daisycutter

ok we get it. you don't like pert and you're gunning for him i don't see how pert who has taken over someone else's pet project (which you think is flawed anyway) gan be expected to resolve it in his first 6 months at the club, especially if it is in fact flawed whether pert turns out to be open to criticism will take a lot more water to traverse under the bridge

well that's just an assumption. there may be a lot of work going on in the background and good reasons for not making premature public statements. just because we don't know is no reason to assume the worst, let alone start throwing blame around. if you are so concerned you could always mail the club and ask for some illumination.

"afl fairness" is that an oxymoron like "army intelligence" or "afl integrity"?

anything he does (or doesn't do) on this project would have to go through the board. it may be his project to pickup but it's not his baby. your (our) issue with lack of public clarity is more likely a board issue than a pert issue. let's hope we hear an update before too long, but i wouldn't be burying anyone in particular yet.

but this supposed preference for yarra park occurred before pert came on board the board probably initially gave him instructions to explore it further. if so, he has been rather quiet about it since, which could mean it has gone cold. we haven't had a statement from the club on this issue for some time, so we are just guessing

maybe they really didn't think they had a chance, od, but by proposing this as their first choice it may have been a ploy to get more favourable support (and money) for their second (and real) choice

each to their own = diversity respect

50,520

don't worry guys the afl are fixing up all the umpiring problems by introducing a 4th umpire incorporating an interchange bench so budha hocking's brother can school them on the bench of the afl's rule interpretation of the day ?

at least misson played the reserve and didn't send goody back out ?

50,422

well of course umpires won't always be 100% correct.....that's not the issue problem is despite 3 field umpires and 4 boundary umpires they are making more mistakes, changing rule interpretations and being incosistent within and between games than before, whilst every other aspect of the game is improving (well, mostly) and the afl does nothing but fiddle at the fringes and make it worse but.......if you are happy with afl umpiring.....i guess we will all have to get over it..... thanks for your advice, i had obviously been imagining my concerns and had problems with my eyesight and understanding of the rules....

hmmmmm

surprised you're posting today dv8. i thought you would be in a total catatonic state

either atrocious goal kicking or poor umpiring accounted for at least 3 goals so you can legitimately blame either or both for the loss local umpires in perth games is just wrong and easily fixed by the afl standard of umpiring is a real issue for the afl and there are a number of really easy changes the afl could make if they had any leadership make all the apologies you like, macca, but it is simply not good enough to tell people to just move on

no need to over react wasn't a good look but there was nothing vicious in what the two west coast dlckheads did move on guys

we are doubly [censored]

nup, no email

or better still moonie, just move into the zoo. we'd be right at home there

they don't get used anywhere near as much as the g or marvel

couldn't the other aami tenants actually just train on aami itself?

i'll leave it up to ernest to discuss it with arthur given he died 29 years ago.....

it's software not hardware (i.e. machines) ....not hard to know the difference. yes, i know they call it "machine learning" but that's just bs marketing. i first got involved in ai 35 years ago (in a minor way)

far far too early to be definitive coachess are still experimenting and there is a move to play safe by playing ultra defensive, hence low scores could take a couple of years to settle down and even then certain teams will go down separate paths based on their particular strengths and coaches' preferences

well just to be a pedant, it's not really "machine learning" but "software written by humans" learning and thus has the same weaknesses embedded in it as it is based on human logic (albeit hopefully those of superior intellect)