daisycutter

lol, i did read that and was totally flummoxed. it was also so badly explained i couldn't make head nor tail of it, quite farcical, reminded me of some of kevin rudd's best work

i've also seen that in other games recently where the ball has gone to the very edge or just over the circle advantaging one side and it has not been called back. i was getting the impression it might be another of these rule re-interpretations on the run the afl are so good at telling the umpires

well there was a new anti-concussion head band discussed (forgot name but in brayshaw thread) which at least deserved a look at

and we should request the afl not to appoint a certain umpire,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but we won't

how does a very recently retired player like bartell get on the mrp when he has so many 'best mates'. still playing?

do clubs submit an umpires report after each game? i have a dim memory they did at one stage. if they don't i think it should be standard practice. how else are they going to improve without exterior performance rating from the major stakeholders

can't see it flying. the argument is too flimsy, but full points for creativity heck, we couldn't even upgrade a rookie to replace an already retired lamumba because of concussion, just because his contract hadn't run full term\ nor could we get a temporary replacement for melksham whilst bummers could for their suspended players (same for port (2) and bulldogs)

there are a lot of other inuries that force people out of the game. sp you just can't single one injury type fpr special compensation

no, but not a big cut. see https://www.cancer.org/cancer/testicular-cancer/treating/surgery.html note i assume he doesn't require the additional RPLND surgery (which would make a major difference)

slowing to a trickle 40,567

you actually watch that stuff, choke? <rhetorical>

i'm presuming that is a rhetorical question, choke

quite agree dockett. if the mrp are complaining about lack of rules to follow they had one very simple option (which has been used before).......all they had to do was refer any incidents they were unhappy with (cotchin, cunnington and others) straight to the tribunal who have much more interpretive power ....simple,.....and it forces the issue to be recognised and acted on by the afl. they are just a muddled, incompetent group of box tickers

and let's not forget salem actually got 2 weeks (1 week if accepted) for that, for negligible outcome. if you watch it at normal speed you can see that impact was also quite light. it looks much worse in slow motion replay.

think you meant vfa, diets. and it wasn't just the players, the supporters were feral and had a reputation of spitting on the visiting team as the players went through the wire fenced visitors race, win or lose. the female supporters being the best phlegmers

but think how refreshed he will be with the rest on a 6 day turnaround

agree partially. the outcome is important too. it is really more a question of balancing intent, type of action and outcome. they simply haven't got the balance right and are weighting (and many times guessing e.g. concussion test and the player plays the next week) the outcome too heavily

oh, i need to read more carefully, chris. maybe yes 2 umps. i haven't really seen any improvement when it went from 2 to 3. in fact it just means you get 3 different interpretations resulting in even more inconsistency which drives me mad

very much so, bub

i've forgotten. think it was to minimise ruck to ruck injuries due to speed of arrival. of course it hurt us because whitey got less of a leap which was his strength not being a big bodied guy..

as long as they throw it up much higher. too often they throw it up too short which favours the taller ruckman because there is less time to manoeuvre and jump

only central umpires need to be full time professional. that's 3 per game. Personally I believe 2 is enough, esp with better umps but that's jmo

frost is only 194 - not a genuine tall these days. we also are missing 1 tall kpf in fact we are in pretty bad shape with kp talls and talls depth

i've said it a hundred times and will continue to. umpiring will only make significant improvement when they have full-time (more) independent professional umpires. Not only will it improve the standard of umpiring but it would give the umpiring fraternity better input into the framing and interpretation of rules and provide a better checks and balances to the afl's impetuosity and addiction to constant rule fiddling changing

we all understand that, macca. but by continuing to march to that beat it just perpetuates the status quo and makes it harder for unpopular clubs to gain popularity. It is a very short term policy and needs a bit more nuancing and leadership (but that is just a pipe dream )