deanox

what about for android?

best advantage rule is the rugby union rule. instead of the umps blowing the whistle for a free kick, they should just point their arm out and shout 'free kick advantage [insert team name]' and only blow the whistle when play is required to stop. This allows the game to continue without anyone stopping (i.e. both teams can contest the ball continuously without fear of giving away a 50 m penalty). the umpires give x amount of seconds to the team to get it right i.e. if they don't actually clear the ball from the area (if they kick it 40 meters directly to the opposition bad luck, advantage is over because they gained ground.

As long as it is genuinely purple I am happy. It does look better. If it is actually blue like their current jumper (not their original jumper) then it will clash with mfc and carlton. Royal purple will be distinctive. A fantastic look.

our game plan seemed to work pretty well against collingwood this year...

i would suggest that it is entirely possible the trafficking drugs charge came about because when caught with drugs the immediate answer was 'they aren't mine' and when he was asked 'whose are they then?' and he replied 'I bought them for a mate'. given it was such a small amount he may not have even been charged had he said that they were his. im also not sure i believe the story about 'helping out a mate' and getting caught. it doesn't gel right with me. hypothetically if you aren't interested in using them, and you aren't dealing them, why would you purchase them and supply them to your friends?

im pretty sure that afl players receive compo/medical etc for any injury they suffer in their last year of a contract, even if the contract is not gonig to be renewed. i.e. if someone needed a knee reco, we'd be responsible for not only their recovery (which is fair enough) but they also get paid out next year even though they aren't contracted (not sure how much, maybe 50% of wage or something?). That is why the club is cautious with this, as they are employed to play for the mfc not csfc. no disrespect meant to casey, and i think it is fantastic that these players want to play the season out with casey, but from a financial risk point of view it make sense for the mfc to not want to risk 100's of 1000's of dollars for a game it does not benefit from, for a player it will not benefit from.

RE dunns first half of the year, didn't he kick about 1 goal 14 in his first 7 games? if he had of kicked with similar accuracy that he had when he came back into the side I don't think his start of the year would've been considered as poor.

150 years of footy and there was no such thing as 'natural arc' until this year. A player must run in a straight line which is extended from the centre of the goal posts and the man on the mark, if he deviates from this it is play on. That doesn't mean franklin or dunn cannot play on to get the extra distance they like, but most players only do it for a step or two and by the time 'play on' is called it is too late for the reaction from the man on the mark. franklin runs right around and gains an unfair advantage. if 'natural arc' flows through, all midfielders, who generally are not particularly good kicks for goal from ste shots, will start arcing around like they can when on the run.

wrath child, what about calling them the gold coast 49ers then? some things are associated with american sport. same as something are associated with aussie sport. i think one of the differences is that most of the vfl team nicknames evolved with time, rather than christened at birth, which meant the names had more meaning. choosing a very 'franchise' type name, of which i believe 'the suns' is, gives the team a bit of a manufactured vibe (which it is).

i'd like to see dunn run with him, although if he spends significant time in the forward 50 chip would be a good option.

its called 'life membership'. all clubs do it.

i hope they dont have a nickname. let the nickname happen in time, like most of the vfl ones did rather than force a mascot on everyone. itll mean more and be heaps better. the coasters is probably the one that will develop but something else might. its the only chance that club has of having an element that isnt commercialised from the start. edit: shouldve read the whole thread first.

if we need to cull any numbers it ours. its not like there are many habitats left where we let them be. they may be annoying but that is part of life. you can't go destroying animals because they annoy you. (although i'll make a for introduced species that are damaging native wildlife and ecosystems such as rabbits.)

a wording that most people fail to understand. If you have already had prior opportunity, you do not get a chance once you have been tackled. So if you are running with the ball and are tackled, there is no reason why the umpire should let you get swung around in a circle until you get a clear handpass to a team mate.

