tiers

No comparison with Bernie's situation. Bernie became a poor contributor, made too many mistakes and generally harmed the team. Nathan Jones is still making good contributions to the team with his hard running and long kicking, especially through the centre. He is rarely beaten and runs to good positions to offer options for the team. Given that he is no longer the core of the so called engine room (thanks to Clarry, Gus, James and Tracca), his output and influence might have been reduced but never his effort and will to win. It is also clear that the FD is still experimenting with his new role. It would be against his natural instinct to be wasted as a tagger as he is still too good a runner and link player. But perhaps, like many champions before him, he will find a role in the forward line.

The razer/Gus low five was an uplifting Footy Moment where our great game displayed its real values. Two participants recognising and acknowledging the lighter side of the game. There should be more.

After Robbie, for pure exposed God given talent (not durability), I say: David Schwarz (for all round skill and the ability to to remake and rebuild his game after injury and be a champion twice) Allen Jackovich and Liam Jurrah (equal as sublime forwards each in his own way) Clayton Oliver (enough said) The rest.

It is not fair to compare anyone with Robbie. He played in a much higher universe to mere mortals. Clarry and Bails will develop their own games that, we hope, will maximise their own unique talents and abilities. It's just that Clarry seems to be in a rush.

I did read in breakdown of free kicks given to all teams ....Melb received the most goals from frees in their forward 50...(courtesy ofHerald Sun) Thanks to Deestar9. We will have to find a new conspiracy theory.

Where we once had the stab pass we now have the Clarry Pass. Low, flat, hard, fast, direct, accurate onto the chest, over long distance and performed at full speed. Others (Salem) can pass the ball perfectly but none with as much authority and class. The kicks to Neal-Bullen, Garlett and Tracca as well to kick his goal were as attractive and effective as those from the past. To go with his ball winning ability, hand passing, tackling, running and field kicking, are there any other so far unrevealed sublime skills to come? What a joy to watch.

6. Gawn - dominant and dominating 5. Oliver - exquisite and unique skills and abilities. Best handballer is also best kick. 4. Brayshaw - never stops moving and attacking 3. OMac - never passed or beaten 2. Gawn - best tapwork for long time 1. Gawn - deserves more than 6

On Wednesday tiers wrote under Umpires Report: If we could only get maximum return from our inside 50s and not squander them as against Geelong, GC, St K, PA and Freo we would not need to add much to our backline and we would have three more wins. Dare to dream. Nice to know the hun reads this site. Acknowledgement would be nice.

If we could only get maximum return from our inside 50s and not squander them as against Geelong, GC, St K, PA and Freo we would not need to add much to our backline and we would have three more wins. Dare to dream.

No need to explain *. It's obvious.

Notice how the outcome of the clarko breakfast cost us a goal against Freo. Hibbert jostling with his opponent for a mark when Fritsch rolls across both and takes the mark. With Fritsch's late arrival, it was clear that Hibbert was not blocking but jostling for position. The umpire, who clearly lacked the feel for the situation and the game, saw it as a block and penalised Hibbert. A block is where a player stands in front of, or shepherds, an opponent to prevent the opponent contesting the mark with a team mate who was in position first and waiting for the mark. How hard is it? Let's build a data base with curiouser and curiouser decisions for the rules committee to respond.

Only Clarrie is in all four categories and except for clearances is very close to top in the others. Considering Cripps has not competition at the lolly blues, Clarrie's efforts are extraordinary. Because most of his work is done in close and consists of both denying possession to the opposition as well as winning possession for the dees, his work is not yet universally understood and admired as his combination of skills and strengths has not been seen before. In time it will be be considered pioneering and elite. C'arn dees and go Clarrie.

Technically and literally correct but one would expect that, if the umpiring is fair to both sides, then the outcomes should be relatively even.

Can someone who reads the Hun please provide an analysis of free kick locations for as many games as possible. How many D50, Mid and F50 game by game over the season and then compare with scores. Do they also break down the source of the goals especially those from frees and/or 50m penalties. So much better than anecdotal evidence.

Should spend more time in cotton wool after games than is an ice bath. Reads the game well and has the ability to win the ball while on the move, push through packs and tackles and kick well on both sides. Complements the skills of Clarrie, Tracca and Viney. What a midfield group!

Fair adjudication does not equate with competence. It just implies an even outcome for both sides.

Even allowing for the conditions, the number of times poor choices, poor positioning and poor planning, that should have been excised from our game, cost us scoring opportunities and allowed Freo to score easy goals was alarming for a top 8 contender. Another missed opportunity - nine goals is nice but it should have been 100 points plus considering we had 78 inside 50s. What a waste. The number of scoring shots does not win games, the number of goals does. There are times I would prefer fewer i50s but better entries to leading forwards or better crumbing from contests. Clarrie as always is a beacon. It's frightening to consider his value when his teammates and the FD figure out how to take full advantage of his skills. Note how the commentators were critical of the number of short hand passes. When the team realises that he can deliver over longer distances and positions themselves to receive, there will be no stopping the dees. He is THAT good.

