9 hours ago, beelzebub said:

That...or quite frankly maybe you just dont get it.

I get it.

Honour the returned service people, remember the fallen from dusk to dawn, march and offer the silence.

Anzac Day became less popular from the 1960s to the 1980s as fewer people thought war should be commemorated.

I am part of this generation. My family feel the same way. Though instead of not honouring the military we discussed the horrors of war, the futility, the destruction and collapse of state.

From this movement came the push to adjust narrative.

But, we have this one sided pro-military stand and very little of what the broader community offer. The alternative views are now drowned out by comments similar to yours.

If it doesn't match the institutional narrative then you get no voice, as the blind followers cannot see history or the other.

Our world is making more division, as grey is no longer. Only black and white.

Hey, Beelze have you made the pilgrimage to Turkey? If not I highly recommend it.

Do you get it, narratives move, just as culture, in constant change. At the movement the institutions are powerful, with there PR to push us where they want. The individual has a hard time expressing the alternatives. Poor @DutchDemons had no chance. Me well, what was it, "That ....", well done, your voice wins.

Anzac day stills remains for me, futility of war, a moment that was nation building and a deep sadness of the consequences of military actions. I remain greatly moved for those who don't return, for those who are physically and emotionally maimed, including the civilians and for those serving now,  I am a bit bewildered by their motivations. 

Edited April 26, 20232 yr by kev martin

I thought May played ok

10 hours ago, layzie said:

I'm taking on board the feedback of people who think the boundaries of entertainment and respect are being flirted. I don't want this ceremony to become a big Instagram fest either.

It would just be nice to have one event that doesn't divide us and we can all look to as something done in good taste. 

Was talking to a mate today who knows several veterans. He reckons they all think there's been a recent resurgence over the last 10 years in the interest and respect for the day. At my local Rsl in Bulli Nsw which isn't a big suburb of Wollongong, there was close to 600 to 700 people at 5.15 in the morning. I'd say that was pretty uniting.  I hope you enjoyed the one near you. I understand your near St Kilda Rd, so close to the Shrine of remembrance which is supposed to be a great service. Cheers.

8 hours ago, Young Blood said:

OK so it has nothing to do with the forwards leading patterns or timing? Bayley seems to do quite well... He gets great seperation and generally leads or points to spaces where he can mark the ball in front. I'll admit we don't have the best delivery and delivery inside forward 50 but its as much to do with the forward line and their positioning as it is those kicking it inside to them. 

The long bomb has been covered in other posts. It's not a dump kick, its deliberate. When the forward line is congested and teams are zoning off its better to kick deep for our forwards to make a contest. Gives you more options at goal (mark, ground ball, repeat stoppage). If you kick short in these situations greater risk is too high with turning it over and teams transitioning so quickly these days. With all our backs pushed up you get exposed so easily in these situations.

So it comes down to faster ball movement through the corridor and hopefully that results in a less congested forward line. As much as I hate to say it, the Pies ball movement and kicking game is the best in the comp. They hit up small forwards in one out situations pretty regularly. I'd love to see us do that more often.

 

34 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Poorly is very kind. Umpired like all 4 umpires had a stroke more like it. 

13 hours ago, —coach— said:

Have a friend who is an ex afl umpire and still does AFLW matches. They most certainly do review every match and every decision. They then receive an overall score which determines whether they umpire AFL matches or are demoted to other leagues to improve (where they don’t get paid any where near as much). Problem is the AFL look at whether the decision was ‘technically’ correct, not correct in relation to the decisions or non decisions already made in the game. On the ‘technically’ correct metric, they do very well. On the correct in relation to the game, I think we all know they are sub par.

Problem is they review every decision, not every non-decision. So they won't look at the non-decision not to pay a 50m penalty to ANB after he was tackled after taking a mark for example.

12 hours ago, DeeZone said:

Layzie that is never going to happen we are to diverse and have different emotional chargers.!!

