Non-Lions discussion 2022

[Happy_Neale]

The only dodgy thing is the umpire passing on sensitive voting info and the people he told acting on it.
By all means, be pissed off at Neale or Cripps getting a certain amount of votes in certain games (I know a lot of people were surprised that Cripps only got 1 vote in round 1 instead of 3, so I'm sure Neale got similar results), or pissed off that Cripps was eligible after having his suspension overturned (although I believe Neale was happy for him, as they're mates and business partners, and I'm yet to see any comments from Ah Chee on the incident or the reversal of suspension), but this is just a stupid, young, inexperienced umpire making a dumb decision that effects nobody except those involved.

This is off topic but I think you'll find most people were annoyed that his suspension was overturned on a technicality rathar than him not actually being guilty of a suspendable offence. You should not be able to win a Brownlow in a season where you knocked someone out cold.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

This is off topic but I think you'll find most people were annoyed that his suspension was overturned on a technicality rathar than him not actually being guilty of a suspendable offence. You should not be able to win a Brownlow in a season where you knocked someone out cold.

Agree with you to a certain degree, but I don't think being knocked out should be a factor. I hate the current rules where it seems to penalise the result rather than the action. Somebody can get knocked out from the most innocuous thing. Accidents happen. I think intent and recklessness should be more of a factor than the end result.
If roles were reversed and Neale accidentally knocked out a Carlton player while making what I considered to be a hard but fair play at the ball, I'd hate for him to miss out on a Brownlow for that.
I know Neale is a fair player who has no malice in him. I know Cripps is the same. This was the first time he had ever been reported in his entire playing career, including lower levels.

Anyway, I don't want to push my luck on your board. Just wanted to correct the fallacies that there was any questions about the legitimacy of the actual count.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

This is off topic but I think you'll find most people were annoyed that his suspension was overturned on a technicality rathar than him not actually being guilty of a suspendable offence. You should not be able to win a Brownlow in a season where you knocked someone out cold.

I'm also genuinely curious about Ah Chee's thoughts on the incident and the suspension/overturn, but I'm not aware of him making any statements about it, so if anyone has any links, I'd love to see.

 

[Nuggo]

Firstly what what Cripps did was no accident. So lets not play that game. He was trying impact the momentum of the game and used force on an unprotected player.

Does Ah Chee need to make a statement? Come on, really?. He probably can't remember as he was knocked out remember

No malice in Cripps? It is not about malice, it about protecting the head. If Neale had done that it would be disappointing as it is disappointing that Cripps did what he did.

Cripps is worthy player of a Brownlow but just not in this circumstance in my opinion.

 

[Dalions]

Firstly what what Cripps did was no accident. So lets not play that game. He was trying impact the momentum of the game and used force on an unprotected player.

Does Ah Chee need to make a statement? Come on, really?. He probably can't remember as he was knocked out remember

No malice in Cripps? It is not about malice, it about protecting the head. If Neale had done that it would be disappointing as it is disappointing that Cripps did what he did.

Cripps is worthy player of a Brownlow but just not in this circumstance in my opinion.

It was not a Brownlow worthy act.

 

[Section 5]

Cripps was lucky on all counts to end up with the 2022 Brownlow under current rules

The Brownlow needs an overhaul badly
I have been saying for many years it should go to someone that most consider to be the best player in the competition
The AFL, and a lot of fans like to stick to tradition.
But for me that just means being stuck in the past
Lots of thing should change in the game as it is played today. But back to the Brownlow

On the Brownlow, it was introduced to the game some 1000 years ago, okay it was in 1924
The game was super amateur at best then, but in the fully professional game of 2022 we still stick to tradition in how it is won
Fairest & Best player voted by umpires. A good system at the time

Now we have 1 corrupt umpire and that has started some discussion on who should award the votes
Maybe someone other than umpires could cast the votes, but that is not my real concern

The Brownlow should go to what most may consider the best player, and as such getting suspended should not rule you out
If a player does something bad, and get say 4-5 weeks suspension, i doubt they get enough votes to win anyhow

