Underwhelmed

[Whispering_Jack 31,131]

I don't know about everyone else but after the first week of the first round of the NAB Cup, I'm feeling underwhelmed. I've watched most of the NAB Cup mini matches, some delayed through Foxtel IQ (although I fell asleep through the Fremantle v Essendon game and missed the end of tonight's tripe header) and so far the only teams that have impressed me have been West Coast who were a class above and Richmond who look early candidates for the big improvers.

I get the impression that most clubs might be trying to keep their game plans under wraps (or perhaps they don't have any? ). The lowest point on the weekend came last night when I thought all three clubs were insipid. The Bulldogs appeared to get away with a win against GWS without any system or cohesion and were lucky that Tim Mohr had a hissy fit after a Doggie goal. Collingwood sent its VFL team with a handful of stars to Bleaktown and were pathetic but still good enough to win both games even if not particularly convincingly.

The scene's been set in Week 1 but I truly hope we get something better next week. I've actually found an opening to go to the Gold Coast later in the week and take in Saturday's games but I really wonder if it's going to be worthwhile. I know that we're going to go in with quite a few players out because they're not ready but I hope the rest of the boys don't treat the games as a carnival jaunt north.

We were insipid enough for large slabs of last year and I truly hope we go north with a bit of a mission even though the competition is looking more and more like a shadow of its former self (and it was never that much to start with).

[dee-luded 2,959]

I don't know about everyone else but after the first week of the first round of the NAB Cup, I'm feeling underwhelmed. I've watched most of the NAB Cup mini matches, some delayed through Foxtel IQ (although I fell asleep through the Fremantle v Essendon game and missed the end of tonight's tripe header) and so far the only teams that have impressed me have been West Coast who were a class above and Richmond who look early candidates for the big improvers.

I get the impression that most clubs might be trying to keep their game plans under wraps (or perhaps they don't have any? ). The lowest point on the weekend came last night when I thought all three clubs were insipid. The Bulldogs appeared to get away with a win against GWS without any system or cohesion and were lucky that Tim Mohr had a hissy fit after a Doggie goal. Collingwood sent its VFL team with a handful of stars to Bleaktown and were pathetic but still good enough to win both games even if not particularly convincingly.

The scene's been set in Week 1 but I truly hope we get something better next week. I've actually found an opening to go to the Gold Coast later in the week and take in Saturday's games but I really wonder if it's going to be worthwhile. I know that we're going to go in with quite a few players out because they're not ready but I hope the rest of the boys don't treat the games as a carnival jaunt north.

We were insipid enough for large slabs of last year and I truly hope we go north with a bit of a mission even though the competition is looking more and more like a shadow of its former self (and it was never that much to start with).

Well it maks sense as we enter a more strategic era of gamestyles with less emphasis on champion players as the interchange has become King. So the coaches don't want to show their hands too soon.

[WhateverItTakes 17]

I still can't believe that Conca might get up to 5 weeks because of the new Tribunal rule.

If there isn't enough video or otherwise evidence for an off-the-ball incidence, it should be thrown out - not deemed intentional!

Feel sorry for the poor bugger and many others that will suffer from this lazy new ruling this year.

[Swampfox 190]

Well i doubt fitness will be a problem

Neeld says he is taking 34 players

The game plan and its application is what interests me

Oh and no injuries

[P-man 13,366]

If this year is anything to go by then the NAB should be dropped next year. The standard has at times been farcical. Dogs v Pies was a joke.

The anticipation for the season to start is in no way enhanced by this circus act of constant kick ins and supergoals performed by B teams.

[Demon 16 214]

I've never been a fan of the preseason 'competition' when we can't have each team play each other twice in the real thing.

A joke really.

[Barney Rubble 1,576]

Totally agree on all of the above.

I'm glad I changed my mind and decided not to waste my money on air tickets and accomodation, to watch a 3rd rate attempt at football.

I'm taping the games next Saurday night. I'd rather go out and see Colin Hay perform is last Gig of his tour.

[Ouch! 2,269]

I still can't believe that Conca might get up to 5 weeks because of the new Tribunal rule.

If there isn't enough video or otherwise evidence for an off-the-ball incidence, it should be thrown out - not deemed intentional!

Feel sorry for the poor bugger and many others that will suffer from this lazy new ruling this year.

Probably OT here, but are you serious?

There was ample video evidence of what he did, it certainly was not lacking, and I have no problem with the new rule stating that anything caught off the ball is upgraded to "intentional" is a good rule.