Hallucinogens help cut through the BS but I understand they're not for everyone

6 hours ago, Vipercrunch said:

I just rewatched that passage of play.  It was a desperate, full stretch dive by Gus to reach the ball and deny a Richmond player taking possession.  That was his sole objective.  There is no way he had any further designs on the direction or distance the ball travelled after that.  All he wanted to do was deny easy possession for his opponent.  The rule is not there for that sort of thing. 13:05 remaining on the clock in the second quarter if anyone wants to watch again.

Exactly, it is taking an act of desperation, something that has been routinely lauded for 150 years and turning it into a free against. His intent wasn't to put the ball out of bounds, his intent was to deny his opponent possession.

19 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Exactly, it is taking an act of desperation, something that has been routinely lauded for 150 years and turning it into a free against. His intent wasn't to put the ball out of bounds, his intent was to deny his opponent possession.

Yeah, but if you watch the telecast, head of the umpiring department Damien Hardwick immediately put his arms out so it was accordingly paid.

Just looking at the replay of Roo's speckie in the last quarter again, reminds me so much of the style in which Swartz use to take them.  Will someone please buy the kid a headband (but no knee brace please!).

12 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

In a billion dollar sport, to have 5 games out of 9 umpired poorly or worse (and this week was not exceptional) is an indictment on the sport and the rules. Adding another umpire wasn’t/isn’t the answer, it feels like every contest needs to have a free kick paid at the moment (and they still miss some!). The goal line review technology is a joke. I wonder what the AFL actually do Monday to Friday to improve the sport.

Who was the Richmond player who basically hung there and then eventually walked it over the boundary line? If Gus's is deliberate over that then my next holiday is to Bolivia. 

23 minutes ago, In Harmes Way said:

In a billion dollar sport, to have 5 games out of 9 umpired poorly or worse (and this week was not exceptional) is an indictment on the sport and the rules. Adding another umpire wasn’t/isn’t the answer, it feels like every contest needs to have a free kick paid at the moment (and they still miss some!). The goal line review technology is a joke. I wonder what the AFL actually do Monday to Friday to improve the sport.

The Umpiring has to be made professional.  Needs to be a totally dedicated and accountable job paying some reasonable coin.

It's amateur hour...because its amateur. 

Beggars belief it still is.

22 minutes ago, layzie said:

Who was the Richmond player who basically hung there and then eventually walked it over the boundary line? If Gus's is deliberate over that then my next holiday is to Bolivia. 

The throw in decision was correct.  Don't remember his name but he was desperately waiting for ANB to knock the ball out of his hands which ANB did.  It was a judgement error by ANB and should have let the guy stand there and be called HTB. 

Another judgement error by ANB was when he was tackled by Rioli which should have been a 50m penalty.  However, ANB went to play on and caught HTB.  The tackle was illegal and should have got the 50m.  Had ANB stayed put he would have got the 50. 

Edited April 26, 20232 yr by Lucifers Hero

10 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

The throw in decision was correct.  Don't remember his name but he was desperately waiting for ANB to knock the ball out of his hands which ANB did.  It was a judgement error by ANB and should have let the guy stand there and be called HTB. 

Another judgement error by ANB was when he was tackled by Rioli which should have been a 50m penalty.  However, ANB went to play on and caught HTB.  The tackle was illegal and should have got the 50m.  Had ANB stayed put he would have got the 50. 

Fair enough, I didn't see the ball knock as it was on the other side but that makes sense now.

That's right on the 50, had he held for a split second longer I reckon they might have paid it. 

1 hour ago, In Harmes Way said:

In a billion dollar sport, to have 5 games out of 9 umpired poorly or worse (and this week was not exceptional) is an indictment on the sport and the rules. Adding another umpire wasn’t/isn’t the answer, it feels like every contest needs to have a free kick paid at the moment (and they still miss some!). The goal line review technology is a joke. I wonder what the AFL actually do Monday to Friday to improve the sport.

Yep, investing millions to expand the competition, but still won't invest money in professional umpiring.

The AFL cares only about the money. They couldn't care less about the standard of umpiring.

Lol maybe they are wary of hiring people on a full time basis that may be hard to move on if they continue to be duds.???

