Mazer Rackham

What's the point of his one supposed strength (elite running) if it brings no actual advantage? Eg, late in a game where he can outrun his exhausted opponents? But wait ... there he was in the dying seconds on his own streaming into an open goal. At last the benefits materialise. He may be NQR, but his version of NQR is still pretty good. Go ANB. Go Demons.

It was about this time last year, when we beat WCE, that the press had us with one hand on the cup already. Turns out that doesn't actually count for anything. I don't get how one 5 goal lead blown, followed by one salvaged, somehow improves our credentials with the press? Unless they have the memory of a goldfish? Suggestion: ignore the press. They don't know any more than any knowledgeable fan. Only one thing matters. Wins, more wins, and more wins.

It depends on whether it's Selwood, Dangerfield, or Martin doing it, or if it's at an Adelaide or WCE home game (although ... the ump would never permit a free against so close to goal at the death).

It really is unbelievable, or it would be if we didn't see similar outrages every match, every week The umpiring is in crisis and the AFL's answer is to paint more lines on the ground

Some strange and absurd situations in sport that we'll never see. In tennis, one end of the court is doused in water for one game then dried off again In soccer, one goal area is doubled in size for 5 minutes In snooker, an extra pocket appears right in the centre of the table in the middle of a break In basketball, the ring is lower at one end of the court for the final 2 minutes In AFL Aussie rules, the games are refereed by AFL trained umpires

They're working to a poorly written set of rules, have been overseen for years by people who don't actually know the rules themselves, are compromised by imperatives from "on high" to make the game "entertaining", have a suspect training regime, and are permitted conflicts of interest. All overlaid by the bizarre existence of ever-changing "interpretations" of the rules. Is it any wonder that refereeing of games appears mostly random, seasoned with a healthy dose of home town decisions?

Why don't the coaches just get it over with and remove all players and play the game as computerised fantasy football. No bad bounces, no flaky umpiring, no injuries or other real world inconveniences. Just pure football strategy and without user interaction the computer can play the entire match in a split second. Leaving only the press conference at the end.

Channel 7 obviously believe that Roaming F***wit *IS* the entertainment. They've made a call that only losers and sad basement dwellers would enjoy genuine access to players, and that Roaming F***wit is required to jazz it up and make it watchable. Doesn't help that RF drinks his own bathwater. He's about as funny as Ricky Nixon giving a statement to the vice squad. Entertainment factor of AFL is plummeting and Channel 7 are contributing to the problem.

Well I hate to burst everyone's bubble but Gil was on SEN this morning talking to Twately, and it turns out that everything's alright with the game, and there are no problems with anything. He batted away everything dear Gerry threw at him. What a relief. So ... nominated ruckmen. Everyone knows the obvious answer except for the AFL. Protected zone. They've [censored] it up completely with a poorly written rule and poor and inconsistent adjudication. Make it that the bloke with the ball, and the bloke on the mark, cannot be interfered with. That was always the intent anyway. 6/6/6 will only ensure that the huge packs can't form for another 5 to 10 seconds. Whoopdy doo. Another brilliant non-solution brought to you by Your AFL. 18m goal square. They cannot be serious. What next, sand traps like in golf? What f*ckin problem does this address? Stupid rule as a non-fix, creating extra decision making for umps, meaning more bad decisions. An AFL speciality, which means it's a given for next year. Rule changes in season, the only comp of any sport in the world that could consider this is the AFL. What contempt they hold us in. They're telling clubs like Bris, GC, Dogs, etc: "your games don't matter. Who gives a [censored] if you lose one because of our screwing with the rules. Apart from your fans, your sponsors, your recruiters, players who might want to transfer to you, etc. No one important." Meanwhile the one glaring rule creating most of the problems, is the interchange. Conspicuously ignored by the brains trust which somehow includes coaches, those well known custodians of the game, and no fans. Get rid of interchange! No more f*cking with the heart of the game. AFL have lost the plot.

Thanks DD. That's good news.

It would seem to be a fundamental skill of the game, and one that if mastered, gives a big advantage over opponents. I have heard (don't know how true it is) that senior coaches tell their players DO NOT kick with your non-preferred. Play the percentages instead. A mediocre kick on your "right" foot is likely to be as good as or better than a good one on your "wrong" foot. That would filter to junior ranks in a jiffy. "To prepare you better for AFL level, you are now banned from kicking on your non-preferred." It would explain why we see so many awkward kicks under pressure. Not a good look. Another area where coaches are harming the game. Not sure what can be done about it though.

Remember when he was gone He copped knocks on the scone Shine on, that Brayshaw guy can Now there's a look in his eye He's set to crucify Shine on, that Brayshaw guy can He was caught in the crossfire Of beltings and king hits Barely remembered his name Come on you talent, you dual-sided star Come on you magnet, you legend You Demon, and shine (segue to screaming guitar solo interrupted halfway by cheesy MFC theme song)

On the days when he's Napoleon Bonaparte, ask him for tips on how to tighten up our defence.

With a solid preseason she should be right next year

The picture manages to capture the bleakness and awfulness of the place

Multiple times Dogs ran too far with it, invaded the "protected" zone, threw it like it was water polo, and Hogan and McDonald T were not playing on footballers, they were playing on Greco-Roman wrestlers. Business as usual for the umps.

The hell? Did I just see Chamberpot low-five Brayshaw? The guy's lost the plot. He doesn't know what he's supposed to be doing out there.

Wow. Umps have finally noticed that Jesse has a neck and on or the two guys permanently glued to him usually have one arm around it. It's taken thme weeks, but credit where credit is due ...... go you umps!!!

He'd like to. He's been monstered for a month or more, no protection. (Compare with that "free" that Oscar just "gave away".) If Ben Brown got the same treatment, Brad Scoot would be arguing in front of The Hague

Inner calm must win Victory and loss are one Viney's f***in' foot Struggle builds the mind Selection is delusion Tyson will be Blue

SOS offered you a contract yet?

Two wins in 25 games ... more than a season's worth. Over 2 years since they've cracked 100 points. Some junior talents going backwards, others getting bashed and worn out. It's out-Neelding Neeld. But they think they're on the right track.

Derek "Iraqi Information Minister" Humphrey-Smith has never seen an umpiring decision that can't be defended. Somehow they are all correct. No wonder he thinks 4 umps is a good thing. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

It's very simple. Someone in a position of influence at Channel 7 is a Blues supporter. Has been sh!tting himself watching his club play out a slow motion extinction ... thinks SURELY this is the year they put it together ... gotta do it for the boys. Get them on Fridee nights ... they need all the help they can get ... gotta do it for the team. Screw the AFL and their "earning it" bullsh!t. This is CARLTON we're talking about!

"Unduly" appears in the laws twice. Once for the ruck rule and once in a similar context for when marking the ball. The word "unduly" is not defined. ("Part B" of the laws is for definitions.) There are other words used in the laws which are also not defined. Eg "encroaching" in the "protected zone" law. How do you know if a player has "encroached"? Laws don't say. Leads to "interpretation" and we know how that ends. Poorly written laws of the game lead to f***ups. An area where the AFL are experts.