sue

So make a mess of the fixture by inventing Round 0 and the mess causes more mess.

Justice must be done and SEEN to be done. If the AFL had any integrity it would try to find a Chair of the AFL Tribunal who isn't so clearly tied to a club as Gleeson is. Admittedly it may be difficult to find someone with a feel for the game who hasn't some sort of ties to a particular club. But Gleeson is too involved. Maybe an ex-player who played for several clubs?

Thank god for that. I never read the game day thread

Not surprised you haven't. That's because concert organisers have more taste and respect for why the audience is there than the AFL does.

Agree, a big disadvantage especially with the speed of the game and the lack of calling the player with the ball to start from an appropriate spot. I've always wondered what would be the result if umpires did not have to call play on but instead left the decision to the player on the mark. Penalise if they got it wrong, do nothing if they got it right.

What are supporters feelings about the new rules? One that has irked me is the implemention of the stand rule when the man on the mark is often called to stand when he is nowhere near the mark (and when the player with the ball can start from almost anywhere). I'm pleased to see that Luke Beveridge complained about that last night where he said it gave Brisbane an advantage leading to a goal. (He could afford to complain having won the game.) Re the lasso rule - I wonder if its introduction should make the 'insufficient intent' rule redundant. That would give the umpires one less mind-reading task to do and allow for mis-kicks. Currently I feel they often interpret mis-kicks as insufficient intent rather than insufficient skill and ignore pressure on the kicker. (I note there is no insuffcient intent for shepherding a ball going out between the arcs.)

I read that Drogon doesn't guarantee it wil show all AFL matches. Is that your experience?

That makes sense. In the regular season all GWS and Sydney games appear on 7 where I live, but not this one which surprised me.

I have whinged elsewhere that at ball ups after goals, Fox/Kayo/7 had been replaying players celebrating goals and confining the actual ball up to a small inset. The AFL introduced a new ruck rule to make the ball up contests more spectacular and their broadccasters aren't showing it properly (and sometimees not at all). Ridiculous. Watching the GWS/Hawks game on Kayo I was pleasantly surprised to see that we got to see the ball thrown up in full screen mode. Has the AFL woken up or was that an aberration?

The AFL changed the centre bounce rule because the ruck clash would look far more spectacular. I predict that by Round 1 the AFL will force FOX/7/Kayo to actually show the ball up properly in full screen every time. They often show full screen repeats of players celebrating etc with the ball up only in a small box at the bottom right. And sometimes they even miss that. And to be totally outrageous, I predict they will show the positioning of players before the ball up for more than a microsecond.

They can't just rely on differing ip's. I believe they can vary even for a single user at the same physcal location depending on your ISP.

During practice matches the telecast often missed a centre "bounce" by playing a replay. I hoped this wouldn't continue but tonight they missed the first "bounce" of the season!! Grrrr!

good question. You'd have to hope they are only doing it where they detected use by 2 IP addresses at or near the same time. (Don't drive home from work too fast.) I live in NSW and use Kayo at home. I'll be in interstate for some rounds this year, including round 1. I'll be [censored] off if I have to jump through hoops to use Kayo.

Panrty. Being full of sugar and salt it does not go off. So why would you put cold sauce on your hot pie if you don't have to?

I haven't followed this. What is the rationale for club's having to provide injury reports at all? Is it just for the gambling industry? If so, it would be about the only area where fairness is of any concern to the AFL.

Thanks and I presume the same was true in earlier years. So the good teams get an extra advantage by playing first (except for those that play a round 9 team in round 1 if any?). Do the better teams really need an extra advantage? AFL is not nterested in fairness, just expanding the empire.

Of course there will be exceptions like that, but it is the overall stats that matter. Is there any evidence that the better teams play in round 0 over the past x years? If not, the stats seems to show it is an advantage. In every practice match the commentators say how useful a real hitout is for preparation for the real thing. If so, round 0 prepartion for round 1 is even better.

Odd that he seemed stunned at the time. Maybe it was just pain.

Pity the poor buggers in the other teams in that comp.

Probably need to change our name to Collingwood for that.

That would be too obvious for head office. But sadly to allow for all the 'special' matches (KB, Anzac etc) they already need an AI engine so powerful to do the scheduling that it causes power blackouts in inner Melbourne. No way the draw can be fair.

Underscores the unfairness of Round 0. We have the commentators saying how tough it is not to have much real match practice before your first game in the season and the AFL introduces Round 0 where 10 teams get to play first and then some of them come up against teams which haven't played. But expecting the AFL to run a fair competition is a pipe dream sadly.

https://www.lightningmaps.org/#

don't forget to add "and will make it hard for umps to make consistent decisions"

Leaving aside the yo-yoing history of encouraging/discouraging ruckmen running into each other, this rule is going to allow difficult umpiring decisions to reach new heights (pun intended). Eg. last nights free against Calrton's ruck.