Chook

Haha what a finish. Adelaide had no right to win that, and I'm glad they didn't.

Slick Fritsch could probably clear it up for us.

Umps refuse to pay deliberate against the Crows at Adelaide Oval.

"He lobbed it to Lobbe." Thanks Kelly. Truly amazing work from you.

I've got one - when she's commentating Crows games, it stops Ricciuto from incessantly ending every sentence with "…boys!"

This has turned into a terrible performance from Fremantle. #BurgessBall is alive and well at the Crows.

Long may it continue.

I have a dees GF jumper hanging from a coat hanger in between my work desk and my digital keyboard. Im happy for you though that you have a 2nd house in Thailand!

Imagine being lucky enough to beat Gold Coast not once but TWICE in your first nine games. That's what's on the line for Jake Bowey this week. Sensational story.

Haha even the universe has it in for Joe Daniher.

By various interpretations of "immediately", Trac was holding the ball when Bont tackled him in the last passage of play in the 3rd quarter of the GF. He disposed of the ball, but was it "immediately"? Immediately is inherently subject to interpretation, because it ranges from planck time through to human reaction time through to a second through to…whatever.

I can't stand Joe Daniher - constantly with his hands outstretched pleading for the free. Why not just win the ball mate?

For how long? That's the key to the interpretation. For simplicity, I am happy for a tackle to be considered ineffective if it doesn't prevent the player from legally disposing the ball.

Early days but neither Brisbane (my early tip for GF opponent) or Port look anywhere near top 4 material based on the first quarter of this game.

I liked that decision. Disposed of it cleanly despite spinning like a top, so it wasn't an effective tackle. It makes the umpires job easier.

Apparently ~30 posts in the Bigfooty Giants gameday thread, so…I guess they have a couple of bots exchanging ACKs every 5-10 minutees.

That lady from the ad will be swooning at work on Monday morning.

Geelong in the late 2000s was talent first, system second.

Every night game should start at 7:10

"We'll still beat your mob" — Every Essendon mate ever

Niall didn't say that. People on this site have a low interpretation skills at times. What he said was Richmond was system first, talent second whereas Melbourne is talent first and system second. The implication for me is that system is equally important between the two clubs but that the talent is higher at Melbourne and the players know it. This lead directly into his "cockiness" comment. People tend to think in terms of zero sum games, and this is a prime example IMO.

Too bad they can't play Essendon in finals.

I made this example on Twitter in response to a similar question: Imagine two sources. One leaks to the bookies and one leaks to a journalist. The bookies adjust the odds for profit and the journalist reports it, ensuring the public doesn’t get conned into making an unfavourable bet. Just one example. Journalists sniffing out leaks to get ahead in their careers by publishing what should be private/confidential information is not always morally on the up and up, but I'd prefer it to those leaks being gathered purely for profit.

The one thing that could stop Melbourne is our lack of attacking midfield depth. I don't even want to say it, but if Trac or Oliver go down (or have a down game), we need someone to be able to pick up where they left off and be damaging offensively. Sparrow has all the tools. Great signing.