Conca shouldn't have floored Adams off the ball and he is lucky that he is able to serve games through the NAB cup.

[Nasher 33,617]

On the topic at hand, I agree, but I have always really struggled to get in to the pre-season competition. It always just feels cold and lifeless to me - I liken it to watching F1 cars do their initial practice laps.

[Guest Jackie]

If fans keep tuning in on TV then the ALF will keep on dishing up glorified practice games to us in one form or another every year. It's all about maximizing ratings and money. It's our own fault.

No different to pigs we are. They know we will eat swill when hungry.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Jackie

[Roost It 1,434]

Well it maks sense as we enter a more strategic era of gamestyles with less emphasis on champion players as the interchange has become King. So the coaches don't want to show their hands too soon.

Can you explain to me why the interchange is king? If it were upto me I'd have 2 interchange and 2 subs. The players are fit enough and I watched more cracking games of football last year than I have for a while

[Striker475 696]

Coincidentally I'm going to be up in Brisbane with another mad Melbourne supporter who has recently moved up there. We've decided we'll head down to Metricon for the game, especially since we'll probably be on the Gold Coast in the day anyway.

As for the NAB, I'm not sure. I think the Sat night was a corker, what with GWS giving it a serious crack (and a certain unmentionable player having a torrid time) as well as the close margins. But I don't know how many of those we'll get next weekend, if any.

Edited February 20, 2012 by Striker475

[Harcourt 146]

Probably OT here, but are you serious?

There was ample video evidence of what he did, it certainly was not lacking, and I have no problem with the new rule stating that anything caught off the ball is upgraded to "intentional" is a good rule.

Conca shouldn't have floored Adams off the ball and he is lucky that he is able to serve games through the NAB cup.

That's all good and well but when the AFL's "interests" are up at the tribunal the amount of weeks is first decided then the ratings system massaged to make sure the outcome is what the AFL want.

If (god forbid) GWS made the Grand Final and their star forward was up at the tribunal for belting someone "off the ball" the AFL would simply change the meaning of "off the ball" for that week. It's happened before.

[deanox 10,045]

Maybe Conca needs his own thread, but I'll put my 2 cents worth here for now.

Should Conca have done what he did? No.

Did Conca bump anyone maliciously? No.

As far as I'm concerned, all he did was prop in front of a player, the other player wasn't watching where he was going and got hurt. Why doesn't that player have a duty of care to pay attention to where he is running? Why is Conca responsible to get out of another players way?

Yes Conca should probably get a week because he caused contact of the ball, but he didn't hit him, he didnt forcefully bump him etc.

[Salems Lot 2,682]

I have found the media in general to be fairly underwhelmed by the whole affair creating a "who cares" feeling throughout all concerned. It is a pity that we can't eke back a couple of weeks at the business end of the competition to add on to the season proper. It would extend the home and away season out to a couple of extra rounds reducing the number of teams that are only played once which to me would be a good thing.

I want to be excited by Saturday night but like a previous poster I really just hope that we don't get any major injuries.

Go Dees

[daisycutter 29,892]

Maybe Conca needs his own thread, but I'll put my 2 cents worth here for now.

Should Conca have done what he did? No.

Did Conca bump anyone maliciously? No.

As far as I'm concerned, all he did was prop in front of a player, the other player wasn't watching where he was going and got hurt. Why doesn't that player have a duty of care to pay attention to where he is running? Why is Conca responsible to get out of another players way?

Yes Conca should probably get a week because he caused contact of the ball, but he didn't hit him, he didnt forcefully bump him etc.

yeah, from the vision I saw Conca was dead unlucky. Looked like the sort of block you see many times all over the ground. Nothing malicious here

[Hells Gates 505]

Just on Conca. It looks like the AFL have changed the rules. Conca will be able to sit out the NAB cup games as part of his penalty due to it not being a knockout system. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but the AFL and it's fat cats are tiring me out.

Edited February 20, 2012 by Hells Gates

[Hells Gates 505]

As for the NAB cup, never been a fan and never will. Why do they persist with these stupid rule changes, no wonder the players run around confused. As mentioned before let's hope we get no injuries. And I agree WJ it is not in any way an indication of any teams gamestyle.

[Ouch! 2,269]

yeah, from the vision I saw Conca was dead unlucky. Looked like the sort of block you see many times all over the ground. Nothing malicious here

I agree it didn't look like much, but it was 40 meters off the ball. Adams was not, and should not have been expecting contact from anyone. Why is it unreasonable to deem that this should be deemed 'intentional'. It wasn't accidental that he cleaned up Adams! The AFL didn't change the rules just because it's Conca, they did it because every game in the NAB cup is deemed "live" up to the final.

