titan_uranus

He's pleaded not guilty. Not the strategy I would have taken, but OK.

We're not playing kids because they are the "bright future". We're two wins away from a flag. We're playing them because they're in our best 22 right now.

No they weren't. They won the game but we put them under enough heat to make me think we can beat them if we play them again. But I doubt it matters as I don't see the Dogs beating Brisbane in Brisbane off a six day break, let alone backing up with beating Port in Adelaide when they've had the week off to rest and recover.

Matthew Lloyd had a look at him on the AFL website this morning, suggesting his positioning in some of the one-on-one contests with Cameron was poor. Athleticism is great but he has to know how, and when, to use it.

Andrews was on Brown for most of the first half at least, wasn't he?

I agree with this. I heard Gerard Whateley's opening on his radio show this morning. He said something about how people in the AFL industry/media who had tried defending Greene were wrong to do so, but I didn't hear him name anyone in particular. That might be because most/all of those who have defended him are his colleagues on either Fox or SEN. We have Luke Hodge, who in the post-match interview tried to lead Greene into saying it was an accident. Justin Leppitscsh blamed Stevic for not getting out of Greene's way. Nick Riewoldt (I believe) said he wanted to "fly the flag" for Greene. Kane Cornes says Greene should be fine unless Stevic effectively rats him out, putting the pressure on the umpire (in this case the victim). Matthew Richardson thinks it should be a fine only. There are also current players defending him, including Petracca (I can't read the Herald Sun article but apparently it's here), as well as Pendlebury and Taylor Adams. That's slightly more understandable given what we know about the all-important player's code. Some/all of the above may have said what they said without seeing the side angle camera footage which removes any debate over whether there was contact or not. But having seen the footage which shows obvious contact, if you still think this isn't worthy of a multi-week suspension, you are contributing to a cultural problem within the AFL which will only serve to increase the horrendous standard of AFL umpiring (i.e. if we don't take a strong stance to protect umpires at the elite level, we'll struggle to get better umpires into the system).

Can you see the outright hypocrisy in you lecturing me to not "use words that might suit your narrative in place of what I actually said", whilst simultaneously telling me what you think I said in my post? I might have clumsily worded it using too many negatives (personally I read it back and it's clear to me), but consistently with the rest of my post, what I was trying to say was that I do not believe anyone else on our list could have played on Cameron for as long as Smith did on Saturday night and come away from that game with anything other than significant criticism. Your initial post was to say no one on our list could have curbed Cameron given his speed and agility. Didn't Hibberd have a good game on Cameron in Round 12, where he kicked 2 goals rather than 5? The argument that Cameron would have been too good for anyone, therefore we shouldn't criticise Smith as much or at all, is in my view a cop out.

I don't know about the rest but three of the four Weightman free kicks were completely there. The one that wasn't was the fourth, where he was pushed out of bounds and just fell over, but got a free for a push in the back somehow. Again, there is no rule that says the free kick count has to be even. Essendon were largely crap all day. It isn't necessarily a surprise that if the Dogs were first to the ball and had their head over it more, they'd get more free kicks.

Here's the footage (albeit still not a lot):

The first three were all there. The fourth wasn't, though. Called a push in the back, he was pushed fairly off the ball. The rest of it is Essendon whinging. Take all his goals out and they still lose that game by 5 goals. Weightman's free kicks didn't stop them kicking 0 goals in the second half.

Would much rather play GWS. Just go back and look at the second quarter last week to remind yourself of what could happen if we play Geelong. Yes they looked rubbish vs Port but they lost the QF last year and still made the GF. It won't matter so much if we win and then Port wins: both sides will have had the same breaks.

Example number 897123 that the MRO system and its plethora of fines doesn't work.

