Putting the total unfairness of his suspension to one side, Alex will be available to play against Sydney and Freo, which I think is a great outcome for Alex and the team.

Listening to Alan Richardson's latest interview on the MFC website, it's pretty clear to me that the club will rotate players through the team in the next compressed fixture period.  I certainly know he has his detractors here on Demonland, but bringing in fresh legs with a player the calibre of ANB represents a significant advantage to us.  His 2018 showed that he can be a weapon for us when he's on song.  Yes this year, his game against Adelaide wasn't a great showing, but I do think he has been somewhat unlucky not to get more games, as in his only other real showing against Carlton I thought he was actually pretty bloody good.  

In my view, there is absolutely a spot in the side for ANB.  Pen him in for the game against the Swans, unless he gets injured on the training track between now and then.

Edited August 27, 20204 yr by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

1 hour ago, 3183 Dee said:

The sooner we are financially independent, the better. It will put the club in a better position to come out with these arguments. At least Damien Barrett has highlighted the ANB issue in his Sliding Doors this week:

https://www.afl.com.au/news/491118/if-you-can-remember-the-old-days-when-the-mcg-used-to-host-games-then

Better late than never.....but if this is all that is mentioned then it’s a disgrace that the media think the public only care about a select few clubs. 

2 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

Putting the total unfairness of his suspension to one side, Alex will be available to play against Sydney and Freo, which I think is a great outcome for Alex and the team.

Listening to Alan Richardson's latest interview on the MFC website, it's pretty clear to me that the club will rotate players through the team in the next compressed fixture period.  I certainly know he has his detractors here on Demonland, but bringing in fresh legs with a player the calibre of ANB represents a significant advantage to us.  His 2018 showed that he can be a weapon for us when he's on song.  Yes this year, his game against Adelaide wasn't a great showing, but I do think he has been somewhat unlucky not to get more games, as in his only other real showing against Carlton I thought he was actually pretty bloody good.  

In my view, there is absolutely a spot in the side for ANB.  Pen him in for the game against the Swans, unless he gets injured on the training track between now and then.

I really like listening to Richo, obviously a top bloke. But he sounds like a Head Coach, so i am still mystified as to where he fits in. But i hope he is adding serious value!!

Good to hear Goodwin mention this in his press conference.

It's an absolute joke that Neal-Bullen gets 4 weeks and then Dahlhaus gets a fine.

Really we should've challenged it, but that's life.

The AFL really are a joke when it comes to these decisions and there is no consistency.

In my mind there should be two parts to the decision:

1. The action - there should be a certain number of weeks for the action. For example, both Neal-Bullen and Dahlhaus should have an automatic 1 or 2 week suspension for the action.

2. The result - I am comfortable if Neal-bullen were to get an additional 1 or 2 weeks as a result of the outcome with a player being concussed as opposed to Dahlhaus not.

I think this would be a lot more easily understandable for players and supporters alike.

8 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Good to hear Goodwin mention this in his press conference.

It's an absolute joke that Neal-Bullen gets 4 weeks and then Dahlhaus gets a fine.

Really we should've challenged it, but that's life.

The AFL really are a joke when it comes to these decisions and there is no consistency.

In my mind there should be two parts to the decision:

1. The action - there should be a certain number of weeks for the action. For example, both Neal-Bullen and Dahlhaus should have an automatic 1 or 2 week suspension for the action.

2. The result - I am comfortable if Neal-bullen were to get an additional 1 or 2 weeks as a result of the outcome with a player being concussed as opposed to Dahlhaus not.

I think this would be a lot more easily understandable for players and supporters alike.

Yes, it was good to hear.

He said something like we "will continue to seek clarification on Alex's behalf" which I assume means the club has been talking to the AFL.  Won't change anything but good to hear the club is asking questions and sticking up for Alex in light of this weeks decisions.

Edited August 28, 20204 yr by Lucifer's Hero

30 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Good to hear Goodwin mention this in his press conference.

It's an absolute joke that Neal-Bullen gets 4 weeks and then Dahlhaus gets a fine.

Really we should've challenged it, but that's life.

The AFL really are a joke when it comes to these decisions and there is no consistency.

In my mind there should be two parts to the decision:

1. The action - there should be a certain number of weeks for the action. For example, both Neal-Bullen and Dahlhaus should have an automatic 1 or 2 week suspension for the action.

2. The result - I am comfortable if Neal-bullen were to get an additional 1 or 2 weeks as a result of the outcome with a player being concussed as opposed to Dahlhaus not.

I think this would be a lot more easily understandable for players and supporters alike.

Agree, as would most of the footy community.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Yes, it was good to hear.

He said something like we "will continue to seek clarification on Alex's behalf" which I assume means the club has been talking to the AFL.  Won't change anything but good to hear the club is asking questions and sticking up for Alex in light of this weeks decisions.

While it was good to hear the issue brought up publically, I reckon Goodwin could have gone harder without being in danger of any sanction from the AFL.  Given how egregious ANB's ban was, even the AFL may have been too embarrassed to hit back.

One rule change which would aid the ball winner and protect the head would be to ban grabbing the ball player by the wrist.  It would still ok to pin the arms but no grasping the wrist.  That's a very effective tactic that has potentially dangerous consequences and makes it too hard for the ball player to complete a legal disposal.

11 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

One rule change which would aid the ball winner and protect the head would be to ban grabbing the ball player by the wrist.  It would still ok to pin the arms but no grasping the wrist.  That's a very effective tactic that has potentially dangerous consequences and makes it too hard for the ball player to complete a legal disposal.

I don’t really think this is a viable solution in the heat of the game. The onus on the tackler is already very high. Another possible solution is to allow throwing.

I am in favour of reducing the number of players to ease congestion and the number of tackles. 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

I don’t really think this is a viable solution in the heat of the game. The onus on the tackler is already very high. Another possible solution is to allow throwing.

I am in favour of reducing the number of players to ease congestion and the number of tackles. 

 

 

The wrist grab is a relatively recent and deliberate innovation. It's pretty obvious when it happens and would not be too difficult to umpire.