Mazer Rackham

Umpiring today was unbelievably bad. Most of the frees they paid were there ...... but for each one they paid there were another 5 the same that were not paid. 50 meters. Kicks not going 15. Running through the "protected area". Holding off the ball. Plus the old favourite: dropping the ball. Lions last 2 goals before half time were from "marks" that might have gone 10m on a fisherman's tape measure.

The one where the Rothschild family run the secret world government.

OK, but don't buy in to the idea that there is a rule that was violated. There isn't. This "straight arm" garbage is an invention of the umpires that exists nowhere but in their heads. It's one thing for fans to buy in to that, as media & Hayden "bless his cotton socks" Kennedy are talking about this "rule" as if it's a real thing. It's another for the media to buy in as they generally have not much clue about anything and can't be expected to lift what little game they have. But for Kennedy to buy in? He's the chief umpire for gods sake!

Cricket. Yes, Harry wanted to bring this impenetrable game of elites to "the people". Somehow ignoring that not only toffs, but also bogans, and everyone in between, played it in droves every weekend. Problem was, Harry and his crew didn't know much about it themselves. I think Bill Jacobs had a fair cricket brain but the rest of them were of the "ooh, he's had a big hit at it" ilk. It was like listening to when your uncle who watches one ODI every three years sits down in front of the TV. "Now why didn't that bloke run then? There must have been a run in that!" "He dropped it! Did you see that! How can he drop that catch!?" "Why doesn't he just bowl at the stumps and get him out?"

Harry used to get horribly frustrated by "tiggy touchwood" free kicks. So much that sometimes he could barely speak as he raged over these .... these .... tiggy touchwood frees! No one ever knew exactly what he meant as he never went into any detail but it was assumed he meant the soft frees that were "technically" there but which fans often don't want paid (especially against their side). He wanted 20 frees paid a game. Circumstances be damned. And this was when he was the umpires' boss! The first advocate of not umpiring according to the rules. Maybe that's when the rot started to creep in.

Let's cross to Tommy down in the rooms. Are you there Tommy? I'm ere Arry. Can you hear me? Tommy, have you got Phil Carman there? I don't fink so Arry. I can't see anyfink because it's dark in ere Arry. I fink I've locked meself in the broom cupboard Arry.

Here is the problem in a nutshell. Read the rules. They are so badly worded that "interpretations" are required to fill in the gaps. Not just the media, even the umpires department (!) have bought into the idea that there are "interpretations" and even that the "interpretations" can change over time. It doesn't seem to occur to them that "interpretations" of rules are a bad thing (leading to all the things being complained about in this thread) and highlight the slackness and carelessness of the AFL in this area. (Example: they are quick to bring in "blurcam" on the goalposts when there's a bad goal ump call and someone cries out that "this could cost someone a premiership!!!" But turn a blind eye to the larger and more endemic problem that may have already cost several flags over the journey, most recent example: last year.) How about .... blueskying here ... rewrite the rules so they are clear and unambiguous? I realise that's not 100% possible but hey AFL .... give it a try? Maybe improve on the permanent shambles that you currently have, and which is getting worse? There are rules that "everyone knows" but are not actually in the rule book. There are rules in the rule book that get ignored. The "guidelines" on how rules will be "interpreted" that the AFL put out before each season has a useful lifetime that doesn't stretch much past the pre season comp. Not to mention the "rule of the week", "rule of the quarter", or even "rule of umpire no. XYZ". The AFL see all this and happily buy into it. Their lack of action shows that they don't have a problem with any of it. For all their big noting, they are a joke. If not for the MFC and countless hours of hope and dreams foolishly invested in them over many years, I would have given up on AFL altogether.

"Never attribute to malice that which can also be explained by incompetence" -- Winston Churchill, Benjamin Disraeli, and Mark Twain (in committee)

Hird's "good bloke" genes must be something powerful to overcome landing the AFL in its biggest scandal in its history. game in disrepute bees d*ck from an entire team being suspended swathe of sackings and resignations fines galore possibility of future health issues ... stacked up against: good bloke

Just like the AFL exec. Going hard on the easy targets and looking the other way the rest of the time. Could be an admin role in Jobby's future! AFL football ops manager, after an apprenticeship as personal barista to Gil.

Wow, the drugs must have finally worn off.

They tried to cheat their way to a flag, but it is for the above reason that they deserve the eternal condemnation of the footy loving public.

Dank is the guy who gave growth stimulants to a rugby player who had had cancer, who later died of that cancer. If there's one thing cancer cells love, it's a growth stimulant. Dank also sued reporters who said he gave warfarin (a blood thinner) to Cronulla players. (Do you reckon they get many bruises?) He won the case but was awarded minimal damages because the jury accepted he had done much worse things! Who wants this bloke injecting ANYTHING into them?

They took drugs meant for horses and they took drugs meant for treatment of multiple sclerosis. Very very fortunate to only go down for TB4. Dank was reckless beyond belief and EFC and AFL have just stood back and let him get away with it.

If he took it further EFC might have to prove that their drug regime DIDN'T cause the kid's condition. Difficult proposition. Presumably they would then have to cough up a list of drugs that they gave. Can't see how it would be a criminal proceeding, I think reasonable doubt applies only to criminal. NLM not checking with/lying to ASADA is a sporting tribunal matter and the supreme court wouldn't care. They'd probably be more interested in whether NLM gave his consent.

I think this is covered under the "so brave" clause in the secret agreement between the AFL & EFC. (Probably Masonic.)

Still "celebrating" yesterday's win?

The Fitzroy (Brisbane Lions) team of the century poster is a beauty, set against the backdrop of the old Brunswick Oval grandstand, with Butch, Murray, Bunton, Quinlan, some bloke called Roos.

Dom seems to be a slow starter after injury/interrupted preseason. Takes him some weeks to ramp up to his best. But when he's there, he stays there. Keep playing him.

I'm happy to keep talking up the EFC/AFL failings until the cows come home. Never forget!

Look at it this way. Why did the Bombers lash out at the AFL, ASADA, WADA, etc, etc, sack their CEO, sack their football boss, sack their high performance manager, wage a PR war through the media, try to get the Feds to kill off the investigation .... But the bloke who did the injecting has been treated with kid gloves. It's like they don't want to provoke him. Why?

Hear hear. They tried to dope their way to a flag. Not a few rogue players trying to get an edge. The club. Nearly the whole team, with the connivance of the coaches and administrators, were on a cocktail of performance enhancers. When the AFL found out, they tried to cover it up. They weren't interested in the corruption of their comp, until it became public knowledge. Only then did they haul arse to "get to the bottom of it" while at the same time trying to minimise the punishment. We won't hear the whole story until a jacked off player spills his guts, some 10 or more likely 20 years in the future when it's ground away at him to the point where it's too much to bear any longer. TL;DR: the club doped up big time and the AFL tried to get them off. Never forget.

Classic logic error. "If the police had been on the ball they would have put in place better security and I wouldn't have been able to rob that bank."

God. it must burn Hird up. Knowing that they'll all be in a very good place when the truth comes out. I suppose it's the AFL, Demetriou, McLachlan, ASADA, WADA, CAS, Fed police, ALP, Worksafe, and the boy scouts all colluding to prevent it. Can't be any other explanation.

Double negative. "Thompson never understood why Essendon self-reported on that fateful February day in 2013 because the key figures in the football department were adamant no prohibited substances were given to their players." Fixed.