I have previously suggested that we collate stats and analysis to demonstrate objectively that, in recent years, the umpiring has tended to favour, by a noticeable margin, opposition teams when playing against the dees. I suggest the we should also collate examples of over technical and strict liability technical breeches that have had no impact on a fair contest but that deny the traditions of our great game and improperly affect a contest (eg. hand in the back without a push, jumper pulls when two players are contesting a mark) to present to those that write and interpret the rules. It is also clear that the rules need to be re-written with a focus on safety, promoting a fair contest and enhancing the appeal of our great game. When we were kids we knew only a small number of simple to understand and interpret rules eg push in the back, trip, kicking in danger, round the neck, handball with a closed fist, holding/dropping the ball and bouncing every 10 yards (in those days). All could be written on a single quarto or foolscap page (before A4), folded neatly and carried in a sock. That was enough to umpire a great game of footy. The wordy, confusing, anachronistic, ambiguous and legalistic rules of today are an appalling example of the failure of the administrators, who we entrust with the solemn duty to protect and preserve our great game, to maintain the great game that we have loved all our lives.

Still haven't worked out the difference between sliding into a soccer like tackle to make contact and take out the legs of an opponent and a player laying on the ground or bending over to pick up the ball who is contacted (note: not makes contact with) by an opponent. Two decisions in the last quarter (one each way) were telling. Those who make the rules cannot resist expanding the remit of their new rules. What was a simple protective measure to prevent dangerous play is now expanding to cover issues where there is no danger. Without the last second sliding or diving, the rule should have no application.

Stop the gratuitous insults of umpires. They were already passe when Melbourne won its last premiership. That we suffer so much at their hands is as much a result of the too literal interpretation and application of the ambiguous, unclear, confusing and excessively wordy set of rules as it is of their inability to have a feel for the game and apply their discretion wisely and fairly. Until the afl and the rules committee devise a better set of rules and interpretations it will be a mess. Compile the stats and analysis and shame them into acting for the benefit of our great game.

No. Don't do this anymore. Conspiracy theories play into the hands of Gil and his team as they can be easily deflected. Stats and analysis are better evidence to seek a change in the rules and umpiring. How many frees and 50s were awarded against the dees the past two weeks? How many awarded to the dees? Some of the stats are beyond rational explanation and defy logic. Follow Redleg's lead and build a legal style unimpeachable case. Then seek support from other teams and march on afl house demanding action. The game belongs to US, not them.

The 50m penalty was introduced in the late 80s as a result of Sheedy's "professional frees" tactic of conceding a 15m penalty to waste time and allow his team to "man up". Since then its application has expanded to include far too many circumstances. If there is no deliberate time wasting and/or interference to the player with the free kick or mark, then it should be play on. Its OK to follow an opponent into the so called protected zone, but the strategy of player who deliberately cause an oppo player to be caught by running the inverted "Y" scam by diverging at the last moment to force the following player to peel off to the other side, should be banned. This happened to a dees player last week and cost us a goal. Even worse was the 50 against against Hibbert who was chasing but not close enough. It was refreshing to hear a commentator in the cats swans game state that 50s had been paid for very minor infringements that did not affect the player with the ball. More commentators should be prepared to support this position and force a change. Where the supposed infraction is minor and has no adverse effect on the player, the umpires should just rerest the mark. 50m penalties for minor infringements are a pox on the traditions of our great game.

Correct. It's the failures in our forward line. Our defence is leaky but if we could find a way to convert from the multitude of inside 50s then it would not be an issue. Against cats, power and saints we dominated this stat and still lost. I recall a similar fate against toasters last year. It might be that with Lever playing the wastage in the forward line would be even worse as we would get it in more often. It has been an ongoing problem for a long time and we seem to be unable to address it. I have raised this issue numerous times and no matter whether Jesse plays deep or upfield, whether TMac is around, whether Jeffy is switched on or whether any combination of Hannan, Kent, Spargo, Tracca is on the field, the ball comes out as quickly as it goes in. If you have doubts, watch cats replay. The current paradigm is that defences win finals. No doubt they do but unless we can get value from our defensive work to push the ball forward, retain the ball inside the forward line and score more consistently, it will not matter even if we have an abundance of Levers in defence. Goals, goals , goals.

It is not only his "intercept" marking that is valuable but also his ability to be back stop and last man in defence that counted. Imagine Lever helping out first gamer Petty in the last quarter. Even if only one goal had been saved, it would have been enough. I thought Lewis might fill this role - back stop and general. Seems not any more..

It has now become theatre. A player wins the ball, gets tackled with no prior, is driven to the ground, is unable to release the ball due to the bodies piled on from the stack on the mill, an opposition player holds up one hand as evidence that he is tackling with the other, all the players (but not the umpires) understand that it is time for a whistle and a ball up as the ball is trapped. Instead, the umpires (who have no feel for the game and cannot read the players' understanding) watch and wait while the players are standing around so that they can, with a grand gesture of bending forward and spreading their arms, penalise the poor bugger at the bottom of the pack. Pure theatre and a pox on the game. When the ball is trapped between players the game should stop and restart. To those who believe that this approach would detract from the game, I urge you to attend an ammos game or watch replays from the 80s and 90s. The current practice of letting play go on until everyone has had a touch of the ball just so that a free kick can be plucked out is a disgrace and ruins the spectacle and the contest. Our game is so much better than this and deserves to be freed from this ugly period. J'accuse!