In Harmes Way

Calling @no plan b it seems you’re wrong. It’s Mitch Brown

Where the hell is @Wiseblood??? He's been the voice of reason and positivity around here for years when you'd have to grasp at straws -> should be at the front of the queue in enjoying all this.....

I'd send them a nice blue cheese next to one with a red rind.

If you look at Richo's summary of the two's on the MFC website, Sparrow was nominated BOG and Harmes first game back from an injury and not too bad.....therefore it's Sparrow in front of Harmes for Baker. I reckon they'll go Petty for Tomlinson, Sparrow for Baker. Jones got a game last week so he's back to the medical sub.

Nobody has raised the obvious outcome from this decision being that Frittata is still eligible for the Brownlow!

Let’s have a poll!

7 news reporting a 7 year deal guesstimating at $900K per year is expected “imminently” Mind you, it is Tom Browne

Poor Weid must be gutted

7 news reporting an agreement is expected imminently, thought to be 7 years at $900K per season

In the AFL's official Tribunal handbook for 2021 they have a series of examples of every offence and grading: https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2021/03/22/221593f5-9b5b-46c7-b038-b032283fcd41/2021-AFL-Tribunal-Guidelines.pdf The best two examples under Striking on page 14 that can be referenced in Fritta’s defence: Example 5: Josh Caddy on David McKay R2, 2018 (Careless, medium impact, high contact) Mackay was assessed for concussion and failed that test, so therefore worse than Powell who wasn’t even assessed for concussion. Example 11: Swallow on Westoff R1, 2020 (Intentional, Low impact, High contact) https://www.afl.com.au/news/389979/suns-skipper-cops-ban-four-players-hit-with-fines Intentional action and only graded Low Impact. Similar incident (in reverse) but worse than Fritta’s. Swallow didn’t have ball, went past ball and collected Westhoff with similar action to Fritta (albeit Fritta has added difference of player coming at him low). Could be referenced as Westhoff played out the game unhindered. Season was then suspended, so can’t look at whether he got up for R2. Given the action is deemed careless rather than intentional, I think it would be in line with past rulings that the potential for further injury is not assessed and should be deemed Low Impact per the two applicable examples here.

I’m happy the club is taking this further. Given I presume the basis of the appeal is medium vs low impact, then I think the Cunnington vs Adelaide appeal should also be referenced where it was regraded to low. It’s probably a better example than the Dangerfield case as it’s this year.

At least everyone's agreeing he should be compared to some of the greats of our game. Kid's a gun. Congrats on the (second) nomination Luke!

I guess it's the hope that returning to 100% capacity will also mean not having to book your seats through Ticketek.

The MFCSS is strong this week. I'm hoping for a game like 2010 where we played out of our skins, but fear we'll have a game like 2018 where we were shooting for finals and tripped over.

Below is the footage of the Dangerfield contact with vlaustin in the grand final last year for comparison MRO finding that the contact was "inadvertent" - Christian quoted "The ball is loose. Vlastuin and Dangerfield approach the ball from opposing directions. Dangerfield punches the ball and in the process makes high contact to Vlastuin. It was the view of the MRO that Dangerfield’s actions were not unreasonable in the circumstances. No further action was taken."

Maybe he meant we were off by 98% and there was only 2% to write home about?

Unfortunately I reckon there’s 16 teams that saw we didnt belt the bottom team off the park (far from it) and will believe we’re gettable. I can’t see too many easy games in the near future on this basis. At least we are a strong finishing team. Our 4th quarters have been terrific.

Has to be low impact and a fine at worst, but what would I know. Powell played out the game without even the need for a concussion test. Its a bit of a farce frankly that the AFL have four levels of grading for impact without definition of what these are.

How does that differ to Tom Hawkins collecting Maysie?

And my son didn't give me nearly enough praise for this pearler from me when the commentator said "Kossie is playing his own brand of football out there today" I turned to him and said "he's playing Kossie Rules Football" I'm still pretty proud of myself for that one....

You can all thank me for the result. I was out for the first half and turned on the tv a couple of minutes into the third qtr. I thought we looked pretty good (from that point obviously) in an ugly game. Umpiring was awful. Seemed like every time the ball stopped there had to be a free kick. And some of those "not 15" decisions were just bizarre. Absolutely gutted for Tomlinson.

Reviewing the OP, I'm not sure why the WA Premier is interested in the comparison between Rance and Lever. \ Unless he's trying to poach him for one of the WA teams...

As annoying as BT can often be, he absolutely nails this commentary.

How much mileage would we get out of a thread where we re-post our historical (extremely) wide of the mark opinions on players? There's a couple of crackers here.

I only got to watch the first half after basketball training last night, but loved Bradtke's centre bounce (double) tap in the ruck to Tom Sparrow who put the ball down Weid's throat in the first for a goal (nice flat kick to Sam's advantage out of the guts). Great ruckwork craft from Bradtke, first I've really seen of him in anger and liked it. Rosman's left foot snap across his body in the 2nd was also really classy. I liked how he's coming along as well. I reckon Casey listed Ryan Sparkes has got a bit to offer too. As with most of the boys, backed up a good performance last week with another strong showing. Sad to see how far Dom Tyson has fallen. I loved him in his early days with us.