1 minute ago, Demonland said:

Please use the report feature in the future rather than quote the post.

Causes more work for the mods to have to delete extra posts.

Will do. I forgot about that button. Probably because we don't get many people posting report worthy [censored] on here...

...although Rollo is definitely cutting it close with his death threats 

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Jaded No More

1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

Will do. I forgot about that button. Probably because we don't get many people posting report worthy [censored] on here...

The forum software has pretty good spam detection but sometimes some filth slips through.

An IQ test or incest paternity test would have sorted this out.

1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

Will do. I forgot about that button. Probably because we don't get many people posting report worthy [censored] on here...

...although Rollo is definitely cutting it close with his death threats 

Many moons ago (far too many) when I was an undergraduate student I was told that when marketing to the masses you need to appreciate that 95% of people are incredibly stupid. At the time I thought that statement was excessively harsh. Now I'm not so sure.

1 minute ago, TRIGON said:

Many moons ago (far too many) when I was an undergraduate student I was told that when marketing to the masses you need to appreciate that 95% of people are incredibly stupid. At the time I thought that statement was excessively harsh. Now I'm not so sure.

95% of people and 100% of Collingwood supporters

2 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Many moons ago (far too many) when I was an undergraduate student I was told that when marketing to the masses you need to appreciate that 95% of people are incredibly stupid. At the time I thought that statement was excessively harsh. Now I'm not so sure.

95%? understatement

7 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Please use the report feature in the future rather than quote the post.

Causes more work for the mods to have to delete extra posts.

Sorry about that, Andy. I actually did think to report that post but I thought the poster hadn’t breached any Demonland rules. Apart from being an !d!ot that is, but idiocy doesn’t constitute a breach, clearly. There’d be reports aplenty, amirite 😁

2 minutes ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

Sorry about that, Andy. I actually did think to report that post but I thought the poster hadn’t breached any Demonland rules. Apart from being an !d!ot that is, but idiocy doesn’t constitute a breach, clearly. There’d be reports aplenty, amirite 😁

I would say creating an account with the sole intent to troll is breaking the rules. 

14 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

95% of people and 100% of Collingwood supporters

99.997%

I have met 3 that are okay.

In some ways this has played out perfectly for Kane.  That system is not working as well as it could and this now gives her a solid - and recent - case in point for creating change.  

I hope she doesn’t just shift chairs on the deck by replacing Christian though, the appeals process and the lawyering up that goes on needs to be picked apart. I have never understood why/how, in a private organisation such as the AFL, injunctions  and appeals beyond appeals are allowed to even happen? 

Wasnt aware Christian cracked the sads and threatened to quit. Kane missed a golden freeby there . Should have graciously accepted Michael's offer.

Would have sent a few rockets through the boys club. 

Damn....lol

 

Does anyone else remember when he was on the radio? (927)

A most unpleasant stupid man.

Again this is sensationalist journalism at its best. Can I suggest that any reluctance Christensen had to grade the incident would be to do with whether the incident could be graded as careless under the rules as they stand. It was only earlier this year when the MRO and Tribunal suspended Van Rooyen for his spoil on Ballard and the Appeals Board overturned the suspension on the basis that the careless grading was not within the rules. I can see this case going the same way.

15 hours ago, layzie said:

Michael Christian's position as MRO is completely untenable now, I expect him to have his desk cleaned out by the end of the week.

Why not today?

16 hours ago, daisycutter said:

yes, it got explained on fc tonight in so much detail it couldn't have been guesswork

gill, dill, and laura forced it, though whether their motives were pure or just optics was unclear

what a hopeless, compromised lot.

If it was Gill I am sure it was optics - that is how he always works.   

Haven't  seen enough of the other two to comment, though Laura looks promising, and thankfully is not a member of the 'old boys club'

16 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Psychic octopus is sooo 2010s.

Replace him with an AI bot.

At least an artificial intelligence bot would have some intelligence, even if artificial.   MC has none.

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by monoccular

Dear All,   see below lifted from ther AFL doc covering Tribunal Guidelines. 

 

) HEAD-HIGH CONTACT: Whereas previously “strong consideration” was required to be given to the potential to cause injury, the potential to cause injury must now be factored into the determination of Impact for Head-High Contact. Additionally, any Careless or Intentional Forceful Front-On Contact or Rough Conduct (High Bumps) where High Contact has been made and that has the potential to cause injury will usually be classified at a minimum as Medium Impact.

 And another poster said these don't refer to Careless.  They Do.

Intentional  or Careless.

