Review Round 1, 2025 - Sydney vs. Brisbane Lions

[Grasshopper17]

1440 x 1080 = now the common standard for commercial TV Networks HD channels in Australia.

That doesn't even make sense. It means everything we watch would basically look like a square, not the wide screen near-panoramas to which we've become accustomed.

 

[Grasshopper17]

In his podcast Dunks said scoring is what he will be working on this year. As well as maintain and improving what he already does.

Weapon.

His set shot late in the game was outstanding. Given his past form in this facet I had absolutely no confidence it would go through. I wasn't even sure he'd have the distance. But we were right behind it in the top tier and it held its line beautifully.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Never noticed to be honest.

Watching the replay bit by bit this week, 90% of the "expert" commentary from Lewis and Buckley is about what the Swans need to do at any particular point in the game. Even when they were well in front. I could only understand that perspective if they had been rank underdog, which they were not.

Who knows, maybe the meeja suddenly have this subconscious (and misguided) view of us that we're invincible, probably on the back of one really good day in September last year.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Lol???





Who we thinking tried to sledge Will on that - Crows mids? Suns mids, lol?

I reckon it was the Suns players. I remember a bit of agro in that match sim a few weeks ago. The Crows game seemed to be played in pretty good spirits overall. So did our half against the Pies.

 

[Grasshopper17]

I don’t think there was much in it tbh.
Unfortunate for Starce but the decision to play 2 weeks after a concussion, not that I am against that decision, but playing and choosing not to wear a helmet are bigger decisions that could lead to a career ending rather than a fairly innocuous hit with accidental head contact.

My understanding is that those helmets actually don't do much good?

 

[martinson]

My understanding is that those helmets actually don't do much good?

That's actually the evidence on any research to date.

What it does do is give the player more confidence.

 

[Section 5]

That doesn't even make sense. It means everything we watch would basically look like a square, not the wide screen near-panoramas to which we've become accustomed.

Below image with explanation

Quite a few years ago i read an article about 4k when it was fairly new.
They explained it something like this.

To get a true 4k viewing of a film or sports event.
First it has to be filmed in 4k. Then it has to be broadcast in 4k by the TV stations/Kayo/Fox etc.
Your TV has to be capable to receive a 4k signal from the broadcast site.
Your TV antenna/satellite dish & internet gear connecting your house has to be capable of receiving and transferring the 4k signal to your TV
If all are capable you get a true 4k viewing

Maybe in the future TV stations will increase their broadcast pixels.
I assume it is costly to do so, or they would have converted by now.
...................................................................................................
Explanation from Google

 

[p4p1]

My understanding is that those helmets actually don't do much good?

The way they are designed they will make a difference. The physics involved say they have to. I don’t know how big of a difference but it isn’t crazy to suggest that in some circumstances they could be the difference between a concussion and no concussion.
The medical team had Joyce playing in a helmet when he broke his jaw for a reason.

ETA: I’m doubtful they make a big difference 99/100 times. But if it slows the head down a tiny bit and stops the brain hitting the skull at a higher speed, it could make a difference.

 

[dlanod]

The way they are designed they will make a difference. The physics involved say they have to. I don’t know how big of a difference but it isn’t crazy to suggest that in some circumstances they could be the difference between a concussion and no concussion.
The medical team had Joyce playing in a helmet when he broke his jaw for a reason.

ETA: I’m doubtful they make a big difference 99/100 times. But if it slows the head down a tiny bit and stops the brain hitting the skull at a higher speed, it could make a difference.

Plenty of people have suggested it makes a difference. However actual medical studies in the US especially have shown no evidence.

A broken jaw is not the same as a concussion - one is from the contact on the body, the other is internal contact from the brain on the skull.

The very latest (last year or two) NFL helmets have some amount of evidence they can reduce subconcussive hits. They do so by effectively cradling the head within the helmet so the head doesn't move on those hits. They still don't reduce concussions, because those hits are above the threshold that the helmet can feasibly protect from. Those helmets are substantially larger and more robust than anything AFL players are wearing on the field.

If you think about the physics involved you'll see why it ultimately makes sense as to why a helmet doesn't help - imagine holding a jar of water with an egg in it. Push it one way and then suddenly jerk it the other. The force on the egg can result it in hitting the side of the jar. If you wrap the jar in a tea towel, it won't make a difference to what's happening inside the jar. The egg is purely at the mercy of the physical forces at play. The tea towel might stop the jar getting broken if you drop it, but the egg is still going to move at the same speed inside it.

A player gets a force exerted on them on way, then an opposing force in the other direction. It might be them running plus a tackle, or a tackle plus the ground, it doesn't matter, just that they're going one way and then the other. A helmet will not reduce the force exerted in either case, just any damage from the impact. Then the change of direction results in an object floating in cerebral fluid contacting the inside of the skull, and there's your concussion.

 

[notliondown]

You would have to wonder if giving a player who already commits to impacts in a way to receive repeated concussions more confidence is actually a good thing?

I'm not suggesting for a moment Starc's concussions are self inflicted, but the reality is he is already a pretty fearless player. If putting a helmet on him means he once again throws caution to the wind, I'm not sure it's the right outcome...

 

[martinson]

Plenty of people have suggested it makes a difference. However actual medical studies in the US especially have shown no evidence.

A broken jaw is not the same as a concussion - one is from the contact on the body, the other is internal contact from the brain on the skull.

