waynewussell

Now, with the stand rule, the game IS unwatchable!

furthermore to my furthermore... before the Stand rule... back in time, there was no necessity for the opposition team to man the mark. If the opposition players in the vicinity ran on in the direction that the kicker was going to kick, there was no penalty. It would be considered poor play because it would allow the player with the ball to run further forward to advantage. The coach would quite likely drag the player who didn't man the mark to prevent this play-on, however, there was nothing in the rules to prevent the opposition team from leaving the mark, as long as the defending players didn't run over the mark! Now we have a 50 metre penalty for almost any movement, in any shape or form, by the opposition player(s). This is more like the playground 'freeze' games we used to play at primary school. This is not sensible, mature rule changing to better the game!

Furthermore, the umpire would most often indicate to the kicker and the man on the mark where the mark was by standing close to the spot and pointing. How often do you see that happen now? The umpire would also indicate the 'line' for kicking over the mark (remember that notion?) and if the kicker deviated, the umpire would immediately call "play on"!

The task for 'the man on the mark' used to be to put pressure on the kicker without moving forward over the mark. This could mean standing, waving arms, jumping up or moving sideways if the kicker attempted to move off his line. If the umpire called "play on", the man on the mark could move toward the kicker in whatever direction to apply more pressure or to tackle. This ruling was accepted and applied throughout many decades, possibly a century, before it was deemed too restrictive on the kicker! If you research and watch the games that are held up as classic examples of Australian Rules (eg the 1989 GF), you will notice that the old rule was applied successfully throughout. The umpire could pay a 15 metre penalty if the man on the mark encroached. Supporters, umpires and players throughout the capital cities and the whole country knew how the rule worked. If it ain't broke...

Have to vent! The "stand" rule is an embarrassment to the code. The perpe-traitors should be run out of town! The 'nominate your ruck' rule is a primary school fix to a non-existent problem! The 'last touch-insufficient intent-raffle it' rule is unnecessary. The worship of the high scoring game is only valid if both teams score highly. Both teams scoring lowly can also provide an intense and engaging battle, enhanced by the fact that the team that is losing is only a goal or two away from winning - duh! A majority of the recent rule changes have not had the desired effect and have led to this crazy need for rule changes to fix the rule changes. Greg Swann had an opportunity to clean up the mess by winding back the obvious mess-ups! He failed!

6 Hore 5 McNamara 4 Gillard 3 Mackin 2 Chaplin 1 Pearce

Umpires refuse to pay incorrect disposal… it ruins the game!

6 McNamara 5 Hore 4 Hanks 3 Fitzimmons 2 Heath 1 Zanka

AMW, if he returns to full fitness, is an excellent option for BP. He is strong in 1 on 1's, has burst speed and loves a dash.

Jack Steele has averaged 23 disposals, 7 tackles, 10 contested possessions and 41/2 tackles throughout his 11 seasons thus far, with 88 career Brownlow votes and a third place in 2020. He has 2 B&F's - 2020 & 2021. In those same years he was AA. He has been St Kilda's captain since 2021.

I've accepted that it is in everyone's best interests to allow Clayton to move on, however, I can't accept any re-writing of history over this; 2025 was not a "very poor" year for him. The upward curve for Clayton in 2025 was there for everyone to see. In the final month he was hunting the ball and successfully feeding it out at levels that rivalled his best years. The challenge for him revolves around how he presents for pre-season 2026. If he presents as fit as a fiddle, I would say he has come full circle. If he has allowed himself to become lazy and careless again, the writing will be on the wall.

You're on fire, Bluey!

This!

Is it time to consider what 7 & 8 will get us in a trade for another player / with another club?

We shall have our revenge!

Clayton simply requested Cleary consider other options that may be available to him!

In the final games of the season Ollie was very close to peak fitness and his form showed it. Go back and look at the final game.

If we can believe TM, several clubs will be coming for Clayton because we are prepared to pay a large portion of his wage for the next x years. At least a few may have something juicy to offer in return

I never mentioned Oliver. I don't jump at the shadows thrown up by others unless the shadows become substantiated matter.

... dodged a bullet there!

I didn't say we were in trouble with our salary cap, I was pointing out that we may not have had the coin to attract the big names because of who we were still paying big sums to in recent years.

Did it ever occur to you that this might have more to do with our salary cap?

I thank CP (no longer 5) for his contribution (after missing his first year through mishap) to our climb to a Premiership. Then I leap forward to 2025 and I would like to point out that he was infuriating! In most games there were patches where he fumbled his initial ball contact, which led to a cough-up or a poor disposal (by hand and foot). I acknowledge that he continued to have many excellent possessions, clearances and score involvements as well. Overall, I feel his 'runner-up in the Bluey' achievement was a result of some kindness by the coaching panel, which turns out to be opportune when considering his trade worth. He has been an A-grader, and I respect him for that, however, I expect his deficiencies to carry over to his new environment. I look forward to our replacement; he may turn out to be strong in the areas that CP sometimes struggled with.

..."there was no contact from the club" You will have to do your own reading on this site, I'm not going to hold your hand on this one! Hint: in his own words on camera

Some of your ‘facts’ are closer to unsubstantiated tripe than accurate accounts. These mythical ‘facts’ were successfully busted this time last year!