On 5/7/2023 at 11:41 AM, dl4e said:

At the end of the day people who gives a flying [censored] what commentators like Dunstall and dermie think. 

Michael Christian gives a flying [censored]!

"Let's see ... Jase reckons this guy is gone for all money. Easy decision for me then. High, deliberate, severe. Done and done. Now, what's Dermie have to say? Oh hell. He reckons the guy has to get off! Now what am I supposed to do? Jesus Christ this job is difficult sometimes. Except for when the commentators all agree. I mean, it was easy back when it was Ablett very week. Nothing-to-see-here on autopilot. But this von Ron Bon guy isn't a big name player. Wait. Not a big name player ... I think I can see a way through this hellish dilemma ... let me consult my notes ... under B for Bugg ... yes, here it is ... no-name player, throw the book. Oh thank God. Christ this job is difficult sometimes."

15 hours ago, #11-TonyAnderson said:

Mine is I’m sick of Christian always suspending Melbourne players automatically. How JVR gets same weeks as Cripps (and then he gets off) when the opponent is concussed is ridiculous - definitely a conspiracy. Bet we don’t appeal either!

I was wrong about the appeal - glad we did.

I may be a little off topic here but in past years I generally used to think the umpiring in the first five or six rounds of each season ‘frustrating’.  Then as the season rolled along it ‘stabilised’.

Not so this year. It has not improved one iota to date.  I’m guessing the contributors are the added pressure on interpreting what constitutes a dangerous tackle.  Also having the fourth umpire (I liked the concept) has certainly diminished the talent pool which increases the number of inconsistent / poor decisions being made.

My only hope come finals time the situation should improve due to the AFL being able to select the ‘better’ umpires to adjudicate. Fingers crossed.

On 5/7/2023 at 10:32 AM, DubDee said:

commentators hate a one sided thrashing so usually are biased to the under dog

enjoy it! means we are one of the best in the comp!

leave the pity commentary to the shizen clubs. 

I totally agree save and except for our 2019 season, felt like commentators loved when we lost that year so they could keep sinking the boot in especially in the wake of our unexpected success in 2018. 

Maybe my bias is clouding any objectivity but it certainly seems like when things aren't going well (steven and melky entrecote example), the media absolutely love taking us for a ride. Maybe that is a ubiquitous sentiment among other clubs however so might not be isolated to us. 

44 minutes ago, Wodjathefirst said:

My only hope come finals time the situation should improve due to the AFL being able to select the ‘better’ umpires to adjudicate. Fingers crossed.

No such thing as "better" umpires. Even their most experienced (Rosebury, Stevic, Meredith, Chamberlain, Nicholls) made some awful calls on the weekend. Unfortunately the real problem is some of the rules are completely open to interpretation and discretion (e.g. mark and stand, protected area, holding/grappling a key forward, prior opportunity, etc.). And matters are made worse by having 4 different opinions on these rules now

2 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

For mine, the top hat is the most fetching. I imagine @The heart beats true would look rather dapper in it, and it’ll go superbly with his tin cape. 

If course it’s a top hat. The rest don’t pair with a cape. I’m going for a shiny Sherlock Holmes vibe.

1 hour ago, Wodjathefirst said:

I may be a little off topic here but in past years I generally used to think the umpiring in the first five or six rounds of each season ‘frustrating’.  Then as the season rolled along it ‘stabilised’.

Not so this year. It has not improved one iota to date.  I’m guessing the contributors are the added pressure on interpreting what constitutes a dangerous tackle.  Also having the fourth umpire (I liked the concept) has certainly diminished the talent pool which increases the number of inconsistent / poor decisions being made.

I think they make it harder for themselves by largely ignoring some of the basic rules of the game. The first ones you learn as a youngster. "In the back" happens in nearly every congested pack where players are scrambling for the ball. Wham! A player's full weight lands on the back of another player. Play on ...

Throwing. I hear ex-umps on the radio saying, but we CAN'T give a free if there's the slightest chance that it was a legal handball!" Oh yeah? That doesn't stop you awarding a free for "insufficient intent" when there's the slightest chance -- often a good chance -- that the player in question didn't really mean for the ball to go out.