My last sentence is a double negative. What I was trying to say is that I think Smith is the only player on our list who could spend the entire game on Cameron, have Cameron kick 5, and then get praised. Anyone else would be lambasted. Arguing no one else could have gone with Cameron is circuitous - you take his form beating Smith and then say "well no one else could go with that". But we don't know what a different/better defender could have done by way of positioning, blocking, etc. I've openly said I've never rated Smith, but my posts about him are to question why there is so much praise after a player conceded 5 goals to his direct opponent and I think it's a cop out to say "oh Cameron's too good".

Actually, if it's considered disrespectful that means under the Tribunal guidelines it is deemed to have been intentional. Aggressive, forceful, demonstrative or disrespectful means intentional. I don't think anyone can be happy if this is 2 weeks, given Viney's was 2 weeks. Viney at 2 means Greene should be 3 at an absolute minimum.

Essendon is one of the weakest finals sides the AFL has ever seen: there's a reason we talk about 12-10 being the mark for finalists, it's not common at all for 11-11 to be enough. It's no surprise they couldn't compete today for more than a half. The Dogs didn't play well but had the easy draw. I can't see them getting near Brisbane next week.

I'll spew if Greene gets anything less than Viney. If Viney wrestling with Collins, albeit admittedly taking it too far, is a worse "look for the game" than a player beelining and shouldering an umpire, the game is [censored].

What I have been thinking about today is not so much our A-graders, who are clearly leading us, but the roles that others have signed up to take, and played so well last night. Players like Viney, Harmes and Brayshaw, who have all over the last three years been pushed out of their preferred inside mid position, been moved around, looked unlikely fits in our best 22 - all of them played their role so well last night. And players like Spargo, ANB, Sparrow, Petty, Brown - none of them have reached the AA heights of our superstars but all keep putting in the right effort week after week.

Textbook definition of a [censored] bloke. Just a disgrace of a human on the field, and with his comments about Sandy Hook, off field too. The sooner he is consigned to the scrap heap of the AFL universe, the better.

Langdon's copped a bit for this. A few St Kilda players have said they're surprised and a number of people on Twitter have posted references to a speech Langdon gave at a Fremantle awards night where he praised Lyon. To the point where Langdon got in touch with Lyon today to apologise. https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2021-ed-langdon-comments-about-ross-lyon-yelling-at-players-next-carlton-coach-former-fremantle-player-melbourne-news/news-story/9d49503c0fcf1fdc2eb15f447a5657c4

This game is probably the least relevant of the four, as I don't see either of these sides beating Brisbane, in Brisbane, on a six-day break. Brisbane only lost at home once this year and that was in March. Having said that, there are great stories either way. Essendon lose and, well, that's the story. Bulldogs lose and you'd be hard pressed to find a side sit in the top 2 for as long as the Dogs did but not even make week 2 of the finals.

This is such a cop-out and IMO serves to show the double-standards on here towards Smith (i.e. he gets treated differently to others). You're talking like Cameron is invincible and tears up everyone he plays. He doesn't, or he'd be kicking 5 goals every week. I doubt there's anyone else on our list who could have spent as much time on Cameron last night as Smith did and come away with anything other than a lambasting.

The ridiculous argument some have offered that Stevic steps out of the way and there's minimal to no contact looks to be blown up by this angle.

Agree entirely. There is a groundswell of support for this in the media. Might end up with two byes through the year, one at around Round 7-8 and one at around 15-16 or something, but they 100% need to get rid of the pre-finals bye. Kane Cornes on radio yesterday morning said that if you have done well enough in the first 21 games to be in a position to rest players in the final game because it won't affect your ladder position, then that's a credit to you. I agree entirely. Have a compromised Round 23 and an uncompromised finals series, not the other way around.

Sydney were I think the next best side after us in terms of W-L record against the top 8, so IMO it's huge that they're out. GWS is in form but Greene said post-match he hasn't felt that cooked before in a while and they'll be on a six-day break into their semi final vs Geelong. I'd expect Geelong to win and be our PF opponent. We shouldn't forget we were 44 points down to them a week ago and they were leading us at the final siren. Tuohy might be back for that game, too.

I believe that in seasons with no pre-finals bye, the winners of the QFs are 28-4 in prelims...