The 2016 Grand Final

[Fork 'em 6,983]

12 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

 Boyd or Picken were BOG/Normy for mine though. JJ's second half was better but missed too many targets in the first half IMO.

100%

Johannsons disposal in the 1st half was atrocious.

[Gator 17,261]

Good luck to the Dogs, they pick a great year to be in the hunt.

There was no standout team and 7th place got the chocolates.  The AFL's draft and salary cap has delivered an even year.

In 88 and 00 we had to come up against the competition's power houses. No such issue for the Dogs.

I don't see a dynasty happening with this Dogs side, but under Beveridge they should remain there abouts.

[brendan 3,434]

Friend of mine put $5 on Boyd to win norm smith at 100/1 fair to say he was [censored] when JJ Got it 

[Macca 16,904]

Allowing the ball to 'spill free' in a tackle has been going on for the best part of 5 years ... it's the AFL's answer to congestion.  It reminds me of union where the player who is tackled places the ball behind or in league where the player once tackled is allowed to stand up and 'pseudo-kick' the ball backwards. 

A free not paid with the ball spilling free in a tackle didn't just rear it's ugly head in this GF.  The AFL basically re-wrote the rules with regards to holding the ball and their reasoning is that they want "continues play" ... the problem with that is the sport now somewhat resembles league & union.  If you like rolling mauls, great.  I don't because it's not the footy I was brought up on.

So either put up with it or do one of 2 things ... pay lots more holding-the-ball decisions or get rid of the congestion.  To get rid of the congestion requires a dramatic reduction in rotations and/or less players on the ground.

Much like the short-pass now dominates the sport, congestion is here to stay unless the AFL becomes proactive and fixes it.

If you're happy with the congestion, so be it.

 

[daisycutter 29,600]

1 hour ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I agree with the sentiments, but the "rich club" part is a myth.

All of Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney (and South Melbourne) and even Collingwood have had their financial difficulties.

The salary cap and draft (the two single most important mechanisms in the AFL) are there for a reason, they mean that any team can win a premiership, it's just up to those teams to use them properly.

you could also add to that, macca, just how long the umps allow play to continue after a tackle. sometimes (rarely) they blow the whistle fairly promptly, other times they let it go on for an eternity. the umps used to bounce the ball fairly promptly in order to clear congestion.

[Dante 2,739]

9 minutes ago, Macca said:

Allowing the ball to 'spill free' in a tackle has been going on for the best part of 5 years ... it's the AFL's answer to congestion.  It reminds me of union where the player who is tackled places the ball behind or in league where the player once tackled is allowed to stand up and 'pseudo-kick' the ball backwards. 

A free not paid with the ball spilling free in a tackle didn't just rear it's ugly head in this GF.  The AFL basically re-wrote the rules with regards to holding the ball and their reasoning is that they want "continues play" ... the problem with that is the sport now somewhat resembles league & union.  If you like rolling mauls, great.  I don't because it's not the footy I was brought up on.

So either put up with it or do one of 2 things ... pay lots more holding-the-ball decisions or get rid of the congestion.  To get rid of the congestion requires a dramatic reduction in rotations and/or less players on the ground.

Much like the short-pass now dominates the sport, congestion is here to stay unless the AFL becomes proactive and fixes it.

If you're happy with the congestion, so be it.

 

There were a couple of blatant throws yesterday that weren't paid and one was a tunnel ball through the legs, which they replayed and the commentators said that it was ok, huh, how could it be if you lift the ball with two hands? Guess we have to revisit the free paid against Fitzpatrick for his tunnel ball against Hawthorn.

Another was a double handed throw right in front of the umpire as the player was going down, it was the most obvious I've seen that wasn't paid.

 

[Biffen 12,940]

30 minutes ago, brendan said:

Friend of mine put $5 on Boyd to win norm smith at 100/1 fair to say he was [censored] when JJ Got it 

What was Picken paying?

He was the player of the Prelim and GF for mine.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

8 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

you could also add to that, macca, just how long the umps allow play to continue after a tackle. sometimes (rarely) they blow the whistle fairly promptly, other times they let it go on for an eternity. the umps used to bounce the ball fairly promptly in order to clear congestion.

I think you quoted the wrong post.