One of these (insufficient intent) requires you to read minds, the other (throwing) doesn't. So which one if the easier to crack down on? It's selective application of the rules. If they cracked down on throwing the way they have done with "insufficient intent", the players would clean up their act within a round.

Then they create grey areas for themselves. Hands in the back when marking is okay provided no actual pushing but you're allowed to hold your ground. Jesus Christ, talk about creating an impossible rule to police. But there they go.

360 in a tackle. It's holding the ball. Except they let it go, play on. Then they decided it was a free. Then overnight it wasn't again.

The pace the game is played at, I understand that it's difficult to umpire. But some of these things things happen right in front of the umps. Maybe they really are blind?

(I have not even mentioned the "i" word in this diatribe.)

TL;DR: they make it harder on themselves by picking and choosing which rules they will enforce.

Throwing gets a blind eye because it keeps the game moving and often, it's the slickest of questionable handballs that breaks a deadlock and opens play leading to a score 

8 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

Throwing gets a blind eye because it keeps the game moving and often, it's the slickest of questionable handballs that breaks a deadlock and opens play leading to a score 

True and goals mean ads.  Many genuine handballs these days get most of the ball's momentum from the other hand throwing as it is punched.  But if you allow the throws, do you chnage the rules to forget the first.   End up with Gridiron throws.

5 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Robbed? I seem to recall watching one of their blokes take a straightforward shot on goal to level the scores, and spray it out to the right. If they were robbed, they did it to themselves.

Yeah Derwayne's beloved footy gods were soooooo upset Chol was not paid a free that they engineered a shank kick out of a pack that landed in the arms of unmarked Sun's player 35 metres out slight angle. 

Despite the magnanimity of the footy gods, King reckoned that every day of the week you'd rather Chol have got the free than Macpherson get that mark because Chol 'kicks goals for a living' and 

Bollocks. Total bollocks.

Chol would have been kicking from about 45 metres on an angle.

Macpeherson, who by the way is 26 goals 24 points over his career (so better than 50% - not as good as Chols' but no butcher), was 35 metres out slight angle. 

There is no way Chol was a higher probability to kick that goal.

If you (not you MR - the royal you) disagree - a thought experiment.

Imagine Van Ruin is paid the free.  He knows how much time is on the clock. He is at the top of his run up some 60 metres from goal. And would you believe Gus is all by himself without an oppo player anywhere near him, 35 metres out on a slight angle. Easy kick to hit him. He knows he has time to do so.

Would you expect JVR to pass it to Gus?

Edited May 8, 20231 yr by binman

On 5/7/2023 at 10:32 AM, DubDee said:

commentators hate a one sided thrashing so usually are biased to the under dog

enjoy it! means we are one of the best in the comp!

leave the pity commentary to the shizen clubs. 

I like it in theory...but go and then explain the over-the-top love infatuation with the Pies or the Cats? Pies i can understand with their exciting brand and (i cringe as i write this), all things Nick Daicos. The Cats for crying out loud have been thereabouts for almost 2 decades and still get the adoration of the commentary teams. 

8 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

I like it in theory...but go and then explain the over-the-top love infatuation with the Pies or the Cats? Pies i can understand with their exciting brand and (i cringe as i write this), all things Nick Daicos. The Cats for crying out loud have been thereabouts for almost 2 decades and still get the adoration of the commentary teams. 

The brave Tigers, invincible in the years 2017-2020, also get this treatment. They're still practically unbeatable and Martin, Riewoldt & Cotchin are still in career best form. It takes a lot to beat the brave, fighting Tigers. Without checking, I'd say they are probably on top of the ladder.

11 hours ago, daisycutter said:

i don't dislike suns either....but 12k crowd ... c'mon

I see not so much the crowds, but the grass roots amature and jnr leagues in the area as the reason it's so important to have the Suns there.

