deanox

I suspect that they have tried to manage this quite as best they can with loading contracts etc. Levers extension I think was reported as a reduction in salary, Petraccas was likely front loaded. Oliver's extension was 2 years only lining him up for his turn for monster contract when ready. The risk is if LJ has come on quicker than expected and we don't have the cap space early enough. But I'm guessing we expected him to be target of a go home raid by WCE looking to replace NicNat, so probably planned for it already.

It wasn't Oliver's best game but he was consistent. 28 disposals (14 contested), 5 clearances, 8 score involvements, 7 tackles. I'd have Fritsch and Salem clearly higher than him in ranking Melbourne players, but after that it is a bit of a raffle. The 2 goals Petracca kicked may get him the nod. Others like Langdon and Rivers are in the mix too, but you could see the justification for Oliver is he gets 1 or 2 votes from the coaches. Had he kicked the two goals he missed, he would have been up there no doubt. It's the one little knock on him, and if he sorts that, look out.

There were only 16 teams though, so you got return matches against 7 sides: more chances to win the clean sweep. No one has done it in the 18 team era.

I realised this morning that only 5 of our team on Saturday were 26 or older (Hibberd, Melk, Gawn, Brown, Salem). Yes, another 5 in our nominal best 22 are over 26 and didn't play (May, TMac, Tomlinson, Viney, Hunt) but we covered them pretty well. In the next 4 years, Gawn, Brown, TMac and May are the only "retirees" we really need to worry about replacing and with Petty and Jackson we've got a good start on two of those positions. I can see that key forward for 2023 onwards would be the thing keeping our list managers up at night.

Hey! Where'd you get that photo of me?

In the 18 the comp, no one has ever beaten all 17 other teams in the one season. Not sure how many have beaten 16.

I like Sparrow, seems like an honest battler with no major weaknesses, developing nicely. But I have no idea what his strengths are. He doesn't seem to have stand out attributes, rather be a generally good foot solider. Maybe that's what he'll be: a reliable contributor over the journey who never truly owns his position, but does enough to hold his spot on the list as he makes his way to 150 games?

Is his disposal poor or has his execution been poor? I've seen him slot a goal or two and done it well.

My thinking: Baker and Hore probably unlikely to get a nod for next year, with Jetta, Jones and VDB probable retirees. Means Weid, Hibberd, and Lockhart probably get extensions. Would leave Lockhart, Hibberd, and Melksham in the gun for 2022. Most of this squad can stay together until 2024 without any key retirement risks, which is great.

It's sad because I think Tassie deserves better, and I think that the AFL place commercial benefits for the top couple of people (players, administrators) above their role as custodians of the game, and above looking after all the other people who make it happen (support staff who work really hard and get paid rubbish and less than market rate, as well as fringe players and 2nd tier comps.

No, I expect you are right on saying that a Tassie team would get more members and more active support than GC, but that isn't what the big commercial battle is about. GC might lose money in its own operations, but it has the potential to create more money than Tassie as part of the bigger picture. For example, the gate takings are worth nothing compared to tv rights. Queensland is a bigger tv market than Tassie, so having a GC team is probably worth more in the tv rights deal. Having two local clubs live on tv on Queensland each week also saturates that market and creates a tv product worth selling. Because Tassie is already "football heartland" they already have maximum eyeballs on tv. Putting a team in Tassie doesn't widen their market exposure or create more revenue for the broadcasters. But GC might. I also don't think you can underestimate the value the AFL place on blocking out the A-League and NRL. There is a finite pool of broadcast right money to be spent across all codes. Blocking or at least matching expansion of those leagues is a critical strategic action. Allowing tose competitors to get a foothold and grow now may mean their long term revenue may grow, making them hard to fight in decades time. Pyrrric victory perhaps, but victory all the same.

I'm not sure, I'd rather Port in Adelaide than coping Geelong at KP (regional crowds in Victoria) for week 1. I don't really rate Port (I think they are the weakest of the top 4 sides) and we have a good record at Adelaide Oval.

