Mazer Rackham

Our premiership windows is breaking! Or is it ... our premiership cuckoo clock is chiming? Something like that.

Cripes. What penalty will the MFC face for p!ss!ng all over our selves in public in rounds 15 & 16?

Steadiness? That's the very thing he has not exhibited this year. For a player of his experience to have made the blunders he has ... sorry, Nathan, time's up. Oh wait, it's not September 2019? It's 2020? Sorry, Nathan. Time's DEFINITELY up.

Club will keep him. If we dump him, some other club will pick him up as a low risk/high reward "free swing". We'll get to watch him tear it up after we put in the effort of working out his injury problem and solving it. That will be the thinking anyway.

Old saying: you only play as well as you are allowed to

What's happened to our game? This is a shocking spectacle, and the umpiring ... it's in crisis

Freo don't deserve to have us play finals

I'm imagining ... Every week, one team randomly draws the hanging judge ... the hanging judge awards every free against that team At half time, the team in front can replace one umpire of their choice with another umpire of their choice Viewer poll ... vote for the next free kick and what it is Each captain has a free free kick they can call at any time of the match, anywhere on the field. Umps in WCE home games and all Hawks games can mark the ball, handpass it, kick for goal as if they were players for that team (not too different from now, but here it's out in the open)

We're pinning our hopes on this low-skilled pack of try-hards to get us into the finals??? (Answer: yes! Heave ho Freo!)

Save money, AFL, and abolish umpires. The game couldn't possibly suffer from it

One week after we learned Danny Frawley had brain damage. Hilarious!

The very week after we learned Danny Frawley had brain damage. Hilarious.

This "little person" mindset just proves that Worsfold never was a true Essendon man

So it's either careless or negligent. "Accidental" doesn't enter into it.

So what is it about a sling tackle that makes it problematic? Is is because of the potential to cause head injuries? Why then would this tackle be different? Neale is trying to slam the guy into the ground as hard as he can. Either the head is sacrosanct or it isn't.

Christian: "Okay, next one ... nothing's happening! It's frozen again! Oh. Press play, that's right. I always forget. Who's this ... Brisbane versus ... looks a bit like Sydney? I'll look it up later ... oooh. Ooooh. That looks bad. That's weeks. Who's that number 9? ... 7 Jarrod Berry ... 8 Ely Smith ... 9 Lachie Neale ...... Lachie Neale? Brownlow favourite? Better look at that again. Oh no ... the bloke's not hospitalised. It can't be too bad. You can't put a star out of the game just because he deserves a suspension. Okay, next one...."

They paid quite a few marks, some for shots on goal, that went about 6 metres

It's okay, the umps often don't know who they're awarding the free kick to, so all good.

Rough way to refer to our midfield boys

The times they choose not to enforce it ... "oh well, 5 metres is close enough to 2 metres" ... versus the times they do ... "that guy is only 9.5 metres away even though he clearly has no intention of assaulting the player with the ball" The rule as it stands is a joke, as is the deliberate out of bounds (again open season for poorly disguised wayward handpasses). Meanwhile, throwing, dropping it, going to ground when tackled to force a ballup ... carry on, lads.

It's an AFL classic. Player with the ball is interfered with by oppo player lurking nearby (I think it was Hawks who specialised in this) ... introduce "protected area" rule ... introduce annual revisions fixing up loopholes ... now the rule is so technical, and we see so many 50s awarded for players in the "protected zone" who aren't having any influence whatsoever ... They should revisit the purpose of the rule and prevent oppo players interfering with the player with the ball. I recognise that "interfering" is subjective, but I think anyone can watch a game and identify what's fair and what's not, and the rule should have wording based on that.

It's nice to learn who our backline coach is

Just had a squizz at the 2020 rules and could not find any such thing. Nothing whatsoever about "crossing the mark" or anything like it. Closest I could see was this: 20.1.2 Protected Area (b) No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls ‘Play On’ or the Player from the Opposing Team is accompanying or following within two metres of their opponent. Note that it says "no Player", which (apart from the exception regarding following your opponent) means even teammates of the player with the ball. Which is typical of the very sloppy wording of the rules, and if it really does mean "no Player" from either team, then the rule is breached about 1,000 times each match. Nonetheless it doesn't seem to fit the incident last night, which was very strange and would indicate (yet again) that the umps don't officiate to the rule book, but to an imaginary version of the game which exists only in someone's head.

Tiges smashed the Cats, scoring an amazing 7 goals. In some quarters they slammed on 2 goals. What has happened to our game?

Yes, watch out for those Western States guys