The very latest (last year or two) NFL helmets have some amount of evidence they can reduce subconcussive hits. They do so by effectively cradling the head within the helmet so the head doesn't move on those hits. They still don't reduce concussions, because those hits are above the threshold that the helmet can feasibly protect from. Those helmets are substantially larger and more robust than anything AFL players are wearing on the field.

If you think about the physics involved you'll see why it ultimately makes sense as to why a helmet doesn't help - imagine holding a jar of water with an egg in it. Push it one way and then suddenly jerk it the other. The force on the egg can result it in hitting the side of the jar. If you wrap the jar in a tea towel, it won't make a difference to what's happening inside the jar. The egg is purely at the mercy of the physical forces at play. The tea towel might stop the jar getting broken if you drop it, but the egg is still going to move at the same speed inside it.

A player gets a force exerted on them on way, then an opposing force in the other direction. It might be them running plus a tackle, or a tackle plus the ground, it doesn't matter, just that they're going one way and then the other. A helmet will not reduce the force exerted in either case, just any damage from the impact. Then the change of direction results in an object floating in cerebral fluid contacting the inside of the skull, and there's your concussion.

Don't want this to sound like anecdotal knowall stuff but there are 2 misconceptions that invalidate my previously held views backed up by professionals in the industry.

Helmets especially the ones AFL players would use make no difference to the expectation or outcome of a concussion.

There is no evidence that repeat concussions can bring on early onset dementia which has some AFL players concerned. Depression ,drug addiction etc. different story.

As to Notliondown's point re the confidence thing that's a good point. Garry Wilson, Chris Smith and others started wearing them decades ago when there was no real knowledge and so they came back earlier than they ever should have. It didn't help Brayshaw much but that was a big hit and in the light of what's happened since unbelievably unpenalised.

 

[dlanod]

There is no evidence that repeat concussions can bring on early onset dementia which has some AFL players concerned. Depression ,drug addiction etc. different story.

I think there's still ongoing studies on the dementia/CTE link - there's some correlation but not enough to be conclusive yet. It's hard given the main test for CTE involves dissection post-death.

 

[Ad Astra]

Plenty of people have suggested it makes a difference. However actual medical studies in the US especially have shown no evidence.

A broken jaw is not the same as a concussion - one is from the contact on the body, the other is internal contact from the brain on the skull.

The very latest (last year or two) NFL helmets have some amount of evidence they can reduce subconcussive hits. They do so by effectively cradling the head within the helmet so the head doesn't move on those hits. They still don't reduce concussions, because those hits are above the threshold that the helmet can feasibly protect from. Those helmets are substantially larger and more robust than anything AFL players are wearing on the field.

If you think about the physics involved you'll see why it ultimately makes sense as to why a helmet doesn't help - imagine holding a jar of water with an egg in it. Push it one way and then suddenly jerk it the other. The force on the egg can result it in hitting the side of the jar. If you wrap the jar in a tea towel, it won't make a difference to what's happening inside the jar. The egg is purely at the mercy of the physical forces at play. The tea towel might stop the jar getting broken if you drop it, but the egg is still going to move at the same speed inside it.

A player gets a force exerted on them on way, then an opposing force in the other direction. It might be them running plus a tackle, or a tackle plus the ground, it doesn't matter, just that they're going one way and then the other. A helmet will not reduce the force exerted in either case, just any damage from the impact. Then the change of direction results in an object floating in cerebral fluid contacting the inside of the skull, and there's your concussion.

i'd defer to your expertise and certainly to statistical studies but i don't understand part of the reasoning.
-If you wore a four-inch thick padded helmet , then a whack on the head is next to nothing
-if you're bare-headed, you take the full force of the whack
So, logically, anything in between would be a reduction in force wouldn't it?
ie. the force of your brain on your internal skull is proportional to the force from the ground/shoulder on the external skull, which is reduced by padding. The egg analogy: the egg will hit the side with a force proportional to the strength of the shaking. Am I missng something?
Do you mean that the standard helmets aren't up to the job given the large forces involved in big hits?

 

[Ad Astra]

Don't want this to sound like anecdotal knowall stuff but there are 2 misconceptions that invalidate my previously held views backed up by professionals in the industry.

Helmets especially the ones AFL players would use make no difference to the expectation or outcome of a concussion.

There is no evidence that repeat concussions can bring on early onset dementia which has some AFL players concerned. Depression ,drug addiction etc. different story.

As to Notliondown's point re the confidence thing that's a good point. Garry Wilson, Chris Smith and others started wearing them decades ago when there was no real knowledge and so they came back earlier than they ever should have. It didn't help Brayshaw much but that was a big hit and in the light of what's happened since unbelievably unpenalised.

Good point. I got a tremendous whack in the head a few years ago, broken nose etc., but no diagnosed concussion. iI took a while before I was confident enough to dive into a pack. I think I would have been with a bit of padding.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Noah has to go. Put McKenna down back. Embarassing

Thought Noah well and truly redeemed himself by match end with some bloody tough and inspirational efforts with the game on the line.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Stupid Sawans PA playing Cam's song.

Did Rayner just kick a goal?

The Swans always play Sweet Caroline at quarter time of home games. Don't know why, it's just their schtick. To be honest it gets the crowd there more involved than the actual game.

Give me "kick-the-ball-into-the-stack-of-tyres-from-40m-away" at Giants matches any day.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Not 15 my ass

That kick was 20 metres!

This was so bad. Even Swans fans around me couldn't understand why it wasn't paid a mark. Sydney got a goal from the ensuing ball up too

 

[Grasshopper17]

No tall presence forward

It really did look as if we were looking for Joe early in the game. "He's not there any more lads!"

Old habits die hard as they say.