daisycutter

taking it out of the soft cap means $100k less which probably equates to 1 less person in fd (or salary cuts spread across fd) salary cap cut would certainly have hurt more

think the whole 100k still comes off soft cap for fd regardless of who pays the players can pay the club the 75k but the cap is still reduced

AFL investigating two Tigers after fight outside Gold Coast strip club afl site

mfc - not worth evaluating

if no list cuts then that would suggest across the board pay reductions. guess it all depends on aflpa negotiations, being a choice of smaller lists or pay reductions if social distancing etc extends into next season as is expected things will get even tougher financially for the afl

4 goals is 4 goals......tigers lethargic for 3 quarters, cotchin, martin (and others) in snooze mode and missing quite a few players not saying wanchors were bad, but they weren't good either

couldn't even score 30 points....and it wasn't because tigers were on song

hogan huffing and puffing a lot

rubbish game so far

try 30k......but obviously conditional....

big, small or in between? plays what position?

hope crows win by a disputed goal in last few seconds. decision for touched goes to the arc goal line cameras but they are malfunctioning and decision is umpires call - goal and match to camry crows. media in meltdown.

agree maurie, except for first sentence re afl. they are not stepping up, they have many times talked the talk on a lot of these issues then back pedalled when it came to action and enforcement

certainly more per person with less overall people, but not more in total . reduced heads will still mean an overall reduction of function from 2019 levels.

at the start of next season nakia will have missed the last 3 seasons injured (bar a couple of games at the start of 2018)

covid symptom

doesn't need to moonie, there are 6 backs in aa team plus 1 more on interchange

still disappointed no-one in the media (that i know of) has discussed the mark not being paid nor the free kick anyone know if it has been raised?

outrageous comment by you, ethan. you should be ashamed, kane was an ornament of the game and you treat him like this!

ah yes, red flags darling.....i remember well so clever of the weagles made sure everyone knew

the "blunder" was not the decision but the lack of goal line cameras. of course it comes across differently

you know (tracc marking it aside), if the umpire had paid holding/over shoulder/chopping arm then it would not be considered controversial, at the very worst a bit soft so much going on in that short contest mark, free kick, touched goal, all should have been to our favour yet punters want to shout controversial

and for filth supporters, biffo?

no, we would have taken brayshaw and lever

if we are talking about the good luck on tracc's leg break goal (or was it an off break), what about the bad luck of tracc not being paid the mark?