Local and women's Aussie Rules footy in SEQ is on the rise.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theage.com.au/sport/afl/battleground-brisbane-the-afl-insurgency-and-league-s-brutal-response-20230323-p5cuoi.html

"Early into this season, the code boasts 38,000 registered participants (58,000 at its 2022 peak) at the grassroots level from northern NSW through Queensland, according to figures provided by the AFL.

It has added 34 teams – half of them for girls – to its Youth Community Football program and lists 170 community Aussie rules clubs in 11 leagues.

Swann said a common complaint from the suburbs was the lack of grounds to accommodate record numbers of juniors.

The NRL was less forthcoming with its data, but said it had 54,550 Queensland participants, up more than 20 per cent. It would not say when the figure was captured."

I expect terrible umpiring these days so it doesn't bother me much when it happens.
Both teams get the rough end of pineapple at different times.
Win some , lose some .... Meh.

On 5/7/2023 at 10:35 PM, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

Fact was in the final quarter we out played them for the most part, kicked poorly, which kept them in the game when they shouldn't have been, they then got a bunch of goals through part fluke and part bad defending on our behalf and had a chance to steal the game when the shouldn't have been in it.

My conspiracy theory is that the long break in getting Ballard off the ground when there was nothing wrong with him was contrived to settle the Suns down and give them a run at winning.

Up until that point Melbourne had kicked 2.3 to nothing in the final term and GCS didn’t look like scoring. That trend would likely have continued but for the break in play.

12 minutes ago, Elwood 3184 said:

My conspiracy theory is that the long break in getting Ballard off the ground when there was nothing wrong with him was contrived to settle the Suns down and give them a run at winning.

Up until that point Melbourne had kicked 2.3 to nothing in the final term and GCS didn’t look like scoring. That trend would likely have continued but for the break in play.

Could they not just have turned the lights out? 🤷‍♂️

Does anyone remember that ad from the 90s for Amnesty International where a whole mail sack of letters arrives and they just look at each other and say: "It's a conspiracy!"

 

 

15 minutes ago, Elwood 3184 said:

My conspiracy theory is that the long break in getting Ballard off the ground when there was nothing wrong with him was contrived to settle the Suns down and give them a run at winning.

Up until that point Melbourne had kicked 2.3 to nothing in the final term and GCS didn’t look like scoring. That trend would likely have continued but for the break in play.

I doubt that.  Ballard stayed down because he told the trainers that he had heard something crack so as a precaution they immobilised him & got the stretcher.

On 5/8/2023 at 3:48 PM, Dee*ceiving said:

Throwing gets a blind eye because it keeps the game moving and often, it's the slickest of questionable handballs that breaks a deadlock and opens play leading to a score 

Same with out of bounds

Regarding the Gold Coast incident. One of the most experienced Premiership players on that ground saw fit to jog away from view because he saw nothing in that incident to remonstrate about..........Ellis

My conspiracy theory this week is that the AFL and North Melbourne conspired to ensure that they lost to the Swans to keep their chances alive of special draft assistance at the end of the year. Couldn’t happen if they won too many matches.

18 hours ago, Elwood 3184 said:

My conspiracy theory this week is that the AFL and North Melbourne conspired to ensure that they lost to the Swans to keep their chances alive of special draft assistance at the end of the year. Couldn’t happen if they won too many matches.

Don't know about conspiracy but it is amazing that any club could miss count their interchanges. They plan them quarter by quarter, maybe they need to start holding up some of those silly signs teams are using now. 

On 5/22/2023 at 8:52 AM, YearOfTheDees said:

Don't know about conspiracy but it is amazing that any club could miss count their interchanges. They plan them quarter by quarter, maybe they need to start holding up some of those silly signs teams are using now. 

I agree that Norf seems to have stuffed up big time here.

But part of the interchange steward's remit is to monitor the numbers.  What happens if the club has it right and the steward overcounts?   Could change an important game like a GF.  

Surely they should be required to tell the club that time's up and not just lurk like a vulture waiting to assert their authority? 

Edited May 25, 20231 yr by monoccular

If they end up with the spoon due to an interchange infringement, it will be the most blessed inadvertent tanking job known to man, but i do like a conspiracy theory so its a clever tanking job aha