3 weeks every day of the week.

I’ll go with the beige jacket. It reminds me of Richie Benaud

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Putting on my neutral hat, The cream, the bone, the white, the off-white, the ivory or the beige one.

It’s 3 weeks every day of the week.

We all know this, but does the “panel” know this though?

 

[dosser]

I’ll go with the beige jacket. It reminds me of Richie Benaud

You guys are such erudite gentlemen. I hope it is complemented with a cravat?