7 minutes ago, Rafiki said:

What was the reason they even brought in the center circle rule which killed Jeff White

To reduce PCL injuries when ruckmen's knees collided at a greater force of impact.

12 minutes ago, Rafiki said:

The bounce is stupid, it should be an even contest in the middle but a lot of the time it is heavily favoured in one ruckmens favour

The one thing the bounce brings in is variation and randomness which the good rucks will deal with. They could get around this by instructing the umps to throw it up at inconsistent heights (but straight)

Yeah ...lets turf the bounce....

Hmm those ovalesque balls...tad unpredictable ....needs 'rounding'

Funny ol' pitch... Needs a few more straight lines to it....bit big too 

Dont need so many players ..a near dozen should suffice.

No need for real endurance... shorten game...two halves ?

Its football so lets cut out the handballing as well.

Whats this near miss gets a score shlt ??

There you have it...couple of teams of prina donnas dancing skipping and falling over !!

Make it happen Gil...

I mean ya f@#$&ng up this game , might as well go the fullmonty.

 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

I've only counted the 3 central umps and an emergency for each game. Maybe we could go back to two with full time umps in place. 

oh, i need to read more carefully, chris. maybe yes 2 umps. i haven't really seen any improvement when it went from 2 to 3. in fact it just means you get 3 different interpretations resulting in even more inconsistency which drives me mad

1 hour ago, mrtwister said:

This will be the interesting one. You can tell by the footage that Higgins does something to Salem as there's a quick, reflex movement just before Salem's contact. That would suggest it's retaliation. But retaliation to what and, more importantly, will it be aired or accepted?

 

My prediction is that all the stomach and jumper punches will be insufficient force but Salem will get a punishment. 

Hate to say I told you so

Salem suspended a week for a stupid elbow to the head. Precedent has been set, fair punishment.

North players not suspended for intentional punches to the head and stomach. Farce. You are now allowed to punch players in the head or stomach and expect nothing more than a fine. The precedent is now set. Time for football to get ugly and unfair apparently.

There is an argument that getting rid of the bounce will increase the pool of good umpires who otherwise won't umpire because the bounce is (a) bad for their backs and shoulders and (b) too hard to do, particularly for women who generally don't have the same strength as men. I like the bounce, but I'd be prepared to get rid of it if it meant the standard of umpiring improved. 

8 hours ago, praha said:

Stop with this "please explain" BS. It was a bad umpiring performance but making a song and dance about it deflects attention away from the real issue and dilutes actual player performance. I'll be disappointed if the club said anything. We didn't lose because of the umpiring. Get over it.

 

8 hours ago, deanox said:

And for this reason, I expect the please explain to be behind closed doors and we'll never hear of it. To do otherwise would be to make excuses. 

Thus, people need to stop demanding that we issue a please explain.

 

Completely agree with these two posts. What's more Bub, constantly calling the Admin and / or Footy Department weak for not making public their enquiries just doesn't make sense. 

 

44 minutes ago, Chris said:

The one thing the bounce brings in is variation and randomness which the good rucks will deal with. They could get around this by instructing the umps to throw it up at inconsistent heights (but straight)

I don't like the randomness that the bounce brings, it just seems silly

While at it lets bring in the boundary ball chucking machines 

1 minute ago, beelzebub said:

While at it lets bring in the boundary ball chucking machines 

Bouncing an oval ball and throwing it in are two completely different things. Yeah the throw ins can be inconsistent at times but no where near the same as a bounce.

In the third quarter, Petracca marks on the 50 metre arch against 2 North players, who subsequently went to ground and Petracca stayed up. He jumped over the player and was about to blitz and stream into what would have been an open goal. One of the North Players purposely tripped Petracca and help him back/dragged him to the ground, which was deemed a trip.

I'm sorry, but how isn't something like this awarded a 50m penalty and not even looked at the MRP? If you intentionally trip someone who has the opportunity to stream clear, and you hold them up by tripping them, they should be suspended and the player should be awarded a 50m penalty.

1 minute ago, Rafiki said:

Bouncing an oval ball and throwing it in are two completely different things. Yeah the throw ins can be inconsistent at times but no where near the same as a bounce.

You just destroyed you argument really. The vagaries of a throw in can mean it actually lobs anywhere but a 'particular'. Players adapt. Its the game.

The WHOLE bloody game revolves about an unpredictable element; the ball.

For well over a century we've not just coped but embraced this ball and the odd things it may or may not do.

The bounce is a truly unique aspect of the game.

Maybe Umps need to get their act together. Ffs its only used to restart afted a goal now. How on earth did they manage all those years all over the ground !!

Its a skill. It can not only be taught, but honed.

Leave the bounce alone.

2 minutes ago, juzzk1d said:

In the third quarter, Petracca marks on the 50 metre arch against 2 North players, who subsequently went to ground and Petracca stayed up. He jumped over the player and was about to blitz and stream into what would have been an open goal. One of the North Players purposely tripped Petracca and help him back/dragged him to the ground, which was deemed a trip.

I'm sorry, but how isn't something like this awarded a 50m penalty and not even looked at the MRP? If you intentionally trip someone who has the opportunity to stream clear, and you hold them up by tripping them, they should be suspended and the player should be awarded a 50m penalty.

As my dearest will attest....i screamed 50 at the box for exactly that. Couldn't buy a free , let alone the 50's .

