24 minutes ago, binman said:

What do you mean by his refusal to shift Turner (i assume you mean shift him forward)?

Didn't he do so when Jefferson was taken off?

i think he means that mj was only subbed off sometime in the 3rd and turner was only put down forward late or halfway thru the last, anyways he should have been subbed off at ht

1 hour ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Shortly after the team came out from half time and were doing little runs near the Punt Rd end 50m line, McVee was hunched over for about 5 mins throwing up liquid. It was 30 metres in front of us, he didn’t look well at all.

Thanks DZ. It may well have been in the post-half time huddle, so that makes sense. Appreciate the reply.

On 11/05/2025 at 13:26, DemonOX said:

I know he umps stank but bloody hell if we kick straight and play FOUR QUARTERS we win and umps are irrelevant.

The umps didn’t cost us the game we did.

You cannot just explain every loss by us not kicking straight.

The momentum that we have generated in just about every game played this season has the maggot extinguisher stamp on each and everyone of them.

Simply they are cheating and just look for , and almost construct some remote, hardly ever paid free kick.

And they just pull it out of nowhere.

They know who they are and they smile as they do it. Many of which are obviously jaw dropping to both teams, and invariably cause 50 mtr penalties.

17 hours ago, bing181 said:

Turner had 11 marks for the day. In the last quarter after he was moved ... 1.

Hawthorn managed 7 goals in 3 quarters with Turner in the back line. And then 6 in a quarter after he was moved.

You don't move players who are winning their positions.

Turner should have been shifted forward in the 2nd quarter when it was obvious we we were winning around the ground but struggling to convert up forward. Despite having a number of set shots we also had a number of inside 50s repelled with Hawks taking easy intercepts which we would have been able to mitigate by moving Turner up forward.

It was blindingly obvious at the ground, had Turner been moved forward earlier we may have been able to convert more opportunities. Conflating Turner's move forward when the game was lost with the Hawks piling on goals in the last quarter is a great example of "correlation ≠ causation".

17 hours ago, bing181 said:

Turner had 11 marks for the day. In the last quarter after he was moved ... 1.

Hawthorn managed 7 goals in 3 quarters with Turner in the back line. And then 6 in a quarter after he was moved.

You don't move players who are winning their positions.

Crikey.

No you leave them exactly where they are and get smashed in the last quarter.

What are you on about? Our three fwds kicked zero goals and you claim you don't move disco there because he was doing well down back.

Yea sure he saved goals but you have to kick them to win games.

Hes been successful playing fwd prior and he is a very reliable shot at goal when experienced players like Fritta were spraying them everywhere.

And just because he only managed one mark in the final while playing forward is a complete non sequitur. The ball was being delivered i50 not as well in the last. We were also running out of fuel. If he was there in the beginning when we were delivering the ball at breakneck speed at times up fwd, it could have been a completely different story. We made Sicily look like a superstar.

Certainly come half time, when your three major fwds have done bumkus, and the game is there for the taking, you make a change. And as a proven successful and accurate fwd , Disco was the obvious and probably only choice given Tmac won't play there.

Just because he was doing well isn't a reason not to move him. On that logic you would only put poor playing players up forward. That's going to just have some more of the same.

Speaking of Bumkus, the word somes up your post beautifully.

I have been away so sorry of this has been dealt with already but did the Hawthorn player get suspended for tripping Pickett in the goal square?

5 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I have been away so sorry of this has been dealt with already but did the Hawthorn player get suspended for tripping Pickett in the goal square?

No.

7 minutes ago, binman said:

No.

Not even fined? WTF??

4 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Not even fined? WTF??

It's like an AFL version of the tree falling in a forest philosophical question.

Does a blatant trip that four umpires did not pay a free kick for and the match review panel doesn't even reference actually happen?

As nuts as the koz non call was, i reckon it pales against thefree paid to siath against fritter.

Perhaps The umpires could argue they didn't pay the trip because for some incredible coincidence all four umpires were unsighted.

But the siath howler was a concious decision to pay a free that was 100% not there.

In fact, more than not being there, Friitter should have got a free as siath dangerously jumped into the pack and got nowhere near the ball.

He did so in such an erratic way that I can only assume the umpire assumed siath must have been pushed. He wasn't.

It was 20 metres from goal and Luke the koz error cost us a certain goal.

THAT is where a umpire not in the immediate zone should come into play - it was clearly a howler, over rule it.

8 minutes ago, binman said:

As nuts as the koz non call was, i reckon it pales against thefree paid to siath against fritter.

Perhaps The umpires could argue they didn't pay the trip because for some incredible coincidence all four umpires were unsighted.

But the siath howler was a concious decision to pay a free that was 100% not there.

In fact, more than not being there, Friitter should have got a free as siath dangerously jumped into the pack and got nowhere near the ball.

He did so in such an erratic way that I can only assume the umpire assumed siath must have been pushed. He wasn't.

It was 20 metres from goal and Luke the koz error cost us a certain goal.

THAT is where a umpire not in the immediate zone should come into play - it was clearly a howler, over rule it.

They’ve admitted they don’t have enough experienced umpires currently. Yet there is still no plant to make them full time professionals even though it’s a professional sport generating millions of dollars. The umpiring is poor, has been for years. They don’t seem to really care.

28 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

They’ve admitted they don’t have enough experienced umpires currently. Yet there is still no plant to make them full time professionals even though it’s a professional sport generating millions of dollars. The umpiring is poor, has been for years. They don’t seem to really care.

Because crud umpiring generates controversy and gets the fans emotional which all leads to interest in the sport. And then they can mysteriously assist some teams.

