Mega Thread Non-Freo AFL Discussion 2024

[Joao]

View attachment 2036174
Laughs giddily...

67% drafted...

 

[Piggy Smalls]

67% drafted...

True. Good point.

 

[Joao]

True. Good point.

I'm actually staggered how flippantly oppo fans say things like "... and we'll target a top end KPF through trade or FA" as if it was some regular, run of the mill occurance. Happens like one every 5 years across the league.

 

[Number29]

Change the number of field umpires back to 2/3. Having 4 simply means too many different interpretations of a law. They all should adjudicate the same, but it doesn't look like it. Keep the game simple, keep the best umpires working and allow the players to have a clear understanding of what is expected when they tackle, are tackled etc. That's my thoughts anyway!

 

[muzzington]

View attachment 2036174
Laughs giddily...

 

[Docker82]

WC aren't coming out of this quagmire before the Tassie compromised draft and there's little chance of them rebuilding for years after that. I for one look forward to them sucking shit for a decade.

I’m very interested in what draft concessions Tasmania gets tbh. I’m really not convinced the AFL can build a team for them that’ll be competitive immediately.

Gold Coast is a far more attractive destination, as is Sydney (not Western Sydney but players can still live Sydney).

I just feel like if the AFL doesn’t completely **** up the draft for one or two years (and give Tasmania a stupidly high salary cap) then they’ll be no way of them being competitive early. And if you don’t give them the picks they’ll be like us when we first started - kind of sh**e but treading water just outside the bottom four until it all implodes 4-5 years later.

If the draft is super compromised around 2027/2028, West Coast is ****ed for a while unfortunately (wish there was a sarcasm filter on here).

 

[DragoDelph]

 

[oldgoat]

Start the car!...Start the car!!

 

[Dump Truck]

View attachment 2036209

 

[Wilksyy]

While North are absolute crabs I give them kudos for being debt free and have received about 20million dollars less (since 2012) than the Saints. Who are still like 4 million in debt or something. Would like to see one of them kicked to the VFL but anyways... Let's get an extra home game!

 

[Halfbaked]

How much fun will be had if Read leaves the year Tassie enters the competition .

 

[Docker82]

Just waiting for them to ‘sell’ their home games to Collingwood and Richmond at the MCG.

In all seriousness the AFL will probably chip and give the games to Gold Coast or GWS - anything to help out the clubs they made it impossible to not succeed yet haven’t succeeded anyway.

 

[Joao]

Just waiting for them to ‘sell’ their home games to Collingwood and Richmond at the MCG.

In all seriousness the AFL will probably chip and give the games to Gold Coast or GWS - anything to help out the clubs they made it impossible to not succeed yet haven’t succeeded anyway.

Be a fair chip given the differences between an Optus gate receipt vs one of those clubs.

 

[james haish]

Last caller is something else

Still laughing at this. They didn't even have the best team on paper when they won in 2018, they got very lucky Richmond choked in the prelim.

 

[DeadEyeJye]

Still laughing at this. They didn't even have the best team on paper when they won in 2018, they got very lucky Richmond choked in the prelim.

The last caller sounds suspiciously like Dan Const from backchat

 

[Alfonz]

Still laughing at this. They didn't even have the best team on paper when they won in 2018, they got very lucky Richmond choked in the prelim.

Pretty sure he meant the best team WC have put out in years (i.e. all of the injury prone players like Yeo, McGovern, Ryan, Allen were playing).

 

[Cam Payne]

While North are absolute crabs I give them kudos for being debt free and have received about 20million dollars less (since 2012) than the Saints. Who are still like 4 million in debt or something. Would like to see one of them kicked to the VFL but anyways... Let's get an extra home game!

Any club that owns pokies and has a debt like that should fold.

 

[FreoRicci]

Am I the only one that thought Essendon’s
Deliberate behind was actually there?

No pressure. Geelong players didn’t push and stayed away. The player had time to move the ball. Pretty clear what he was doing

 

[Nodgey]

I agree. Was more deliberate than ANB's which cost them the game V Brisbane.

The whole deliberate rule is a complete and utter joke. What the **** is "insufficient intent" anyway? Do away with it entirely. I see zero value in it whatsoever. A sufficient penalty for deliberately putting the ball through the opposition goals is the addition of 1 point to their score.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

What's with the fallout from the West Coast game?
Have they forgotten they are shit?
It doesn't take long for the entitlement to return. I guess they are still believing the big lie, that they never stay down for long. And they truly believe they are better than Hawthorn.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Am I the only one that thought Essendon’s
Deliberate behind was actually there?

No pressure. Geelong players didn’t push and stayed away. The player had time to move the ball. Pretty clear what he was doing

What is the rule?

I think it is this

If you are within 15m's from goal, and under any pressure you can concede.

 

[gaskin]

What is the rule?

I think it is this

If you are within 15m's from goal, and under any pressure you can concede.

Nope. 9m aka the length of the goal square.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Nope. 9m aka the length of the goal square.

I thought the goal square was 15m. Happy to be corrected.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

Nope. 9m aka the length of the goal square.

There needs to be an AFL dance called back to the nine.

 

[Paracleet]

I agree. Was more deliberate than ANB's which cost them the game V Brisbane.

The whole deliberate rule is a complete and utter joke. What the **** is "insufficient intent" anyway? Do away with it entirely. I see zero value in it whatsoever. A sufficient penalty for deliberately putting the ball through the opposition goals is the addition of 1 point to their score.

The whole approach was wrong with the rule. It was brought in after the Joel Bowen time wasting incident: If that was all they wanted to deal with then they should have just made the rule "Any rushed behind that is clearly the result of intent to waste time is a free kick" and if that's too subjective for them then something like "You can't intentionally rush a behind a) from outside the 9 metre zone or b) at all from a kick in phase of play until the phase is ended either by a score at the other end or the opposition side gain possession of the ball."

Or echoing what I said earlier just make the rule the same as for out of bounds. Instead we have to put up with the different definition of what 'sufficient pressure' is from every umpire. This is stupid because with the out of bounds rule at least its only one parameter (what the player with ball did). With the rushed behind rule he has to make up his mind not just about what the player with the ball was doing but what the other side is doing too.