50 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Salem suspended a week for a stupid elbow to the head. Precedent has been set, fair punishment.

 

Precedent? We're talking MRP here.

 

50 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

North players not suspended for intentional punches to the head and stomach. Farce. You are now allowed to punch players in the head or stomach and expect nothing more than a fine. The precedent is now set. Time for football to get ugly and unfair apparently.

 

Interesting concept, this "precedent". Do you think the MRP has heard of it before?

13 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

You just destroyed you argument really. The vagaries of a throw in can mean it actually lobs anywhere but a 'particular'. Players adapt. Its the game.

The WHOLE bloody game revolves about an unpredictable element; the ball.

For well over a century we've not just coped but embraced this ball and the odd things it may or may not do.

The bounce is a truly unique aspect of the game.

Maybe Umps need to get their act together. Ffs its only used to restart afted a goal now. How on earth did they manage all those years all over the ground !!

Its a skill. It can not only be taught, but honed.

Leave the bounce alone.

No I didn't destroy my own argument, how many times a game is there a poor throw in compared to a bad bounce that is let go? You see bounces  that are literally on the edge of the circle several times a game. How is that fair to the ruckman that has to stand under the ball and be jumped on by the opposition ruck? It is almost a free hitout for them

26 minutes ago, Rafiki said:

I don't like the randomness that the bounce brings, it just seems silly

It's one of the skills of the game ... ruckwork. The best ruckmen have been able to factor the randomness into their skill/ability. The AFL have been gradually diluting the ruck skill so it's little more than a tip off.

With no third man up and a totally predictable throw up, we could end up seeing Caleb Daniel and his shorter brother contesting the ruck.

15 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Maybe Umps need to get their act together. Ffs its only used to restart afted a goal now. How on earth did they manage all those years all over the ground !!

Watch old replays. The umps used to bounce it all over the ground all day long even on wet days.

Now it's "too hard" and somehow distracts from their decision making abilities. (That's textbook AFL logic.)

Umps, give us some indication that you have decision making abilities and we'll consider your case for the bounce. (And then tell you to GAGF.)

Just now, Ted Fidge said:

It's one of the skills of the game ... ruckwork. The best ruckmen have been able to factor the randomness into their skill/ability. The AFL have been gradually diluting the ruck skill so it's little more than a tip off.

With no third man up and a totally predictable throw up, we could end up seeing Caleb Daniel and his shorter brother contesting the ruck.

It doesn't nullify the ruckmen at all, I know you were being facetious with your Daniel example but it would not change the ruck contest at all, just make it completely even which I think is fair.

5 minutes ago, Rafiki said:

No I didn't destroy my own argument, how many times a game is there a poor throw in compared to a bad bounce that is let go? You see bounces  that are literally on the edge of the circle several times a game. How is that fair to the ruckman that has to stand under the ball and be jumped on by the opposition ruck? It is almost a free hitout for them

On the edge of the circle! Wow. That's almost out of bounds.

It's called "the art of ruckwork" and for decades good ruckmen somehow didn't stand there like a lump and get swamped. They could counter it. It was a unique skill of the game which the AFL have watered down and will eventually kill off because they'd rather something akin to a video game controlled by computer than a living breathing contest with randomness in it.

1 minute ago, Ted Fidge said:

On the edge of the circle! Wow. That's almost out of bounds.

It's called "the art of ruckwork" and for decades good ruckmen somehow didn't stand there like a lump and get swamped. They could counter it. It was a unique skill of the game which the AFL have watered down and will eventually kill off because they'd rather something akin to a video game controlled by computer than a living breathing contest with randomness in it.

I guess it is pretty irrelevant to argue with someone who has a completely different view (not knocking you at all) but I just feel like the randomness of the bounce is rubbish.

1 minute ago, Rafiki said:

I guess it is pretty irrelevant to argue with someone who has a completely different view (not knocking you at all) but I just feel like the randomness of the bounce is rubbish.

Ever see a wonky shot on goal from 60 out tumble along the ground, bounce like a leg break and go through for a goal?

Ever see a player do what the coach asks and play in front of his man, get in perfect position only to have the ball bounce over his head into his opponent's hands?

Ever see a player in a grand final, with seconds to go and his team one point down, run onto a loose ball near the goal square for a near certain open goal, only to have it take a funny bounce and go through for a behind, tying the scores and forcing a replay?

These are all part of our game. Our beautiful unique game.

Take them all out or leave them all in. They are all part of it, as is the centre bounce.

2 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

Ever see a wonky shot on goal from 60 out tumble along the ground, bounce like a leg break and go through for a goal?

Ever see a player do what the coach asks and play in front of his man, get in perfect position only to have the ball bounce over his head into his opponent's hands?

Ever see a player in a grand final, with seconds to go and his team one point down, run onto a loose ball near the goal square for a near certain open goal, only to have it take a funny bounce and go through for a behind, tying the scores and forcing a replay?

These are all part of our game. Our beautiful unique game.

Take them all out or leave them all in. They are all part of it, as is the centre bounce.

Yes I have seen all of those things but that is when the ball is in play so to speak and completely different to the centre bounce

2 minutes ago, Rafiki said:

Yes I have seen all of those things but that is when the ball is in play so to speak and completely different to the centre bounce

How so? They are all directly related to the ball being oval.

4 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

How so? They are all directly related to the ball being oval.

A centre bounce and an oval ball in play is completely different in my opinion