Roast IF it isn't biased or ncompetent..... THEN it must be inciteful media coverage part II

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
b2915337354c5fc0227c4bfc50124aaa.jpg


Great as always from the HUN.

The cut and paste it from the AFL website and didn’t want to get done for copyright so they changed it to their own words.

Actually very clever by the editor
 
Re Goodes I think we have a tendency as humans to think in black and white. It’s either racist to boo or it was just purely his on field actions.

Most likely it is somewhere in the middle.

I can understand him being upset and thinking it was a racist attack but I can understand people who booed him because of his on field actions not liking it when they are accused of being racist and told to stop because someone is taking it as racist.

I met Goodes when he was doing a corporate speaking gig. He was very nice and charming to chat to prior to the event. However once he got on stage his whole demeanor changed and his presentation was very self pitying. I honestly walked away very bemused by the whole thing.

It was odd.
For what it's worth, up here in Kunners, all the indigenous mob up here can't stand Goodes, because of the way he has carried on.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Hackdorn at it again. Going to file this with his JK out for the season stories from a couple of years back.
There's no way he's a $1.2 mil per season player, and I highly doubt he is on $800K now.
 
There's no way he's a $1.2 mil per season player, and I highly doubt he is on $800K now.
I heard his last contract made him one of the top 3 paid players in the squad so I don't think 800k is a stretch.

Dogs have cash to burn for next season's cap with Boyd's retirement. Makes sense they'd do something stupid and throw it at one player.
 
I heard his last contract made him one of the top 3 paid players in the squad so I don't think 800k is a stretch.

Dogs have cash to burn for next season's cap with Boyd's retirement. Makes sense they'd do something stupid and throw it at one player.
Really? I haven't seen that about his previous contract. When did he sign? Not sure he ever had those kinds of runs on the board. - would've thought plenty would be in front of him.
 
Dogs would end up losing one of their young WA guns if Darling wants out. I know JD is a FA next season but surely it would end up like a dangerfield situation.
 
Robbo completely misrepresenting what Barrass said, that he had no motivation at the start of the season. No wonder Dunstall and Derm seemed shocked.
Yeah, expecting Derm and Dunstall to ten comment on Barrass' remarks - only having the paraphrased by Robbo - was pretty lazy. Prettyt sure Derm also said in that segment that we had lost to Collingwood.
 
Yeah, expecting Derm and Dunstall to ten comment on Barrass' remarks - only having the paraphrased by Robbo - was pretty lazy. Prettyt sure Derm also said in that segment that we had lost to Collingwood.
As always, the quality of coverage you would expect of the reigning premiers. -___-

Definitely a forgettable result, smashing Collingwood at the MCG.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dogs would end up losing one of their young WA guns if Darling wants out. I know JD is a FA next season but surely it would end up like a dangerfield situation.
How do you figure that?

The Dangerfield situation is what happens when a RFA wants to move to a particular club who isn't willing to pay him as much as the original club. Geelong traded with Adelaide because with the relatively small value of the contract Adelaide had every incentive to match.

If hypothetically Darling opted to accept a $1.2m/yr contract from the Dogs our options would be let him go and accept compo or match.

The idea of trading him a year early to get something in return, because of a contract offer that may or may not exist, and may or may not be as big as reported, for a player whose allegiances his entire life have been in Perth and with West Coast are so fanciful it's hard to know where to start arguing against that avenue of getting something in return for him.
 
View attachment 688052

This is pathetic reasoning. "There are problems with the system that haven't been fixed yet, so scrap the whole thing."

Errr, check the 2018 GF if you want to see why scrapping Video Review is a woeful, knee-jerk, response.


Agreed. Nothing in history has ever been fixed by putting it back in its box. It still works 95% of the time and highlighting failures are the best way to improve it.
It's funny how last year when Masto kicked that goal against Geelong that was reviewed/ruled as touched (from memory it was touched but came back off his boot last but the score reviewer stopped watching after the first touch) generated 0 interest from the media. If they'd bothered to shout about it then, we wouldn't have had the issue now.

It's simple, watch the goal kicking play in it's entirety from when it's kicked to when the ball crosses the line. Improve the quality of the cameras/have fixed cameras looking around the goal line/goal square where most touched balls are. Most reviews will take <10 seconds.

Accept that no system will be correct 100% of the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top