Modern players get a week or 2 for very little compared to 1924
A week or 2 suspension in the period 1924 to 1974 was probably a fist to the head behind play resulting in something broken, a concussion, or a trip to the ER

 

[Nathan Barley]

Should just ban betting on it (and all sports)

 

[Happy_Neale]

Agree with you to a certain degree, but I don't think being knocked out should be a factor. I hate the current rules where it seems to penalise the result rather than the action. Somebody can get knocked out from the most innocuous thing. Accidents happen. I think intent and recklessness should be more of a factor than the end result.
If roles were reversed and Neale accidentally knocked out a Carlton player while making what I considered to be a hard but fair play at the ball, I'd hate for him to miss out on a Brownlow for that.
I know Neale is a fair player who has no malice in him. I know Cripps is the same. This was the first time he had ever been reported in his entire playing career, including lower levels.

Anyway, I don't want to push my luck on your board. Just wanted to correct the fallacies that there was any questions about the legitimacy of the actual count.

Accident or not he was still negligible in his actions. I don’t believe anyone could watch that incident and say he wasn’t trying to inflict physicality on the opposition, sure he didn’t mean to hit him in the head and knock him out but he still did. That is Cripps fault which the tribunal actually did agree with if you recall.

Not sure Ah Chee making a statement in the media about it or not makes any difference either, that’s before considering whether he is even allowed to or not.

 

[martinson]

Should just ban betting on it (and all sports)

You can't stop it now. It'd be a legal minefield. Plus the revenues to sports and particularly governments are substantial.

Having been a gambler and a punter all my life what was totally impossible even 10 years ago is now available at the click of the fingers.

Like many other aspects of life this is the world that we live in.

 

[martinson]

Accident or not he was still negligible in his actions. I don’t believe anyone could watch that incident and say he wasn’t trying to inflict physicality on the opposition, sure he didn’t mean to hit him in the head and knock him out but he still did. That is Cripps fault which the tribunal actually did agree with if you recall.

Not sure Ah Chee making a statement in the media about it or not makes any difference either, that’s before considering whether he is even allowed to or not.

It was a dog act.

Plain as day as soon as it happened.

It was not indicative of Cripps the player or the person but he should've paid substantially for what he did and instead he got a Brownlow.

Ironic.

 

[BRAB]

I'm also genuinely curious about Ah Chee's thoughts on the incident and the suspension/overturn, but I'm not aware of him making any statements about it, so if anyone has any links, I'd love to see.

Callum Ah Chee hasn't been able to speak since murderer Cripps killed him in cold blood. Shame on you for injury trolling.

 

[dlanod]

You can't stop it now. It'd be a legal minefield.

The government(s) absolutely can. It's no difference to banning any of the many things they've chosen to ban over the years. Is sports gambling really that much more of a legal minefield to ban than plastic straws or asbestos? One has more money to chuck a hissy fit over it, but no more legal standing.

Plus the revenues to sports and particularly governments are substantial.

But it's never going to happen and you've nailed the real reason why.

 

[nup]

You should have to be able to read three pages of any book before a pokie machine will take your money

 

[martinson]

The government(s) absolutely can. It's no difference to banning any of the many things they've chosen to ban over the years. Is sports gambling really that much more of a legal minefield to ban than plastic straws or asbestos? One has more money to chuck a hissy fit over it, but no more legal standing.

But it's never going to happen and you've nailed the real reason why.

With respect to Governments banning it it's so entrenched in the largest markets overseas that all you'd end up doing is sending that money to the most powerful jurisdictions . The will of Governments is to expand and enhance it so it won't ever happen but just say a Government did want to ban it it's effectively far more difficult than plastic straws or asbestos because the demonstrable harm to the community is more obscure , restraint of trade issues are more complex, it would affect the earning capacity of the competitors ( in the sports) possibly significantly instead of expanding interest to new markets which it presently does, and they could just take it to Vanuatu or the Philippines who would welcome them with open arms anyway.

But if a Government was of a mind to do it technically they could do it with support of the crossbenchers which would be a given. It'd only be a matter of time before another Government relented. But you're right they don't want to for obvious reasons.

