Autopsy Hawthorn v West Coast Eagles

Remove this Banner Ad

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/daniel-rioli-vs-cyril-rioli.1163303/

This thread on the polls board got locked pretty much immediately last Thursday. The Richmond OP tries to take advantage of Cyril's dip in form having coincided with Daniel's hot start by posing the question: "who would you rather have playing a game for you next week?"

So much potential lost for that thread following a great performance by Cyril in his next game! :D
 
I was doing some YouTube clips early last year and reducing a continuous video clip to under 30 seconds helps.

It will be an issue if there's a long chain of highlights or even doing the final 2 minutes of a close game.

So for a highlights package, you'll have to do a collection of clips less than 30 seconds, otherwise one will get picked up. There's no way around it unless you compromise the video quality.

As mentioned earlier, disclaimer does nothing as it's YouTube's Content ID that picks it up automatically.
Was talking to some other YouTubers and this is exactly what I did. It isn't too big of an issue luckily, and I can work around it easily.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Because someone unstickied the Supercoach/Fantasy Questions thread and this is the result.
We do have an entire sub on bigfooty for fantasy football though
 
We do have an entire sub on bigfooty for fantasy football though

Most club boards have a go to thread for specific player inquiries which avoids player questions in other threads and unfavorable responses from Hawks posters. Maybe next season it would be a good plan to have specific club threads placed in the SC forum across the whole of Bigfooty?
 
Most club boards have a go to thread for specific player inquiries which avoids player questions in other threads and unfavorable responses from Hawks posters. Maybe next season it would be a good plan to have specific club threads placed in the SC forum across the whole of Bigfooty?
not sure what the answer is, a lot of posters seem to just scroll past sticky threads and we seem to get questions about SC in random threads without mentioning that they are SC questions
 
not sure what the answer is, a lot of posters seem to just scroll past sticky threads and we seem to get questions about SC in random threads without mentioning that they are SC questions

42
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

not sure what the answer is, a lot of posters seem to just scroll past sticky threads and we seem to get questions about SC in random threads without mentioning that they are SC questions

Well I'm no einstein but I can imagine that a pies supporter is not in here enquiring about his job security because he's looking to hookup
 
Well I'm no einstein but I can imagine that a pies supporter is not in here enquiring about his job security because he's looking to hookup
you do know the Spec in my title is Special right?
 
hey guys just wondering about Hardwick's job security?
Surely you aren't contemplating replacing Bucks with Hardwick, after their 5-0 start to the season?
 
I was doing some YouTube clips early last year and reducing a continuous video clip to under 30 seconds helps.

It will be an issue if there's a long chain of highlights or even doing the final 2 minutes of a close game.

So for a highlights package, you'll have to do a collection of clips less than 30 seconds, otherwise one will get picked up. There's no way around it unless you compromise the video quality.

As mentioned earlier, disclaimer does nothing as it's YouTube's Content ID that picks it up automatically.
The way around it is to post it on either a different video site or host the videos yourself on your own website. The AFL/7/FOX may still come after you but the chances are smaller. Currently they use auto comparison software on YouTube which detects infringement and automatically reports to YouTube who automatically take it down.

If its on your own site they need to take you to court.
 
Left the ground believing Hawks won by 51 points.
Saw on C7 last night that the score line changed to 50 points.
Not sure of this but apparently Burton punched the ball through for a behind as the siren sounded and no score was recorded on the day but the AFL changed the score during the week the register an additional behind to West coast.

Anyone got further info on this????
 
Left the ground believing Hawks won by 51 points.
Saw on C7 last night that the score line changed to 50 points.
Not sure of this but apparently Burton punched the ball through for a behind as the siren sounded and no score was recorded on the day but the AFL changed the score during the week the register an additional behind to West coast.

Anyone got further info on this????
It wasn't as the siren sounded it was ages after the siren sounded and even after the umpire had blown full time. Then he punched it through instead of marking it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Hawthorn v West Coast Eagles

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top