Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About CarnTheDees

  • Rank
  1. Rolf has to stay in the team all year, even with Gawn and Hogan back he's the CHF and backup ruckman that keeps our balance right.
  2. There's a new one called "Kicking Behinds" on the App Store, give it a look it's good fun.
  3. Out: Weidemann, Melksham, Hannan In: Hogan, Hibberd, T.Smith Pedersen and Trengove close to a call up.
  4. Yep, disgraceful. Tyson's in the team on the weight of numbers of his possessions, but the quality of his touches and his lack of defensive effort are a liability.
  5. To me he's absolutely worth the punt. Put a proper AFL pre-season and full-time training regime into him and I can't see how he couldn't become a handy or better 3rd tall forward.
  6. Demonland does that plenty well without the Riddler helping out.
  7. Assuming results pan out this round as expected (Adelaide, Geel and WB all win), at the end of this round there will be 4 teams tied on top of the ladder and another 3 only 1 game behind. Unprecedented? And Adelaide, Sydney and GWS have similar %'s, so pending results, the % could split 2nd/3rd. The Hawks look like they'll meet an in-form Collingwood, WCE have everything to play for Friday night to secure a home final and maybe even top-4. As Brian Taylor would say, Wowee!
  8. If he's available for a reasonable price then we should go for him because (IMO) he would be instantly best-22. For me, the talk about Melksham is irrelevant, because Hibberd is (slightly) taller but around 10 kg heavier, so he plays a different game and can take on much bigger, marking opponents. Also I was led to believe that Melksham was recruited based on his impressive work at the end of 2015 as a wing/HF? I see Hibberd as an upgrade on Lumumba, he would play as either 3rd or 4th tall defender depending on matchups. Plus he can kick, which we are sorely lacking right now with Dunn and Salem not back there. If we had Hibberd in the team I reckon the first choice back 6 (in 2017) would be: FB: Hibberd T.Mac Jetta HB: Salem Frost Wagner With the option of pushing Salem into the midfield and swapping in Hunt, O.Mac, Dunn, H etc. depending on fitness, form, matchups etc. Then you have guys like Melksham, Stretch etc. fighting for a spot in the midfield rotation. As a free agent or 3rd round pick he would be great value, or for a 2nd round pick he would still be good value.
  9. Yep, this is the area of the most inconsistency IMO. 1. At one extreme end, you see the ones where the tackler genuinely knocks the ball out of the carrier's hands. (Which has always been called play-on) 2. At the other extreme end, you see a player actively and deliberately let go of the ball. (Which was the original definition of a throw) Most tackles fit somewhere in-between those and it can very difficult to decide. In the last 2 years, it appears that the instruction to the umps has been to adjudicate more of them as no.2 where-as in the past the majority of them would have been no.1. The other grey area is the definition of an attempt to dispose of the ball correctly, especially in circumstances where a player gets tackled and then it's stacks-on-the-mill, but also because an attempted (but unsuccessful) kick or handball can look exactly the same as a throw. And finally, the period of time that constitutes "prior opportunity" is now just a fraction of a second. The incident against WB where Jetta tackled Redpath(?) is a classic example where he had the ball in his hands for about 1/2 a second, I can't believe Redpath was pinged for that one. Of course it doesn't help when you have Brian Taylor and other commentators appealing for holding the ball at every second tackle and shouting out "dropping the ball" or "incorrect disposal" all the time. And then they bleat about "rewarding the tackler" FFS! Howa bout rewarding the ball winner? The only two actual rules are "holding the ball" and "throwing the ball" - the other terms are just descriptors or clauses within the HTB rule and it doesn't help the public's football knowledge when the buffoon commentators can't get it right. AFAIK, HTB was originally part of the rules to reduce the number of ball-ups caused by players trying to bullock through 18 tackles. Apart from the ones where the players get pinged for "dragging it in", it more often than not actually stops the game that was still moving because players are getting pinged every time they are tackled and the ball spills free.
  10. My thoughts on equalisation is that it needs to be addressed in two parts: 1. On-field and 2. Financial. The difficulty is the grey area where the two overlap, i.e. where the richer clubs are more successful because they spend more on coaches, facilities etc. I feel that on-field, the system is pretty fair at the moment. The draft plus the fixturing (with the three groups of 6) should be enough, everything else being equal, for teams lower down to rise up the ladder within a few years. The biggest concern is the finances, with some clubs massively advantaged over others in terms of the revenue they can generate because they have better stadium deals and they get better access to prime-time scheduling. This is where an equalisation payment comes in for the poorer clubs, Eddie's favourite "tax" on the rich clubs, and it should be set up with a formula that relates to fixturing and stadium deals.
  11. Can anyone explain what happened to Todd Banfield (Bris/Richmond) - he started his career on red-headed fire then went absolutely nowhere. Also Brett Goodes had a pretty swift fall from grace after being nearly their best player early in 2013.
  • Create New...