BoBo

The AFL is either corrupt or insanely inept and I’ll prove it. Firstly there is the Maynard example. Now I’m assuming people know how human anatomy works. If not, being hit below the rib cage in the solar plexus is about the only way to take the wind out of someone and bring them to the ground, assuming both people are of about equivalent strength. If you watch the clip with Long, there is not a significant ‘load up’ or transfer of weight (which equals force). He swivels at the hip yes, but strikes Maynard in the PECTORAL MUSCLE and therfore above the solar plexus, which in no reality could cause you to hunch over (let alone grab the head). There is ZERO chance of Maynard being incapacitated by this hit and he is 10000% faking it: Note the distance between them and the fact that Long is REACHING to connect with his elbow way beyond a 90 degree extension. The force has been mostly expelled or absorbed by the fact, it hits Maynard in the god damn chest. Maynard is also looking directly at what is coming to him so he can brace for impact. The second example is Pendlebury. Now you can see in the below that Pendlebury hits Neale DIRECTLY in the solar plexus. Perfect hit. Go and watch the clip if you don’t believe me, but Pendlebury loads up (he jumps in the air, plants his feet, swivels his hips like a boxer does to land a gut punch) and hits Neale directly in the solar Plexus and is hitting UP INTO NEALE. Look at the angle of Pendlebury’s elbow, bent at 90 degrees, NOT REACHING, weight primed for weight transferred into the strike, Neale isn’t even looking at him and isn’t even expecting it. Both of these are a fine. If anyone thinks that these two examples are in anyway similar, you are out of your [censored] mind. The fact that the AFL deems both of these cases as similar is a [censored] joke. They are nowhere near each other by a degree of magnitude. Now if an [censored] like me can look at these two examples and find the gaping chasm in between them, I’m sure the AFL knows and can do the same. The AFL is either corrupt or so ineptly run that it’s a disgrace. Take your pick.

Man this is what I mean, how many other times has this exact thing happened, every week, for probably years now and no free kick given.

I’m kinda done to be honest. Up until a few rounds into this year I would watch 3-4 games a round but it’s gotten to the point where the umpiring just frustrate the [censored] out of me. It has gotten that bad. There is no consistency within games and it’s a joke. I don’t enjoy watching AFL anymore. I’ll watch Melbourne games and finals but outside of that, I don’t want to waste time just getting frustrated. If anyone reckons things have always been like this then that’s fine, I would say it has gotten much worse in the last couple of seasons. And I don’t blame the umpires, it’s the AFL for allowing interpretations to be so loose.

There were good signs to take out of the game for sure. We won the tackle count by 17 which shows intensity, which is an attitude thing.

Going into the game, I didn’t know whether to expect a 3 goal loss or a 12 goal loss. I don’t feel despair tonight, just dissapointed we couldn’t get it done.

Football.

Yeah true, showing any opposition to nicknames in Australia will only lead to worse nicknames.

I was going to write a whole thing to respond but I worked 13 hours today and I’m stuffed. Dangerous tackles are a category for suspension as far as I know (could be wrong). I don’t reckon Danger has a case to answer to be honest, but I’d bet a lot of money, that if this was a no-name player from say, St Kilda, that this 1 week suspension would be upheld. If nothing else, to show as an example. It isn’t the rules I have a problem with, it’s the inconsistency of application.

I distinctly remember players being given a week(s) years ago on the grounds that ‘both arms were pinned’ and therefore players can’t protect their heads from hitting the ground. So it’s a ‘dangerous tackle’ categorically and one in which the AFL was super keen to get rid of because: The tackler has to take the health and safety on board of the oppo player. But maybe only danger can do dangerous tackles. No consistency yet again.

Hmmmm, there’s a big difference between a 22y.o. and a 28 y.o. going through something like this. It’s only 6 years yes, but at 22, you’re still a ‘young adult’ essentially, but 28 is in reach of being in your 30’s in which your priorities are waaayyyy different. No idea what’s in Traccs mind but the fact this has happened to him at 28 means the likelihood of him seriously weighing his future is much higher than if he was 22. He seems like a genuinely good and level headed person so whatever he chooses is going to be the right call.

Pretty sure I remember in round 0 or 1, commentators noticing players purposefully hitting their heads into the ground to milk frees… I’ve also seen identical (and I mean exactly the same) incidents to May’s happen at least 2-3 times this year. Player gets tackled, purposefully bends their neck, head touches the ground and then they put their hands on their head like they’re injured. But it’s the AFL so who gives a flying [censored] about consistency.