15 hours ago, kev martin said:

Anzac day stills remains for me, futility of war, a moment that was nation building and a deep sadness of the consequences of military actions. I remain greatly moved for those who don't return, for those who are physically and emotionally maimed, including the civilians and for those serving now,  I am a bit bewildered by their motivations. 

What are you bewildered by?, Is it because people still join the armed forces knowing that at any time yhey may have to go into a conflict?

As an army veteran, I would still re-enlist if need be, although they probably don't want 73 year olds.

As Demonland asked yesterday to keep this thread football related, I await your pm response.

15 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

Was talking to a mate today who knows several veterans. He reckons they all think there's been a recent resurgence over the last 10 years in the interest and respect for the day. At my local Rsl in Bulli Nsw which isn't a big suburb of Wollongong, there was close to 600 to 700 people at 5.15 in the morning. I'd say that was pretty uniting.  I hope you enjoyed the one near you. I understand your near St Kilda Rd, so close to the Shrine of remembrance which is supposed to be a great service. Cheers.

By pure coincidence I just happened to read Peter Fitzsimons’ book Gallipoli just before Anzac Day.  To be honest, I knew very little about the Anzacs prior, now I have a far deeper appreciation, (in other words I know a little more).

I guess a lot of people’s take on what Anzac Day means to them would vary, each to their own. When I was at the G for the game this time round my focus was very much remembering and paying respects to all soldiers (on both sides of the fence). This includes the fallen and those that survived but carried physical and mental scars for the rest of their lives. War is a very cruel business.

I understand that there is a commercial aspect to how the AFL handles Anzac Day (eg Anzac ‘Eve’ game). To me however, it gives me an opportunity to reflect and at the same time I am proud of the ‘humble respect’ that the crowd exhibited to our fallen soldiers in all wars and …..enjoy a great game of football. There  is no conflict for me.

 

Edited April 27, 20232 yr by Wodjathefirst
Typo

20 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

What are you bewildered by?, Is it because people still join the armed forces knowing that at any time yhey may have to go into a conflict?

As an army veteran, I would still re-enlist if need be, although they probably don't want 73 year olds.

As Demonland asked yesterday to keep this thread football related, I await your pm response.

Some of the dialogue was about Anzac day being a recruitment drive.

16 hours ago, Boots and all said:

So it comes down to faster ball movement through the corridor and hopefully that results in a less congested forward line. As much as I hate to say it, the Pies ball movement and kicking game is the best in the comp. They hit up small forwards in one out situations pretty regularly. I'd love to see us do that more often.

The tackling by Cwood in the last quarter was ferocious.  It's what was lacking from us against Essendon.  Even the tackles we did lay were not very intense.

18 hours ago, layzie said:

I saw it as a 50-50 contest with an attempt to deny possession. If there were other realistic options then it would be a different story but other than not committing for the ball I don't know what other option there was.

The other thing is that this Twitter guy completely made up a rule that once the ball hit the ground it's no longer a spoil from a marking contest and therefore a qualifier for insufficient intent. This is no-where to be found in the laws of the game charter. 

There’s rules and interpretations and for a long time now spoiling the ball out has been allowed in marking contests but if it’s not a marking contest you have to show sufficient intent to keep the ball in. 

Also ‘the what other option’ is nonsense. These are highly skilled athletes. Gus had the option of punching it forward or to the corridor. He could’ve taken possession. He could’ve not touched it at all.

He punched a bouncing ball straight over the line. That might make the video for insufficient intent. It’s clear cut.

Its not even a bad play by Gus. We concede possession but have time to set numbers back rather than getting caught on the back flank. It’s not nearly as much of an issue as several of the frees paid. 

21 hours ago, layzie said:

Completely goes against my understanding of the rule up untill now. I've been under the impression that if it's any sort of 50-50 contest then it can't be deliberate, whether it be in the air, on the ground, in a footrace kicking off the ground, whatever it may be.

I presume that Gus being an astute player aware of such a stupid rule would have been trying to keep the ball in play??

By the way these RULE INTERPRETATIONS seem to pop up a lot just in our games

Maggot intelligentsia....