We've had a good run, but strange stat calculation. https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2021.html#12

That's counter intuitive deev. The areas that already support it already support it. They put their money in, they watch the games on TV, they play the game on Saturday. There is no return on investment in putting a team in Tas. But teams in growth areas have massive potential pay offs. Double TV exposure in NSW and Brisbane is worth big money. Capturing the hearts and minds of the western Sydney migrant population could add millions of fans in a few decades. Im not saying I agree with the approach, I'm saying it makes economic sense.

If you see me abusing umpires, please call me out. Tag me directly. If you see me doing anything that doesn't meet the standards, call me out. I'll reflect and try to do better. I'm not claiming I'm not racist or that I don't have conditioned biases; I know I do. But I don't need to be perfect to call other people out for their behaviour, I just need to accept that I too will be called out when I miss the mark. In fact, not walking by something unacceptable is part of improving myself. But bringing this up in this thread puts you on the side of the racist trolls, because you are derailing and diluting the message. Do better.

Nah not at all, Tassie is shored up. GC and GWS were/are contested regions (vs Rugby and Soccer), they needed a marketable presence as part of a 20-40 year battle. Even if GC never succeeds in itself, it has succeeded by stopping soccer from taking a foothold. The A-League launched a GC team in 2009, which subsequently failed: did the Sun's starve it of media and oxygen? Possibly contributed. The GC Yitans were launched in 2007 in the NRL. The AFL needed to be there. GWS had to come up in Australia's fastest growing population corridor. A Leagues Western Sydney Warriors were formed about the same time, so AFL needed to go head to head. NRLs West Tigers were there first in around 2000. In addition, theoretically these teams give "double" the local interest for media in these towns. A live local game every weekend. 2 games to broadcast in live on tv. 2 games to report on. To hold their slice of the media bubble, these 2nd teams were needed.

Seriously you are turning an anti racism thread into "but you don't like umpires discussion"?Y ou have demonstrated which side of the fence you are on, and unfortunately it's the wrong one. For the record I have no problem with any individual umpires. I recognise that they do their best despite the standard being relatively low. When I comment on umpiring, I attack the decision, but I don't attack the individual. They are workers doing the job under instructions of their employer, and it is the AFLs directions I have a problem with.

Macca surely you can see how takimg up space in this thread to discuss vilifying an umpire detracts from the issue at hand? I attached the clubs statement earlier. It doesn't ask us to "compare racism to other discrimination and assess which is worse". It doesn't ask us to debate whether what was said was really that bad (like posters who focussed on knowing the particular words tried to do). It certainly doesn't ask "why should First Nations people get special awards, isn't that racism itself?" (which one poster did). It asks us to play a proactive role in stamping out racism, to call out racism where we see it. If you are well intentioned, don't bring the topic down to this level. There are posters here who are pushing racist talking points, trying to sabotage the conversation. Tackle that issue, that's what it's about this week. Leave the treatment of umpires for another time.

Has never looked like making it for mine, and has been 6-7 years on the list for 18 games isn't a great outcome. Best of luck of he plays, but I'm not convinced he is the best reserve option.

Hawthorn moving to Tassie would be a dream come true.

Then every team can play every other team once, bringing balance to the league. Oh wait, no we'll still get 2 extra interstate trips and never play WCE or Geelong in Melbourne.

Anything is better than the Jack Jumpers.

This is an excerpt from the club statement this week. The majority of posters here are trying to live this. A small minority of you are choosing to attack, argue, defend against, "devil's advocate" or some other obfuscation tactic to prevent this happening. The club is calling you out on your behaviour and saying you are an anachronism.

With Dean Margetts retiring at least obvious crimes on the football field will reduce over there.

I agree that it should get done, but the current mob in charge won't do it unless there is competition down there. If the A League or NRL think about expanding down there, the AFL will swoop in. But currently they don't have any alternative so football in still no. 1. I would have thought that Covid was the perfect time to relocate a team. If the State Government is willing to chip in a higher than usual proportion of money, covid is easy cover for claiming "there isn't enough money to support 10 teams in Vic any more". I just don't know if Gil is up for that culture war.