Mazer Rackham

No, we want a system that is not ad hoc and is consistently held to. So (as in the cricket) everyone watching can see what information is available, how good that information is, and what decision is made and why. If it's upheld, or overridden, everyone watching knows why. If the video is not sufficient to reverse a decision, everyone can see why provided the same process is followed every time. There will be some oddball situations cropping up here and there but as long as it is adjudicated consistently, people will wear it. (We're not after perfection after all.) This would work even with the blurry cameras that the AFL are so fond of. At the minute, it's all typical AFL seat of the pants stuff where no one can work out what the hell they're thinking. The only consistent part of the process is the a.r.s.e covering that comes afterwards.

or maybe "match is an artist's impression of a fair and competently administered game"

BANG! Exactly. Gil is more akin to the producers of Masterchef, the Bachelor, A Current Affair. You say to producers of those shows "that's staged" or "this can't be good for the participants' health" or "that's abjectly misleading", and they say "what are you talking about? Look at the ratings!!!!!" Gil has lost control because his understanding of what he is the custodian of is askew. The goal review is a clown show? "Look at the ratings!"

No-one's thought of riding unicycles and spinning plates on long sticks while tackling either.

We're human beings, we understand that we can't have perfection. That is no reason why we can't strive to improve, though. Nor why we should have to accept something sub-standard. We want consistency. Even if it occasionally leads to unexpected outcomes, a transparent system where everyone understands what's going on is what is needed. The current system shambles has enormous room for improvement. You "just" flick them back? With your hand eye co-ordination, you should be playing cricket for Australia. Bradman-esque.

Did he mention booming attendances? He seems to think that's a get out of jail card for all that ails the AFL

The way it works in cricket is pretty good. The captain can call for a review, then there is a set checklist they go through to work out whether to overturn the umpire's decision. And part of that is a procedure for if the video or other evidence is not conclusive. I also note in rugby league there are often questionable tries and they "go upstairs" to see if the ball hit the grass, or if the player lost control of it, etc. (The ref will sometimes send it "upstairs" of his own volition just to be sure.) Multiple angles and usually clean as a whistle. The cameras used by the AFL look like they came out of a "photo journalist Barbie" set bought at a garage sale. But in the AFL, everything is always vague and inconsistent, with poor rationale, behind-covering after the event and later the powers that be come out and say (explicitly or tacitly) nothing to see here.

Incompetent. The AFL is the corrupt entity, for permitting lousy umpiring and farcical goal reviews to go on week after week after week.

Didn't watch the game but yet again, a team with fewer scoring shots got the win by kicking straighter. GWS should have ump-proofed themselves by kicking straight.

King is a former good player, so his opinions on what it's like to play AFL standard football, how to succeed as a player, are unimpeachable. He is a numbers-driven analyst, so his thoughts on what teams are doing right and wrong are worth listening to, although I find him a bit too subservient to the numbers myself. When it comes to the internal politics of what individual clubs are going to do or not going to do, his information is no better than anyone else's and many keen Demon supporters probably know more about our club anyway. Meanwhile SEN have to fill up 24x7 airspace even in a slow news week. Being a former player does not give you special insight into what a club's footy dept is/isn't going to do. Put another way .. opinions are like shoe soles ... everyone's got two. (I think that's how it goes?)

Imagine how good you'll feel when you start drinking it

yes, the escape submarine!

Sounds good on paper, but what about his defensive pressure?

AFL Integrity Unit looking into it:

This whole post reads like something Julian Clary would say.

$36 on 3 bets. It's all so innocent and harmless. That's probably what Hansie Cronje thought at first. Meanwhile there are rumours of bikie gangs showing up to clubs' training because some players owe them money ... (dream sequence begins) It's the year 2021. Stephenson, having never self reported, is now an habitual gambler and bets large amounts. And finds himself in money trouble. He's put a bet on at good odds, that he will not score any goals in the next match againt the Suns. Deep in the 4th, no goals. It's all looking good. Then at the 30 minute mark, with Collingwood down by 3 points, he marks 30 out directly in front. Does he kick the goal? Or ... what if his bet was for to Collingwood to lose? Not too far a leap, if he's accustomed to laying bets, and the Pies were underdogs for that match. Does he kick the goal? "Fixing" a match in advance would be hard in the AFL, but affecting the outcome of a match is not too much of a stretch.

The Integrity Office is like the Homicide Squad or the Vice Squad. They're to ensure there isn't any, or at least to find and punish those who commit the heinous act.

And if Pendlebury or Moore or someone runs in and delivers a no ball then we'll really know something is up!

Not surprising. If they were, then maybe the Pies could be accused of match fixing. That could affect their gaming licence. One of the reasons we were found guilty of not tanking not guilty of tanking was that we could then have our gaming licence taken away, and possibly liquor licence too. AFL is going to do everything to protect its clubs, and itself, from that.

It's a short way off

And then .... they sit down with Collingwood to work out the penalty! AFL ... should be called MIUOTR ... Making It Up On The Run

A better punishment would have been, play up to & including round 23 and THEN you're suspended! But of course that might affect attendances which is the only thing that keeps Gil up at night.

"Son, you've embarrassed yourself, your club, and the league, and worst of all, you've put the league into match fixing territory. It's as serious as it gets. We need to send a strong message. Really, you should be out for the rest of this year. But gee ... that'd be a bit rough! Oh, go on .... play your finals! (ruffles hair) Ha ha, fine boy, that."

If the AFL want to stamp this out, they should have ruled out finals too. but Mr Man of Steel McLachlan sends out another message signalling prevarication and lenience.

"self reported" = "the club found out the story was coming and after sh*tting themselves, ordered Stephenson to self-report to try to get out in front of the story"