I’m watching less and less neutral games to be honest. It’s absurd how inconsistent the umpiring has been allowed to get and it’s frustrating to watch.

Couldn’t be at the game or watch but obviously we lost yeah? Lol

In the 2nd quarter, Chad Warner kicked it inside the swans F50 blindly around the corner after just picking up the ball and it went out in the pocket, without a Sydney player being within 15 meters of it and it was called as thrown in. If a defender was doing that, but kicking it out of D50, again blind around the corner type kick, it would be insufficient intent 100/100 times.

Oh dear… just seen the Port score 😬😬 Can someone briefly fill me in? Were Brisbane firing on all cylinders and/or were Port terrible?

Play on. Siren goes. Still a goal. LOL

I just switched in the tv and was very very confused. Why are they wearing those colours???

I’ve never heard him say which he would prefer and I wouldn’t believe anyone… and I mean anyone… on here that claims to know what any player prefers/thinks/feels about anything. He has foot injuries which are notoriously difficult to get over completely and I can only infer from his movements this year that he is: Struggling to get across the ground Is completely lost in the forward line Is suffering from being bereft of confidence. That is being as charitable as I can because my own personal speculation (which could absolutely be wrong) is that he has checked out and wants to go home as well as physically struggling for a few reasons. If he and Goody were on different wavelengths, then playing a guy out of the position he wants to play, round after round, after he has offered basically nothing, says to me that the coach is choosing players illogically and inexplicably and I am EXTREMELY worried. I don’t think that’s what’s happening, I reckon he’s got foot injuries (he moves like a freight liner) and he isn’t as invested. Just my opinion.

Geez, excellent awareness of distance/space

We’re going to win by 23 points. And if we don’t. I’m going to win $550. haha

I personally don’t put much blame on umpires at all. They are instructed to umpire in a particular way. And it’s inarguable that the way they umpire is allowed to drift away from initial set standards. Umpires change the way they call things as soon as the AFL tells them to do it. The question is: why does the AFL allow umpires to slowly divert away from rules that are clear as day written down?

Yes absolutely they don’t care. This is like, THE basic facet of sport: Apply the written rules of the game consistently. And yet, here we are.

IMO this isn’t hard to fix up. If the AFL advised the umpires to: Enforce rules that are ALREADY IN THE BOOKS and monitored that interpretations of the rule were kept consistent, so they don’t drift away into places like the recent holding the ball fiasco. That would take care of a lot of issues and the AFL are the only ones able to enforce it. Evidenced by the very fact, that in the space of a week, they addressed the holding the ball interpretation. If it starts drifting away from what they initially told umpires in how to call it, bring it back to the initial advice. The gap is that the AFL is reactive and not proactive. They allow interpretations to drift for months or even seasons until they everyone gets so annoyed that the AFL has to do something about it. This is all avoidable. Secondly: You can set up thresholds for objectively incorrect calls round by round or in groups of rounds. If a round sees too many incorrect calls and it crosses a threshold of a particular rule: Advise the umpires to look out for it before we again spend months/years asking why said rule isn’t applied correctly. Will there still be incorrect calls? Yes. Will there be subjective 50/50 calls? Yes. But the aim is to minimise the amount of objectively incorrect calls AND re-implementing rules that for some ludicrous reasons just aren’t called any more. Apply the rules of the game. Monitor and get on top of when this doesn’t happen in the interpretations that the AFL wants and be proactive about it. Pretty simple.

There has been a crazy amount of games that have been decided by bad calls or bad non-calls of free kicks over the last couple seasons. Not 50/50 calls, just flat out wrong. The AFL fixed up the holding the ball fiasco in 1 week so there’s no reason they can’t fix up the rest. There’s been two goals (can’t remember which games) this season that have been paid, the replay has shown it was touched after going back to the middle and the commentary team just… didn’t really say anything? The off field umpire just missed the footage that everyone else saw? Doesn’t get spoken about again? It’s all amateurish at best or the AFL just likes the results so it’s ‘meh’, sooo I guess they literally aren’t interested in games being umpired properly. So that’s nice. I won’t even mention how you basically don’t even have to try and get rid of the ball anymore if you get tackled which is a rule called ‘insufficient attempt’. [censored] crazy

Ahh ok, thank you 🙏