Mazer Rackham

Weren't they going to crack down on this? In preseason and community games it was policed and then it wasn't. See it at least once per match now. 49m penalty. 48m if you roll them twice.

Doesn't matter. If team A gets 26 frees and team B gets 22, then team A's differential is +4 and team B's is -4. Add them up and you get 0. What the free kicks were for doesn't come in to it.

These tables are never right. This free kick differential bizzo is a zero sum game, but for the past 3 years, maybe longer, they never add up. Dunno who puts them together but it's sloppy work, so probably someone at the AFL.

So the message has gone out. Staging is worth trying -- you might get away with it. Kicking is okay. One week suspension for these characters nips the problem in the bud. Now there will be more incidents of staging and kicking and the AFL will tie themselves in knots without fixing the problem.

Hawkins should have been reported. Cotchin should have been reported. The umpires have been neutered to the point where they will not lay reports, and why should they when the controlling body undermines them by doublespeaking these incidents away. What a shambolic state for the game when the officials do not enforce the rules of the game. Why have these rules at all? 22.2 REPORTABLE OFFENCES 22.2.2 Specific Offences Any of the following types of conduct is a Reportable Offence: (n) attempting to kick another person; (u) engaging in an act of staging;

As it is they look weak and incompetent. They probably feared they'd get a memo from the AFL management & steering committee (Channel 7) asking them what planet they're on when a star of the game (RATING$) can be penalised.

"All" they need to do? Big word, that "all". When your direct opponent blatantly cheats and is rewarded for it and scores what is potentially the sealer? Not a big ask at all! It's next to nothing! Anyone would swallow it with a rueful smile and admiration for the guy who hoodwinked the umpires right under their very noses. Show me someone who considered Waverley a favourite and I'll show you someone whose brain was addled from frostbite.

Let the AFL web site waffle all they want. Everyone will get to know our entire team in time. The way I got to know everyone in the 2000 premiers' team, and the 2001-2004 teams. And so on. (Against my will!) For years oppo fans only knew of "Bruce" and "Green" as MFC players, even after those two had retired. It's time for our entire list to permeate their brains, and it will happen, but these things can't be rushed. Meanwhile may the waffle continue!

"As to what that level (of insufficient intent) looks like, that's up to the umpire to decide." "As to what rule X (where X can be any rule) looks like, that's up to the umpire to decide." NO IT ISN'T IT'S IN THE F***-ING RULE BOOK IF YOU CAN'T WORK OUT FROM THE RULE BOOK WHAT IT SHOULD BE, THE RULE IS POORLY FRAMED Now, to contradict myself, the "umpire respect" rule is a typical AFL dog's breakfast. There is NO RULE to allow the ump to award a 50m penalty for abuse or dissent. And many rules are poorly framed, so whatever the ump adjudicates can't be "wrong" Umpiring in crisis.

Translation: "I'm not sure what should and shouldn't be considered dissent, but I'm sure as hell not going to admit that here, and as soon as this conference is over, I'll be running off to the umps for an emergency meeting."

Did you see Frost? He was fair dinkum ready to burst.

We've even destroyed the stats insider web site? Maybe we have unleashed something more terrible than we could possibly have imagined.

Are we the New York Yankees yet?

For someone who is held in the esteem that Sheedy is, he sure has done a lot of damage to the game. The travesty of interchange is another of his brainchildren. Imagine umpiring as a vocation where you get paid as you progress through the ranks, have time for study (as I can't see it necessarily being a "full time" gig), and get a super/retirement fund when you exit the game. Their track record is not so good, so why do they keep doing it? They are the worst people to be deciding what the "improvements" to the rules should be. Third man up, "insufficient intent" ... areas where improvements are obvious to everyone except the AFL.

An ouija board would be more reliable. But wouldn't get past the Channel 7 AFL Oversight & Management Committee. Slows the game down too much. Understandable sentiment. Now that the Cats have been skinned, and we've smoked our post-coital ciggies, we're asking ourselves what the hell we have just done. But look on the bright side. If the Hawks get anywhere near us in finals, we'll murder them.

So here we are, on top of the ladder a game and percentage clear. Only 4 teams have scored more than us, and one of those got to play North and another WCE. Meanwhile MFC and Freo are well clear on the points against. Already.

We understand your anguish but it's in a good cause. The GET [censored] GEELONG cause.

Selwood & Libba. Dive on the ball and throw it out in one motion. Right in front of the umps. Play on. Are they [censored] blind or something? Even when reviewing the game they do not see this?

GET [censored] GEELONG!!!

When a player has one of those sideways kicks for goal, the oppo players are supposed to be 10m away. These umps are letting them charge in from 4 and 5 metres.

But it's a TELEVISION INNOVATION All TELEVISION INNOVATIONS are Good Things and can't be changed back. Another great TELEVISION INNOVATION is the count down clock which adds nothing and only kills tension in a tight match,

Hawkins gave away 50 just hanging around in the protected zone. No worries mate. Can Selwood dispose of the ball legally any more? Last 5 minutes all I've seen are throws, scoops and tunnels.

I have wondered if this sentiment has affected our crowds. Bummers supporters dispirited coming into our game. Same Port. Same GWS (although their 50 supporters wouldn't have made much difference). Yeah, I had a brief look yesterday and this morning and they've lost the plot! Only one or two recognise that their "bad run" with the umps is because they play on the edge, and no longer have the skills to get away with it.

They manifestly don't know what is!

Just goes to show they didn't think it through and maybe hoped one scorched earth community series game would be enough to send the message to the entire comp. But hey presto, players react in different ways to giving away a free. The umps department clearly hadn't gone over past footage to determine what's acceptable and what's not. They're undermining themselves. If they're trying to set an example for lower grades of footy, surely some degree of frustration or disappointment is allowed. As other have said, the player might be disappointed in himself, or worried about what his coach might say. He isn't necessarily disagreeing with the ump or disrespecting the ump. Right concept, terrible execution. The AFL umps department in action.