I don't often agree with the AFL, the tribunal rulings etc, but sniping players behind play is cheap and dirty.... and rarely is it accidental.

[Deeman 1,532]

The 2012 NAB Cup ladder:

[Team Won Lost % Pts]

1. West Coast Eagles 2 0 189.13 8

2. Collingwood 2 0 119.61 8

3. Hawthorn 1 1 132.35 4

4. Fremantle 1 1 132.00 4

5. Richmond 1 1 100.00 4

6. Western Bulldogs 1 1 96.43 4

7. North Melbourne 1 1 76.60 4

8. GWS Giants 0 2 88.57 0

9. Essendon 0 2 49.56 0

Adelaide, Brisbane Lions, Carlton, Geelong, Melbourne, Port Adelaide, St. Kilda, Sydney Swans and Gold Coast Suns have yet to play.

[jnrmac 20,272]

Peoples

NAB Cup is simply practice. Experiment time. This is not about the supporters it's about checking our list under match conditions. It's actually pretty important for the club to have this opportunity.

Personally I don't want any fierce physical contact until rd 1. It's a long season and history shows that the guys who keep their team on the paddock generally do well. Misson, remember, got the Swans through to Premiership with only 1 change in the named side from rd 15. Amazing really.

Craig's record as fitness advisor under Blight delivered 2 premierships. These guys know what they are doing. Let 'em do their job.

[deanox 10,045]

I agree it didn't look like much, but it was 40 meters off the ball. Adams was not, and should not have been expecting contact from anyone. Why is it unreasonable to deem that this should be deemed 'intentional'. It wasn't accidental that he cleaned up Adams! The AFL didn't change the rules just because it's Conca, they did it because every game in the NAB cup is deemed "live" up to the final.

I don't often agree with the AFL, the tribunal rulings etc, but sniping players behind play is cheap and dirty.... and rarely is it accidental.

My problem is that Conca didn't actually clean up Adamas. Conca propped and Adams ran into him because he wasn't looking. After Conca stopped, it looked like Adams took 2 more steps before they collided.

Conca shouldn't have caused the contact, but the semantics are important, Adams should be aware of where he is running.

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Conca knew what he was doing, don't be so naive. Adams falling in a heap and having a little concussion tanty on tv didn't help his cause however.

[daisycutter 29,892]

I agree it didn't look like much, but it was 40 meters off the ball. Adams was not, and should not have been expecting contact from anyone. Why is it unreasonable to deem that this should be deemed 'intentional'. It wasn't accidental that he cleaned up Adams! The AFL didn't change the rules just because it's Conca, they did it because every game in the NAB cup is deemed "live" up to the final.

I don't often agree with the AFL, the tribunal rulings etc, but sniping players behind play is cheap and dirty.... and rarely is it accidental.

I agree sniping players behind play is cheap and dirty and rarely accidental but not necessarily malicious (and then we get into a semantic argument on degrees of intent)

Maybe conca didn't realise the other player was unsighted, i dunno

Pushing, blocking, bumping etc go on all over the ground, Just watch the half fwd/half backline just before any centre bounce, but yes I agree it is mostly childish, unnecessary and poor sportsmanship.

But given all that I thought conca unlucky to get 3 weeks just as trenners was unlucky getting 4 (meanwhile established stars at favored clubs can continue to eye gauge etc)

pretty soon we'll either get to the stage where teams have more players suspended than injured or the game will morph into non-contact basketball

Either way the supporters will get short changed

[Ouch! 2,269]

My problem is that Conca didn't actually clean up Adamas. Conca propped and Adams ran into him because he wasn't looking. After Conca stopped, it looked like Adams took 2 more steps before they collided.

Conca shouldn't have caused the contact, but the semantics are important, Adams should be aware of where he is running.

Technically whilst I can agree that Conca propped, he did so with the express intention to make contact with Adams, or for Adams to make contact,.... either way there was intent there.

DC I agree it seems severe, but thats the loading that intentional puts on the charge, and the AFL is trying to stamp out the behind the play stuff, and thats not a bad thing, pushing, blocking etc is fine, but that happens on the ball or ahead of the ball, not behind the play.

Anyway,.... am bored talking about those sniping little richmond players if I wanted to talk about Conca as much as this.... it would be so much more fun doing it on a Richmond board!