.See table 3.1 (B)  where its referred to.

Maynard gets off in some other universe but not this one.

And a nice touch for the 2022 editin has a big picture of Trac on the front cover from the 2021 GF

The Guidelines are interesting reading BTW if your into that sort of thing.

If he is replaced now it is already too late.

28 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Dear All,   see below lifted from ther AFL doc covering Tribunal Guidelines. 

 

) HEAD-HIGH CONTACT: Whereas previously “strong consideration” was required to be given to the potential to cause injury, the potential to cause injury must now be factored into the determination of Impact for Head-High Contact. Additionally, any Careless or Intentional Forceful Front-On Contact or Rough Conduct (High Bumps) where High Contact has been made and that has the potential to cause injury will usually be classified at a minimum as Medium Impact.

 And another poster said these don't refer to Careless.  They Do.

Intentional  or Careless.

.See table 3.1 (B)  where its referred to.

Maynard gets off in some other universe but not this one.

And a nice touch for the 2022 editin has a big picture of Trac on the front cover from the 2021 GF

The Guidelines are interesting reading BTW if your into that sort of thing.

Head high contact occurred - severe impact / outcome - and reckless / careless - none of this can be disputed, yet the bastard will likely get off, or a one match to "not deny him the opportunity to play in a GF".

This is the AFL's biggest concussion test yet - anything under 3-4 is abdication.

1 hour ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

Why not today?

I figure he needs the whole week to clean out the Maynard bobbleheads. 

4 hours ago, TRIGON said:

99.997%

I have met 3 that are okay.

People or Collingwood supporters?

3 hours ago, Winners at last said:

Does anyone else remember when he was on the radio? (927)

A most unpleasant stupid man.

As I previously mentioned, I had a bit to do with him when my husband was into race horses. There was always something about him that didn’t sit right with me and I won’t go into any further details only to say that I never trusted him and my sixth sense proved to be correct.

When he got the job with the AFL I was totally floored. 

20 hours ago, beelzebub said:

R  .. serious Q  ..do you/would you believe anything from the AwFuL?? 

They 'guide' things 🙄🙄

This is 100% correct ... everything the AFL has done (until now) does not happen without the almighty $$ / ratings, ensuring the biggest crowds (etc) coming into play.

And the biggest clubs will certainly almost always be the beneficiaries.  The filth obviously the biggest of the lot.

We're about to find out how much clout Laura has OR does the old guard boys club still hold the upper hand?

I'm leaning towards the latter and they will massage this as they always do.

Two weeks today, reduced to one on Thursday's appeal.

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Demon Dynasty

17 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Can you imagine the outcry if Viney had done this to Nick Daicos?? He would be looking at 6 weeks.

Absolutely Dr... hung, drawn and quartered

17 hours ago, Macca said:

And Christian putting his own job on the line is weird.  What was he worried about?

Is he that biased towards Collingwood and if so, how on earth can he hold such an important position for so long?  Bizarre

Caro mentioned that Gil & Dillon wanted the case to go straight to the tribunal as well

I'm surprised you're asking that Macca

I would suggest that's a Gil appointment and we need to keep in mind the close relationship that Eddie has had with Gil, at least until he stepped away.

Hopefully not so much any more but i wouldn't put any sort of wager on it.

Gil may have grown the game but he's also leaving a very dodgy legacy behind him in a tribunal / MRO sense.

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Demon Dynasty

2 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

I'm surprised you're asking that Macca

I would suggest that's a Gil appointment and we need to keep in mind the close relationship that Eddie has had with Gil, at least until he stepped away.

Hopefully not so much any more but i wouldn't put any sort of wager on it.

Well I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt unless proven otherwise

I just always thought he was incompetant and the MRO was a farce.  That was always my beef

Hopefully he's gone soon, but failing that, Laura can step in whenever applicable (like, every time!)

11 minutes ago, Macca said:

Well I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt unless proven otherwise

I just always thought he was incompetant and the MRO was a farce.  That was always my beef

Hopefully he's gone soon, but failing that, Laura can step in whenever applicable (like, every time!)

Ha she might have to if they leave MC there.

The fact that one man has so much say and is an ex player of any of the clubs tells me everything i need to know about the sham & circus that is the AFL.

Alot easier to influence / coerce one person than it is to do so with a number of them on a panel.

Should be at least three or even five panel members and none of them should be ex players or people who have had career long appointments at a club.

Needs to be an odd number so they can reach a majority decision.

Ex umpires might be the go.

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Demon Dynasty