3 minutes ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

I don’t get it. Last night’s match was capped at 25,000. As expected, totally sold out. But the attendance last night was 19,500. How is that a sellout?

I assume some people stayed away in the end. It was freezing and it was meant to rain. 

3 minutes ago, Jaded said:

I assume some people stayed away in the end. It was freezing and it was meant to rain. 

but the weather forecast was well known when they bought the tickets

i suspect saying it was a "sell-out" was just marketing talk

14 minutes ago, Jaded said:

I assume some people stayed away in the end. It was freezing and it was meant to rain. 

It could’ve hailed then snowed and I still would’ve gone. ?

The other option is that some of those tickets were allocated to family and friends who didn’t go? ?‍♀️

1 minute ago, Jaded said:

The other option is that some of those tickets were allocated to family and friends who didn’t go? ?‍♀️

Just seems a shame that there was people who would love to have been there, and 5000-odd empty seats. 

2 minutes ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

Just seems a shame that there was people who would love to have been there, and 5000-odd empty seats. 

Totally agree. But if those 5000 were more booing Essendon fans, I am happy they didn’t come. 

8 minutes ago, Jaded said:

The other option is that some of those tickets were allocated to family and friends who didn’t go? ?‍♀️

20+% ??????

 

Port v Melbourne in Victoria. Casey, Kardinia, anywhere but SA please ??

1 hour ago, Jaded said:

Port v Melbourne in Victoria. Casey, Kardinia, anywhere but SA please ??

We might get lucky and play Port, Suns and West Coast in Melbourne

Maybe I should wait to books flights and a hotel room for the port game.

Just now, binman said:

Maybe I should wait to books flights and a hotel room for the port game.

Good idea

It’s going to be very interesting how this season unfolds in a scheduling scenario. Talks of another footy frenzy to potentially cut the need for hubs, does that mean game time gets cut back again and will we potentially have a stop start season to keep players happy. Anyway good luck to the AFL dealing with all the government’s and players to make it work, it’s not going to be easy. 

55 minutes ago, binman said:

Maybe I should wait to books flights and a hotel room for the port game.

Two words; Flexible Fares. 

27 minutes ago, ANG13 said:

It’s going to be very interesting how this season unfolds in a scheduling scenario. Talks of another footy frenzy to potentially cut the need for hubs, does that mean game time gets cut back again and will we potentially have a stop start season to keep players happy. Anyway good luck to the AFL dealing with all the government’s and players to make it work, it’s not going to be easy. 

They will not reduce game time. Have to have the same rules for the entire season, was the reason given as to why they couldn't revert back to normal game time last year for finals/once the frenzy was completed.

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They will not reduce game time. Have to have the same rules for the entire season, was the reason given as to why they couldn't revert back to normal game time last year for finals/once the frenzy was completed.

Yes true, which just makes it even more interesting how any footy frenzy will work this year. 

 

6 hours ago, bing181 said:

A premier who was recently reelected in a landslide.

From memory the opposition is 3- 4 seats . 

I have to say the reaction from Simpson is vastly different to what it was last year when he had a big sook about going into a hub. Obviously realized his team isn’t an island and his club is going nowhere fast if they can’t win away from home (or at home for that matter!). 
Maybe just maybe the cursed state of Victoria which has been through more than all the other states combined, will finally benefit and our club can get some lucky breaks and play extra games at home. God knows we deserve some fortune!

There are some huge issues facing the AFL.

Talk of a footy frenzy is dangerous - they cannot reduce games to 16 minute quarters having had 15 rounds of 20 minute quarters. But asking players to back up full length games on 4-day breaks, which is what was required to compress the fixture last year, is dangerous (and the AFLPA will, rightly, revolt).

Then there is "fixture integrity". They can't reduce the season to 17 games because some return games have already happened (Essendon v Hawthorn, Brisbane v Geelong, Richmond v St Kilda, North v GC, West Coast v Bulldogs were all repeat games). So the "least" number of games that can be played now is 18 per club, but then how does the AFL work out who everyone else's return game is against?

Another example is Fremantle v Carlton next week. There is talk of that game being moved from Perth to Melbourne. But Carlton has already played Fremantle at Marvel earlier this year. How can Carlton get two home games against the same side?

There are serious problems here if WA and SA don't let sides in.

