mauriesy

Making umpires full-time won't help when it's the way rules interpretations have changed over the last few years that has caused the umpiring indecision. The worst umpiring decision yesterday was when a Port player took on Brad Green after two steps and tried to fend off an excellent Green tackle with a forearm to the throat. It should have been either holding the ball or a high fend-off, but was ruled a ball-up. Then you see a player buried under a pack and adjudged holding the ball with three players lying on top of him because he "didn't make an attempt to get it out". I'd also like to know what constitutes a tackle. Was Westhoff's "tackle" on Garland actually a tackle? I thought you had to actually hold the player. All I could see on the replay was a slight touch to the shorts and he never actually held Garland at all, yet got the holding the ball free. Fits in perfectly thought with the idea that the game is turning into touch football.

A really strange article from someone who is normally more to the point. She spends the first two paragraphs telling us Tom is not necessarily going, then the rest of the article telling us he necessarily is. I got nothing at all from it, except the idea that it will bend some pliable minds even further.

Rubbish. The only ordeal anyone has gone through is entirely self-inflicted or self-imagined. There may be a psychological term for it.

It's being described as a hip flexor injury.

I suppose the possibility that he actually has knee soreness is too simple a reason.

Thomas has just re-signed with the Pies too. Another GWS draftee bites the dust.

WAToday talking about Fremantle possibly taking Fevola: Former St Kilda coach Grant Thomas says Fevola's problems shouldn't prevent him returning to the league but rails against the line of thinking that his goal-kicking prowess could be the "saviour" of any side. "If we'll accept a drug addict (Ben Cousins) back into the league we ought to accept Fevola with his drinking and gambling issues," Thomas said. "But I've never been an advocate of teams relying on power forwards who just kick goals. It makes you too predictable and it's much easier for other teams to stop you in finals ... I'd hate to think Fremantle would put itself in the position of giving up draft picks to try and get one." You could easily substitute 'Melbourne' for 'Fremantle' in that last sentence.

Liam's played 35 games. He comes from a style of football where raw talent and skill is paramount and defensive pressure and physical toughness are not high priorities. Give him another 50 games, build his body with some more pre-seasons and gym work, and keep him on the huge learning curve about the forward defensive pressure and game structures that he needs to be a mature AFL forward, and we'll see whether he can become a 10-year player that kicks 70-80 goals. Simply casting aspersions about him being as 'soft as butter' or being 'lazy' are missing the point.

The Long Road

Depending on results next week, our first pick in the 2011 draft will be in the range #13 to #17. Then picks around #33, #51 and #69. Not a great position for any club to be hoping to trade for an 'established' and 'hard-bodied' forward or midfielder with long-term prospects.

I'm with you Bob. Sure it wasn't a great game, the crowd was quiet and it was the end of the season blues, but too much talk here is based on the idea that the Suns should get flogged by 150 points every week and that anything less is bitter disappointment.

Jack's a much better actor than the guy on the couch.

Funny how former Crow Rhett Biglands was "70% certain" Walker would go to GWS. I guess that's not as certain as Schwarz's "97%" on Scully. And player manager Paul Connors, who was a main source for the Walker rumour mongers, said in June that Walker 'had already signed'.

Plus we've only got one over 28 ... Green. We've got two 28s ... Davey and Jamar. One of our problems is senior experience (not to mention leadership). Having obtained good picks over the last few years, we need to largely build on what we've got. Trading is not like swapping football cards where you give your $3 Petterd or Jamar for a $5 star. Constantly wanting to turn over the list by trading out players as soon as they reach 50 games, start to show something and have 'value' is wasting draft picks and 3-4 years of development. Trading players like Petterd just because you can is pure folly. There are some more notable passengers occupying seats on the list.

Jones is not A Grade annd probably never will be. But he's good B or C+ Grade, and even premiership sides have a few of them. His advantage is his body size and toughness around the ball. You leave him in, possibly forever, while we build the silk. I wouldn't call some of the others 'trade bait'. More like 'delisting bait'.

So you're regurgitating a two-month-old post in a rumour section from 'the fantasy site' of Fan Footy as some sort of confirmation that Scully has signed 'something'? That's sealed it then.

Trengove would be the youngest-ever AFL captain. He turns 20 on the 2nd September ... if he was appointed at the end of January (like Green was this year), he'd be 20 years and about 150 days. That's very young, probably too young. Previous youngest captains: David Dench (North Melb), 20 years 221 days, 1972 Haydn Bunton (Fitzroy), 20 years 299 days, 1932 Kevin Dynon (North Melb), 21 years 249 days, 1947 Michael Voss (Brisbane), 21 years 272 days, 1997 Wayne Carey (North Melb), 21 years 303 days, 1993

He's not alone. I'm tired of watching most of our players waiting for the opposition to take possession and opting for the tackle, rather than making the ball their first priority.

And you don't have to look far to find out why a high percentage of gay people commit suicide ... which apparently is a reason they are 'unsuitable' for parenting. Church hypocrisy of the worst kind,

Show me a rigorous, peer-reviewed study that shows every gay person can't provide a good environment for bringing up kids and I might change my mind. Meanwhile, no matter what the family unit kids end up in, whether by happenstance or circumstance ... heterosexual, gay, single parent, divorced, grandparent, rich, poor etc. ... I'm sure that there will be a continuum of ability in each broad unit, with excellent parents at one end and really atrocious parents at the other (plus a healthy bell curve in the middle). You seem to be saying that the excellent end of one of these family units (gay) has no right to children, even though they may be a long way further up the continuum from the atrocious end of another (heterosexuals) that does have such a 'right'. So you are classifiying them purely by their gender or sexuality, not by their parenting skills, love or the ability to provide for their children. If I was to transpose 'black' and 'white' for 'gay' and 'heterosexual', I'd hope you'd see how socially dangerous and prejudiced that is. PS. Have we gone up another alley away from IVF and adoption back to basic parenting again?

Sorry, the thread seems have gone up alley ways and I've lost track. Some good friends of mine are gays who paid a surrogate mother to carry their child. They must be bottom of your pile. Would you tell them face-to-face they are not 'suitable' to be parents?

Prospective humans that are not even conceived have no "rights" either. It's a logical absurdity. The Commonwealth at least determines who gets married (the subject of this thread). But there are no controls over who can procreate, unless you're proposing that we introduce them?

Well, I just want to know whether there's a limit. Leaving aside racism, can you say the most disgusting, demeaning and filthy remark on the field and, according to your 'time-honoured' position, get away with anything? A. because it ought to 'stay on the field' regardless of how hurtful and B. because it's never meant to be 'serious' regardless of how disgusting? Did McGinnity's remark cross the boundary? If so, how far?

I think you should go back to being Hannabal. You're taking the idea of being a Pig far too literally.

The best men are those that don't lose their moral compass when the heat's on and they're under stress. McGinnity just showed how morally weak he is. Remarks like that might have been happening for over a century, but that doesn't mean they have to keep happening. We are not in the year 1911. The AFL has a policy on respect for women, and McGinnity clearly breached it.