[Macca 16,904]

6 hours ago, Dante said:

There were a couple of blatant throws yesterday that weren't paid and one was a tunnel ball through the legs, which they replayed and the commentators said that it was ok, huh, how could it be if you lift the ball with two hands? Guess we have to revisit the free paid against Fitzpatrick for his tunnel ball against Hawthorn.

Another was a double handed throw right in front of the umpire as the player was going down, it was the most obvious I've seen that wasn't paid.

 

I saw at least 30 throws yesterday ... but I'm applying the old interpretation.  I reckon the AFL could serve up just up anything to the masses and they'd munch into it. 

The sport would be absolutely bullet-proof if we had decent custodians.

Yesterday was a great 'contest' and it really was fantastic to watch.  But it wasn't a great exhibition of Australian rules footy. 

 

Edited October 2, 2016 by Macca

[junk 342]

Great win for the Western Bulldogs,it shows you what good coaching and recruitment can do for you. To think we could of have the Bont. The Dees are a long way off from the Doggies they have better back up players than we do.Perhaps they have more experienced players which we often refer to when we don't win a certain or an amount of games.I think players want to play for coaches that had that  Hawthorn coaching background. I wouldn't be surprise to see Carlton to be up their with the Dees next year (neither will make the 8 ). To think they have Cameri to come back into their side next year. I ask the question who of great importance wants to come to the Dees next year?

[daisycutter 29,600]

43 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I think you quoted the wrong post.

yep, sorry clint, not sure how that happened 

[Macca 16,904]

58 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

you could also add to that, macca, just how long the umps allow play to continue after a tackle. sometimes (rarely) they blow the whistle fairly promptly, other times they let it go on for an eternity. the umps used to bounce the ball fairly promptly in order to clear congestion.

I honestly believe the better way to fix it is to get rid of the congestion. 

But our voices are in the minority dc with regards to the whole 'incorrect disposal' debate anyway ... as I stated earlier, most supporters of the sport are seemingly happy to "let the game evolve"  Evolve into 'what' is my retort. 

The sport sells itself to a large degree because of all sorts of other reasons.  I'd prefer if it was absolutely bullet-proof.  In other words, make it so great that other sports pale into insignificance.

[monoccular 17,413]

6 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

What's wrong with Collingwoods draw?

They can draw a crowd (even interstate) as a result all clubs want to play them as their home game. Are you happy for Queens birthday to be their home game every second year?

Richmond (70,000 members this tear?) are set to lose their Friday night games for underperforming this year, as long as that is consistent across all clubs there shouldn't be an issue.

Fact or guess?  Collingwood, Carlton, Essundone, also underperformed   MFC performed better than these but you must be dreaming to think that the corrupt AFL will reward us and penalize their favorites  

6 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

OK fair enough, "just like Port Adelaide did", that's more accurate.

Port however was from a footy tradition  

2 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I agree with the sentiments, but the "rich club" part is a myth.

All of Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney (and South Melbourne) and even Collingwood have had their financial difficulties.

The salary cap and draft (the two single most important mechanisms in the AFL) are there for a reason, they mean that any team can win a premiership, it's just up to those teams to use them properly.

Equalizing the (rewards from) the prime time scheduling would be important too. 

[daisycutter 29,600]

3 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Fact or guess?  Collingwood, Carlton, Essundone, also underperformed   MFC performed better than these but you must be dreaming to think that the corrupt AFL will reward us and penalize their favorites  

Port however was from a footy tradition  

Equalizing the (rewards from) the prime time scheduling would be important too. 

how do you equalise the lost opportunity of prime time scheduling on things like sponsors and members

[Diamond_Jim 12,527]

The "rich clubs" will be the Crows and possibly the Eagles and perhaps Geelong.

Why.... they have stadiums that hold less people than they have members. In Adelaide people assign their seats to others rather than give them up. It has the potential to be similar to debentures at Wimbledon.

$10 plus per home game for the right to a seat adds up to a massive amount on top of memberships. Add in the sponsorship dollars where you are not competing with 9 other teams ( a la Melbourne) and you have a potent recipe.

The only problem stymieing these mega clubs is the salary cap. Note that the "rich tax" on clubs is going so the rich will get richer.

[loges 6,767]

2 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

100%

Johannsons disposal in the 1st half was atrocious.

Reckon half his kicks went to no one or the opposition, should look at effect on the game not disposal tally

[JTR 2,846]

Dale Morris was BOG for me. Some of his work down back was absolutely outstanding.

