Mega Thread Port Forum General AFL Thread Part 23

[gbear]

Says HE chose the crows over PAFC because of both 'the on-field and off-field stuff'. FMD.

View attachment 1634564

This is a reminder of what the crows looked like 'on field' when he signed at the end of the 2021 season..

View attachment 1634574



and 'off-field':

View attachment 1634572

Just admit it they offered you more money and the captaincy. Seriously such a franchise.

 

[dirty2]

The bump is still a split second instinct thing for some I reckon, it'll die out almost completely by the next generation with the tackle only coaching approach.

Is it still a thing where Little kids arnt allowed to tackle they can only bump?

 

[backtozero]

Is it still a thing where Little kids arnt allowed to tackle they can only bump?

It is for DBJ.

 

[dirty2]

"I think that fart was a wet one"

"I'm glad Hawthorne have poo and wee coloured Guernsey/shorts so know one can tell"

 

[Del165198]

Chard warner

On SM-G970F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'd have gone with CHUD Warner myself

 

[dirty2]

It is for DBJ.

Lucky he missed.... Would of got 6 weeks if DBJ got him which probably would of been a good thing.

 

[dav3]

Three games for McAdam

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

Crow banned​

McAdam has been found guilty of rough conduct and banned for three matches.

 

[Festerz]

Three games for McAdam

IMHO is fair. But 2 things:

1. Consistency with Pickett 2 game suspension?

2. All that wasted tribunal time and legal argument around potential v actual impact for that?


Coming out of this come 2 things for the AFL:

- Surely it is time to wait until round is over before issuing MRO suspensions to ensure consistency at least within the round itself?

- And AFL needs to clear up rules around bumping/shepherding once and for all especially given concussion class actions pending. FFS it's not as if this issue has come out of the blue.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Is fair. But 2 things:

1. Consistency with Pickett 2 game suspension?

2. All that wasted tribunal time and legal argument for that?

Can they appeal?

 

[Festerz]

Can they appeal?

Yes - to the AFL Appeals Board.

But why? Everyone agrees it was worth 2 weeks at least and the argument used by the crows' defence was (imho) ....odd (in terms of contesting all elements of the charge). Deep pockets aside, I think they will let this one stand and just make vague statements about inconsistencies etc.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Yes - to the AFL Appeals Board.

But why? Everyone agrees it was worth 2 weeks at least and the argument used by the crows' defence was (imho) ....odd (in terms of contesting all elements of the charge). Deep pockets aside, I think they will let this one stand and just make vague statements about inconsistencies etc.

I don’t watch the Crows games. Is he a big loss?

 

[Doctor Feel]

McAdam is a "would be delisted if they actually had depth" kind of player.

 

[OneGreatClub]

McAdam is a "would be delisted if they actually had depth" kind of player.

Oh that’s a shame

 

[Del165198]

McAdam is a "would be delisted if they actually had depth" kind of player.

File under McHenry, N. And Jones, C.

 

[powermacs]

So the Crows have edited their proposal to include a much smaller 2nd ground.

I wonder how much of this is due to resident protests and how much is due to the $15m blow out and budgetary hole?

My suspicion is that as always with the Crows it is more about the $$.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Na, it’s 100% about the tress. It’s incredibly funny. My mate who lives a few streets away is having a fair say. He’s a Green and hates the crows.

 

[RossFC]

McAdam to miss the SANFL Showdown.

 

[HinkleysHeroes]

Na, it’s 100% about the tress. It’s incredibly funny. My mate who lives a few streets away is having a fair say. He’s a Green and hates the crows.

Fair enough too! Its no minimal use dog park ffs.

 

[Buget]

IMHO is fair. But 2 things:

1. Consistency with Pickett 2 game suspension?

2. All that wasted tribunal time and legal argument around potential v actual impact for that?


Coming out of this come 2 things for the AFL:

- Surely it is time to wait until round is over before issuing MRO suspensions to ensure consistency at least within the round itself?

- And AFL needs to clear up rules around bumping/shepherding once and for all especially given concussion class actions pending. FFS it's not as if this issue has come out of the blue.

What do you expect from a Kangaroo court, that isn't really a court....

You just have to look at the fact that last year's Brownlow Medalist got off from a suspension and subsequently remained eligible, as deep pocketed legal-beagles argued the suspension was invalid due to technical legal aspects (I am clearly not a lawyer) - all whilst pretty much every football commentator was saying he should be suspended - a loop hole that the AFL has now closed.

This is the problem with the tribunal system, it is took rigid, the "guidelines" basically tie the hands of the review panel. That meant McAdam got referred and Pickett didnt. It is clear they didn't applied the "likely to cause injury" clause appropriately. Pickett got lucky with his incredibly inappropriate bump - if the bulldogs player went off for a Concussion test, he too would be at the tribunal. Just because it didn't end up with a player having a concussion test doesn't mean the action was any less likely to cause injury. McAdam's probably got an appropriate suspension, but Pickett didn't.

In saying that, the tribunal has demonstrated numerous times its flexibility in rigidity..... In a game of many variables, the AFL should be able to step in and automatically refer actions straight to the tribunal for an independent assessment - this happens with miss-conduct charges, so why can't it happen with actions that are "likely to cause injury"? That is the only way I see stupid actions, like Pickett's bump, removed from the game.

 

[RossFC]

Another crow heading to the tribunal as well.

 

[Jonts]

McAdam is a "would be delisted if they actually had depth" kind of player.

Shocked they went him over Rowe tbh

 

[JimmyBC]

Shocked they went him over Rowe tbh

Really? McAdam isn't great but he at least has some AFL attributes, I could out run Jummy Rowe after a 3 day bender.

 

[raman]

Really? McAdam isn't great but he at least has some AFL attributes, I could out run Jummy Rowe after a 3 day bender.

I’d have mistaken him for a keg and put a tap in his head during the bender.

 

[backtozero]

I’d have mistaken him for a keg and put a tap in his head during the bender.

Dwayne Russell voice - "that's what they recruited him for!"

 

[Powerade 08]

And on top of all of this, Sheezel has nothing to do with us anyway. We never had a chance to get Sheezel. If they want to troll somebody about Sheezel they should be trolling GWS or West Coast supporters.

A lot of people are forgetting that feeder club GWS saved the day and made sure North and WC were well compensated. They are the team losing out in this deal.

At our pick we could've had Reuben Ginbey, who looks like the result of some sick experiment and should probably be locked away. Hes the same size as Josh P.Kennedy. but he is not JHF.