It is clear from the fixturing, the special games etc etc, that the AFL does not care about building a fair competition but is mainly interested in building an empire.

On the Kozzie trip - OK, maybe 4 umpires didn't see it and they assumed he tripped over his own feet or a paticularly thick blade of grass. But why no review or a dangerous act? Beyond outrageous.

11 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Turner should have been shifted forward in the 2nd quarter when it was obvious we we were winning around the ground but struggling to convert up forward. Despite having a number of set shots we also had a number of inside 50s repelled with Hawks taking easy intercepts which we would have been able to mitigate by moving Turner up forward.

It was blindingly obvious at the ground, had Turner been moved forward earlier we may have been able to convert more opportunities. Conflating Turner's move forward when the game was lost with the Hawks piling on goals in the last quarter is a great example of "correlation ≠ causation".

It really show how desperate and incompetent Goody is

How any body can continue support for this coaches gamelan beggars me

Should have gone end 23 and we would be through our rebuild now

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Not even fined? WTF??

#playonhawthorn

52 minutes ago, sue said:

Because crud umpiring generates controversy and gets the fans emotional which all leads to interest in the sport. And then they can mysteriously assist some teams.

It is clear from the fixturing, the special games etc etc, that the AFL does not care about building a fair competition but is mainly interested in building an empire.

On the Kozzie trip - OK, maybe 4 umpires didn't see it and they assumed he tripped over his own feet or a paticularly thick blade of grass. But why no review or a dangerous act? Beyond outrageous.

For me its the reverse.

Umpiring and the MRO and the blatant AFL favouritism over fixtures, TV slots etc etc just kill it for me.

For someone that used to watch 3 or 4 games a week other than Melbourne I basically watch 1 game a month or less of other teams.

38 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

For me its the reverse.

Umpiring and the MRO and the blatant AFL favouritism over fixtures, TV slots etc etc just kill it for me.

For someone that used to watch 3 or 4 games a week other than Melbourne I basically watch 1 game a month or less of other teams.

I feel like that too. But I'm sure the AFL is busy monitoring clicks etc and thinks all PR is good PR, especially easy when it has the so-called footy journos in thrall.

2 hours ago, binman said:

It's like an AFL version of the tree falling in a forest philosophical question.

Does a blatant trip that four umpires did not pay a free kick for and the match review panel doesn't even reference actually happen?

So they 'drop' the closest umpire for what was called as the worst non-call of the season, but somehow the player escapes a fine?

Only rational i can think of is they thought he was 'scrambling' after the collision with team mate and it was accidental. long bow to draw though

1 hour ago, jackaub said:

Should have gone end 23 and we would be through our rebuild now

There is just no reality where a coach 2 years after a flag with 2 subsequent top4 finishes and prelim finals gets sacked.

It just would not have happened under any circumstances and people should let it go.

Whether change is needed now or not it is pure fantasy to think he was ever getting the axe after ‘23.

3 hours ago, binman said:

As nuts as the koz non call was, i reckon it pales against thefree paid to siath against fritter.

Perhaps The umpires could argue they didn't pay the trip because for some incredible coincidence all four umpires were unsighted.

But the siath howler was a concious decision to pay a free that was 100% not there.

In fact, more than not being there, Friitter should have got a free as siath dangerously jumped into the pack and got nowhere near the ball.

He did so in such an erratic way that I can only assume the umpire assumed siath must have been pushed. He wasn't.

It was 20 metres from goal and Luke the koz error cost us a certain goal.

THAT is where a umpire not in the immediate zone should come into play - it was clearly a howler, over rule it.

And then about 30 seconds later Weddle got a free kick for holding the man when he had dropped the footy, the umpiring was infuriating in this game.

LAWS OF AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL 2025

22.2 REPORTABLE OFFENCES

22.2.2 Specific Offences Any of the following types of conduct is a Reportable Offence:

(a) intentionally or carelessly:

....

(xi) tripping another person whether by hand, arm, foot or leg

On 10/05/2025 at 17:07, Stiff Arm said:

Fixed

34 minutes ago, GM11 said:

LAWS OF AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL 2025

22.2 REPORTABLE OFFENCES

22.2.2 Specific Offences Any of the following types of conduct is a Reportable Offence:

(a) intentionally or carelessly:

....

(xi) tripping another person whether by hand, arm, foot or leg

Don't be naive - the laws of Australia Rules Football (incorporated) override those and allow AFL HQ and the MRO to do whatever is currently on their empire building agenda.

5 hours ago, jnrmac said:

I have been away so sorry of this has been dealt with already but did the Hawthorn player get suspended for tripping Pickett in the goal square?

A player hasn't been suspended for years for a tripping offence.

3 hours ago, jnrmac said:

For me its the reverse.

Umpiring and the MRO and the blatant AFL favouritism over fixtures, TV slots etc etc just kill it for me.

For someone that used to watch 3 or 4 games a week other than Melbourne I basically watch 1 game a month or less of other teams.

It's not an even competition anymore. The same teams benefit from fixturing and TV which = more $$$$$ = better facilities = destination club = always good.

45 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

A player hasn't been suspended for years for a tripping offence.

Not true, eg. Keane from Adeliade in 2021. And lots of fines have been made, up to $10K, including this year.

Most trips are accidental and not very careless, so the MRO is understandably reluctant to suspend for them. But Kozzie had a clear deliberate trip. Not saying it was done with evil intention (ie to hurt Kozzie), but please explain how it wasn't at the very least a fine and basically ignored. What does it say about the AFL?