 

[Viceregal]

It was a dog act.

Plain as day as soon as it happened.

It was not indicative of Cripps the player or the person but he should've paid substantially for what he did and instead he got a Brownlow.

Ironic.

And that look of sorrow he had on his face just afterwards was an enlightening glimpse into the soul of true nobility...

 

[Section 5]

I must be in the minority that think this just won't work
18 teams is to many in my opinion
They will now have to either go to 20 teams or relocate someone to Tassie which is unlikely

AFL reaches in-principle agreement with Tasmania for 19th team

An in-principle agreement on commercial terms for Tasmania's bid for a 19th licence has been reached

www.afl.com.au

 

[briztoon]

I must be in the minority that think this just won't work
18 teams is to many in my opinion
They will now have to either go to 20 teams or relocate someone to Tassie which is unlikely

AFL reaches in-principle agreement with Tasmania for 19th team

An in-principle agreement on commercial terms for Tasmania's bid for a 19th licence has been reached

www.afl.com.au

Play each team once, plus magic round, plus a rivalry round.

 

[Nunez]

19 teams is bad from a talent pool perspective, let alone a fixture perspective. Think they should get rid of one of North or the Saints.

 

[Section 5]

Play each team once, plus magic round, plus a rivalry round.

Not really the logistics of getting rounds in an issue for me
No matter how many teams in the competition the AFL will come up with something not fair but will suffice

The AFL will not sit on 19 teams, so something will have to give
I recon the talent pool is stretched to the limit as it is, not to mention sponsorship dollars
20 teams would be terrible when more than 1/2 the population lives in 2 League dominated states

Will 19 AFL teams also mean their will be a Tasslass Tigress team in the AFLW

 

[nup]

19 teams is bad from a talent pool perspective, let alone a fixture perspective. Think they should get rid of one of North or the Saints.

It won't happen but id like to see them get rid of Richmond

 

[Big Sauce 21]

I must be in the minority that think this just won't work
18 teams is to many in my opinion
They will now have to either go to 20 teams or relocate someone to Tassie which is unlikely

AFL reaches in-principle agreement with Tasmania for 19th team

An in-principle agreement on commercial terms for Tasmania's bid for a 19th licence has been reached

www.afl.com.au

Awful awful awful decision. No one will want to relocate to there, No one will show up to watch and it will slaughter the fixture.

 

[Jivlain]

 

[Viceregal]

...and the Saints lose Max for a few months - sooo glad I never embraced my geographical heritage!!!!

 

[Dalions]

Wowzers!
Keen to get rid of them weren’t they.

 

[Section 5]

2022 AFL TV Ratings - Sports Industry AU

State Leagues The growth in the AFL’s digital footprint was well received by fans, with an average of 5000 weekly users streaming VFL matches and a further 2000 average users live streaming WAFL matches. Viewership for the WAFL competition in 2022 attracted nearly 750,000 people across the...

www.footyindustry.com

Found the above article on the AFL 2022 Ratings for anyone interested
Not sure why they bothered to included AFLW as it is only for round 1
Below three sections from the article
.................

24 AFL games in the H&A season reached over a million viewers,

#1 Dees/Dogs R1 1.436m
#2 Dons/Pies R6 1.415m
#3 Dees/Pies R21 1.231m
#4 Pies/Dees R13 1.221m
#5 Dogs/Cats R12 1.216m
#6 Swans/Cats R2 1.203m
#7 Blues/Pies R23 1.165m

In Brisbane, the city average for the season on FTA was just 27,000. Matches involving Brisbane averaged 43,000, while the Suns averaged 23,000 per game. The Suns were the second lowest rating team in the AFL for 2022, while Brisbane came in at #7. In 2021, Matches involving Brisbane rated an average of 59,000, while matches involving Gold Coast rated an average of 25,000.

Summary

• AFL Preseason 1.089m
• AFL H&A Season 106.265m
• AFL Finals 19.169m
• Total TV 126.524m
• Total Attendance 6.752m
• Attendance + TV 133.276m
• Total TV Viewing Hours 316.310m