Ouch!

I was never comfortable with us going to the tribunal for this, and TBH it's because of the Maynard case. I absolutely 100% agree that this is different, but he made contact with the head in a brace, bump or whatever you want to call it. It just felt wrong to appeal it. Picket plays on the edge, it's what makes him a great player, and his closing speed will always cause some accidents to occur. But, he was very lucky with his hit on Bailey Smith too. If that hit happened today, that would be a 4-6 week at least. With Kozzie we accept the good and the bad and we move on.

Can we quickly zoom you in ? Let’s give AA the boot.

I'm not potting the umpires, I'm potting the stupidity of the rules. Do I think that dissent should be stamped out, yes absolutely. Do I think the rules should have given 50m penalties when players are expressing their frustration in their own actions as much as anything, No. With that said as well, goal assist technology has had a negative impact on umpiring similarly as it has in cricket. In that a lot of decisions that don't need to be referred are being referred due to 'fear' rather than it being unclear. That doesn't help their mindset. Also, boundary umpires at the moment are making a lot of mistakes with regards to calling the ball out of bounds. I have no idea why, but in terms of clarity of the rule, it's not a hard decision to make that call. Often we are seeing both a field umpire AND a boundary umpire on the scene yet no calls (Higgins, that Port player last week v the dees, Jeremy Cameron x 2) I'll second the view that someone made in this thread that having an umpire in the commentary or media would be valuable (i.e Razor Ray with Whately). Even Laura Kane talking to the media each week is welcomed, we don't always have to agree, but at least they explain what is going on with contentious issues.

I think some of the media asked a similar question to this through the week, and admittedly I think there was a dissent 50m paid in one of the earlier games this season, but this rule is subjective at best, and dare I say is based on how the umps are feeling often more than hard evidence. But no doubt we're gonna get a round where the umps are reminded about dissent rules, and you'll get 20+ dissent 50m penalties in a round!

So the list says 3-4 weeks, but Selwin Griffith in the actual update says hopefully it's just 2 games. Assume that is due to us having the bye after Brisbane?

I have honestly no idea who you are talking about, do you mean Mabiol Chol?

I actually think that the Liberal party will look to engage with Labor to get this through, not to rely on Lambie or Greens. Bec White... 3 failures at elections as opposition leader... there are rumours that the party position differs from Bec White.

Ok, I respectfully ask you to read before commenting. I said, the Tas Gov contribution WILL BE CAPPED AT $375Million. The Stadium is costed at $715, which includes the $240mil from the federal govt, $15mil from AFL, the remainder comes from private investment.

no. Edit: Sorry just to clarify. I dont' think this will proceed regardless of the support of 200k supporters. The Club presidents of the other 18 clubs will pull the pin on the project. GC, Sydney, Collingwood and some other clubs were lukewarm at best. I suspect Hawthorn and North are 'supportive' but secretly covet the cash that will no longer be afforded them.

Sorry this is just total crud, and shows you know nothing about the two stadiums, Bellerive will not upgrade to this size, it's in the suburbs and York Park is NOT IN THE CAPITAL CITY. How many times does this need to be said!!!! Also, please everyone understand this. THE COST is NOT $715 or $1Billion to the Tasmanian Taxpayers, it's $375 Million.. the rest is being paid by Federal Capital works money, the AFL and private investors. If this stadium does not go ahead, not only does the other 400 mil not get spent in Tasmania, but all of the money that the AFL is committing over the next 10 years, (300+ million) for junior development pathways, the high performance/community football etc, that all goes.

Test cricket has no rules stating that it cannot be played under a roof apparently. I believe that the issue is more that no country has ever requested that a test match be played in a roofed stadium either, so it's more that the ICC would need to make a ruling on such a thing.

Think of the roof as much about protecting the ground from wind as it is about the cold. The proximity to the mountain, and the river leaves a lot of Hobart exposed to severe winds. Both Bellerive Oval and York Park are highly susceptible to wind, and it doesn't make for a good game.

Again, you realise that the Gold Coast Council/Qld Govt had to upgrade Metricon as part of the licensing to get it into AFL. That wasn't the AFL paying for the upgrade, it was Taxpayer money. It was a requirement as part of the license. Similar with the showgrounds. This might appear different, but it's really not. https://www.themercury.com.au/news/opinion/colin-carter-all-the-reasons-why-a-new-afl-stadium-should-be-supported-built-in-tasmania/news-story/89f786e91033a62e61f6501f526067c2 This article is worth a read, Colin Carter did an independent review of the business case for the team, he then presented to the AFL commission and the presidents. It was mentioned (although don't think it's in this article) that the business case itself identified that a new stadium is essential for the team, albeit not immediately. The AFL and the clubs decided that it would need to be done as part of the 19th license. It was always identified as being required and being in the city itself.

Hawks since 2001 and Nth since 2012. Given the last arrangement with the Hawks will be $13.5 mil for 2 years ending in 2025) it's not a stretch to assume that the Tas Gov (i.e Taxpayer money) could exceed $200million dollars for the 'honour' of hosting these Vic clubs. The financial / economic benefit has apparently been worth us doing it, so why do people think that a stadium and supporting a single Tasmanian team wouldn't have a greater impact. Can I honestly ask for those of you in Victoria, given the way Dan Andrews has wasted money ... would any of you even 'blink' about a project that would cost Vic taxpayers $375million? Its less than what you are paying to NOT host the comm games! Also it's somewhat amusing that people seem to think that the AFL has no right to ask for a stadium to be attached to the license. GWS & GC still needed a commitment from govt/councils to make Metricon and the Showgrounds fit for purpose to play AFL there.

So about the same value as your incessant negativity brings to demonland you say? Sometimes if you don't have something positive to say, consider keeping your views to yourself. I believe you are wrong on the $$ value, I believe the feel good factor alone is more than enough of a reason to have Tassie in the competition, and the predicted 200k by easter foundation members that incidentally include a significant number of people who support other teams and live on the mainland would suggest that it does too. Who gives a stuff about the catchment areas when we are talking about this issue? I'd love to know the TV viewing numbers that have gone with the GC and GWS, I suspect the AFL wanted to get into the NRL market, and I doubt that the ratings are that solid, I firmly believe Demetiou made the wrong call, and I suspect the vast majority of people would now consider that to be true. Hobart as a market, is very similar to Geelong? Heck.... Victoria is a state of 6.5million, and you have 10 teams, roughly speaking thats 650k per team, Tas as a population is 550k, but Tassie will be supporting and behind one team. No one is 'Pandering' to converted footy fans. Tasmania deserves a team, and has done for decades.