having watched the 50's, ive got no problems as said before. RE the syvlia one. It was a bit soft but why I think it was paid: the essendon player made no attempt to contest the ball; he pulled his arms down and turned his body. Perhaps a bit unlucky as I don't think he saw sylvia until the last moment but I don;'t think it would've been paid if he had've tried to punch. RE the free kicks, what I said about the scully and lonegan decision still stands. RE the watts decision, essendon player was unlucky in that he contacted watts when he was off balance after the kick. But, watts had disposed of the ball and there is no reason why the essendon player should have pushed him, and he did fall as aresult of the push. unlucky but i don't understand why it should be acceptable to push any player in the back as they kick the ball or after they have kicked it, when they are running into the goals, and normally the umpires let that go unpunished.

and someone should get rid of them all when you go to the beach, its terrible. and seriously, how about when you go outside and there are mosquitos? can't someone zap them all? and i went on a picnic and there were ants everywhere. why didn't the council get rid of them so i didn't have to worry about them? They are natural wild life. WTF is everyone whinging about? put up your hood if it is a problem, you can't just 'get rid' of birds because they bug you.

RE the lonegan holding the ball decision. It wasn't a great decision, he did get a handball away before he was retarded. The exact same free kick however was paid against tom scully earlier in the game. and no one is whinging about that.

i agree that the first 50 to sylvia was soft. the question is, did the umpire think that sylvia had marked it before he was cleaned up? if so it could be a very soft, but correct decision. i didn't think he had marked it, in which case, i thought it should have been a free kick. would happily see a replay?

was that just behind the goals on level 2? a couple of moron essendon supporters were snuck in there as well, and after carrying on decided that 'they had every right to be there. didn't seem to worry them that it was a members only area...' should probably be policed more. supporters in opposition regalia should not be allowed access to an area with an mfc membership card. that should set off alarm bells.

don't worry about how well PJ played (or how bad) he will be sitting the next 3-4 out anyway after that bump in the 3rd.

my take on this today: we looked better when there was some movement - which today was bate. there needs to be more movement with players presenting, thats the best way to break the zone. point 2: today, a number of times, a player was on his own, straight out in front 35-40 m from goal BUT by the time the players bumbled around and decided to swap kickers and got back into the square the zone had closed that spot up. i would like to see 'quick kick ins' and that means getting ready to kick it quickly and having 2-3 players whose job it is to make an early lead into space as an option. if the option is no good, or there is a hold up with the ball thats fine, we can kick long and wide to jamar/bate/the boundary line, but i'd like to see us try and get a quick kick straight up the ground.

i thought it was because he was at that awkward in between height of 192cm?

i think that you'll find the prior opportunity rule is commonly misunderstood by fans and commentators. In fact, if a player is in possession of the football and is tackled and retarded it is holding the ball instantaneously. The exception to this rule is if a player has not had prior opportunity to dispose of the ball before the tackle. In this case, when the player with the ball (and no prior opportunity) is tackled, he is allowed to dispose of the ball legally. If he is not able to dispose of the ball legally, he has been caught holding the ball. The exceptions are: If the ball is pinned to the player in the tackle (i.e. player is trying to handball the ball but it is being held to him) If the ball is dislodged in the tackle (i.e. the initial jolt of the tackle results in the ball spilling free) NOT an exception: If the players arm is pinned and he is unable to correctly dispose. If the player throws the ball out or drops the ball while attempting to dispose of the ball. IMO the umpires do not follow this rule correctly, it is not good enough to throw your arms out and drop the footy when you are tackled, that should be a free kick against. And holding onto the footy to avoid giving it up to an opposition player is not a legal tactic either and should also be penalised, you must dispose of it immediately.

with the new rules this year, if moloney is found not guilty because he doesn't make contact to the head, then should the port player not be charged with staging for a free kick?

with watts and sylvia generally playing CHF type roles I thought miller was allowed to stay closer to goal last night. while one of his strengths has obviously been his lead up marking style play, this has also been one of his weaknesses because he hasn't had the quality of disposal to either kick goals or use the ball when that far out. allowing him to play close to goal means he can use his other attributes such as strength in contests etc and reasonably good kicking for goal (over 35m) to his advantage. could he find a position as a full forward rather than a CHF for the next few years?