[sue 9,096]

3 hours ago, Dante said:

There were a couple of blatant throws yesterday that weren't paid and one was a tunnel ball through the legs, which they replayed and the commentators said that it was ok, huh, how could it be if you lift the ball with two hands? Guess we have to revisit the free paid against Fitzpatrick for his tunnel ball against Hawthorn.

...

 

The fact that the commentators said it was OK  illustrates why the whole umpiring/interpretations in AFL is such a mess.  If 'experienced' ex-players and commentators can't see a blatant rule infringement what hope is there?

Just as well bring back the flick pass - it was less of a throw than some of the passes we see these days where all, or almost all, of the momentum the balls gets comes from the hand(s) holding the ball.

[Tony Tea 2,806]

David King on Clarko footy: "this was a colossal win for the modern press over the one-on-one style defence."

Fingers crossed the Dees take this on board.

[daisycutter 29,600]

17 hours ago, sue said:

The fact that the commentators said it was OK  illustrates why the whole umpiring/interpretations in AFL is such a mess.  If 'experienced' ex-players and commentators can't see a blatant rule infringement what hope is there?

Just as well bring back the flick pass - it was less of a throw than some of the passes we see these days where all, or almost all, of the momentum the balls gets comes from the hand(s) holding the ball.

there was also that incident when morris out of position dived on a ball and took out the legs of a swan. he then cleared the ball. not one commentator said anything when the umpire let it go. it was a very clear breach of that rule and not the only one in that game, but the fact the commentators weren't interested amused me.

[old dee 23,770]

46 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

there was also that incident when morris out of position dived on a ball and took out the legs of a swan. he then cleared the ball. not one commentator said anything when the umpire let it go. it was a very clear breach of that rule and not the only one in that game, but the fact the commentators weren't interested amused me.

Channel 7 people do not criticise the AFL dc.

They are in a very chummy relationship.

Look elsewhere for criticism.

[Moonshadow 17,675]

Anyone still think the Doggies can only win at the Docklands? Two finals away and then a clear win at the G.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

19 hours ago, Tony Tea said:

David King on Clarko footy: "this was a colossal win for the modern press over the one-on-one style defence."

Fingers crossed the Dees take this on board.

I'm not 100% sure what the modern press is, but the way the Bulldogs go about it, coming in waves and holding it in their forward line is fantastic. Take that passage of play around half way through the last quarter, were time and time again Sydney tried to clear it only for a Bulldogs player to smother the kick or get a fingertip on the ball or push it through legs to an opponent....until finally, i think it was Picken? kicks the goal. Awesome.

I also noticed 2 or 3 guys constantly running at the pack marking contests and pouncing on the spilt ball, completely free, time and time again.

[old55 23,357]

Off topic irrelevant Tom Boyd comparisons in the Jesse Hogan thread.  It's got nothing to do with Hogan.  Here's a better place for it.

Tom Boyd won the flag for the Dogs.  That was one of the greatest big man games in a Grand Final I've seen.  6 contested marks in any game is big and the time, place and way he took them was amazing.  Topped off with 3 goals 2 - goals at critical times in different methods. That doesn't happen by accident.

#1 draft pick, following on from his tough work in the ruck in the PF, he came of age in a hot GF and has inked his name into football immortality.  If he never played again the Dogs would still have their money's worth.  I reckon he'll have a good career and he'll always be a GF match-winner, that's rare air

[jnrmac 20,053]

4 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Off topic irrelevant Tom Boyd comparisons in the Jesse Hogan thread.  It's got nothing to do with Hogan.  Here's a better place for it.

Tom Boyd won the flag for the Dogs.  That was one of the greatest big man games in a Grand Final I've seen.  6 contested marks in any game is big and the time, place and way he took them was amazing.  Topped off with 3 goals 2 - goals at critical times in different methods. That doesn't happen by accident.

#1 draft pick, following on from his tough work in the ruck in the PF, he came of age in a hot GF and has inked his name into football immortality.  If he never played again the Dogs would still have their money's worth.  I reckon he'll have a good career and he'll always be a GF match-winner, that's rare air

I think Hawkins played a blinder in a GF a few years back didn't he? From memory that was better. But yes, you'd be happy with Boyd , particularly after the rubbish he has copped (which is about 1/50th of what Jack Watts has copped).