3 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

There are some huge issues facing the AFL.

Talk of a footy frenzy is dangerous - they cannot reduce games to 16 minute quarters having had 15 rounds of 20 minute quarters. But asking players to back up full length games on 4-day breaks, which is what was required to compress the fixture last year, is dangerous (and the AFLPA will, rightly, revolt).

Then there is "fixture integrity". They can't reduce the season to 17 games because some return games have already happened (Essendon v Hawthorn, Brisbane v Geelong, Richmond v St Kilda, North v GC, West Coast v Bulldogs were all repeat games). So the "least" number of games that can be played now is 18 per club, but then how does the AFL work out who everyone else's return game is against?

Another example is Fremantle v Carlton next week. There is talk of that game being moved from Perth to Melbourne. But Carlton has already played Fremantle at Marvel earlier this year. How can Carlton get two home games against the same side?

There are serious problems here if WA and SA don't let sides in.

Do they think they will let filthy people from the east in?

They cancelled attendance today with one positive person. 

2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

There are some huge issues facing the AFL.

Talk of a footy frenzy is dangerous - they cannot reduce games to 16 minute quarters having had 15 rounds of 20 minute quarters. But asking players to back up full length games on 4-day breaks, which is what was required to compress the fixture last year, is dangerous (and the AFLPA will, rightly, revolt).

Then there is "fixture integrity". They can't reduce the season to 17 games because some return games have already happened (Essendon v Hawthorn, Brisbane v Geelong, Richmond v St Kilda, North v GC, West Coast v Bulldogs were all repeat games). So the "least" number of games that can be played now is 18 per club, but then how does the AFL work out who everyone else's return game is against?

Another example is Fremantle v Carlton next week. There is talk of that game being moved from Perth to Melbourne. But Carlton has already played Fremantle at Marvel earlier this year. How can Carlton get two home games against the same side?

There are serious problems here if WA and SA don't let sides in.

GWS played a home game against the Hawks at the G today. I think at the end of the day those sorts of things are just going to be "tough luck".

If the interstate sides hub in Vic they can get away with normal rounds using MCG/Docklands/Kardinia over Thurs-Sun or even Monday if needed. The only reason they would need a footy frenzy would be so the AFL can keep their promise of no hubs for longer than 3 weeks. Well at the end of the day if options are limited that will have to be off the table. Club's may end up having to hub for minimum a month (maximum 3 months) depending on how long outbreaks/border closures etc last in other states.

4 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

There are some huge issues facing the AFL.

Talk of a footy frenzy is dangerous - they cannot reduce games to 16 minute quarters having had 15 rounds of 20 minute quarters. But asking players to back up full length games on 4-day breaks, which is what was required to compress the fixture last year, is dangerous (and the AFLPA will, rightly, revolt).

Then there is "fixture integrity". They can't reduce the season to 17 games because some return games have already happened (Essendon v Hawthorn, Brisbane v Geelong, Richmond v St Kilda, North v GC, West Coast v Bulldogs were all repeat games). So the "least" number of games that can be played now is 18 per club, but then how does the AFL work out who everyone else's return game is against?

Another example is Fremantle v Carlton next week. There is talk of that game being moved from Perth to Melbourne. But Carlton has already played Fremantle at Marvel earlier this year. How can Carlton get two home games against the same side?

There are serious problems here if WA and SA don't let sides in.

I can’t understand why these states are so dumb. WA had one case for goodness sake. What is the chance that one case infected the entire West Coast and Freo sides? 
Surely states can get each club tested prior to boarding a charter flight (say test 10 hours prior to flight, between getting tested and boarding flight players are in lockdown at home). You get off the plane, you go to the ground, you play your game, you get the hell out. 
There is no interaction with the community. There is no risk. 
Apart from NSW where there is currently a really bad outbreak, the rest of the teams should be let in and out for the purpose of playing. It really is idiotic when we play in such controlled environments. 

2 hours ago, binman said:

Maybe I should wait to books flights and a hotel room for the port game.

You might need to book them for a Port game in Geelong. A quick chopper Bronwyn Bishop style and a nice hotel!

With regard to COVID in 2021, I'd love for the media to ban the word crisis in favour of the word situation.

2020 was a crisis. This is nothing compared to that.

Edited June 27, 20214 yr by Chook