sue

Are/were we hoping to get AFL money for Caufield?

Surely NB would have been aware this was coming. Odd?

Don't blame our media dept for the inability to hear the questions in a press conf. It's true of all AFL coaches pressers.

Of course some people have good 'mail'. But just because someone posts that according to their mail, X is true (and they don't give any hint of the source of that mail), that carries much less weight with me than someone who gives their source. Unless the poster has a good historical record of their 'mail' being correct, I don't see why I should give it much credit without a source being quoted. I have to give more weight to someone who says their source is first hand talking to a player than a bland 'my mail is'. Of course it could still be wrong, things change etc and I dare say that some people could invent a conversation (not saying GW would ever do that).

Possibly. But I wouldn't compare anyone's 'mail' about a player to a face to face interation with that player.

CHATGPT can't help someone familiar with footy with some questions like "should A do B" or "where should he play on the field". It will just hoover up all the mindless drivel people have posted or put in the media, mix it with anything sensible that has ever been on the web about footy and process it to produce bleeding obvious recommendations (or go off in a hallucination to say A should run for President of the USA). It's true if one knew nothing about footy, it would provide useful information. For example "We see A is 7 foot tall and note that the best ruckmen are near 7 foot tall, so we think the ruck would be a good position for A". Useful info if you knew nothing about ruckmen, but adds nothing if you are familar with footy. And useful if you want to ask about rules, though you'd want to check the answers. I speak as someone who uses AI a lot to ask questions like "How do I move single files from a PC to an iphone". Usually I get correct answers quicker than doing a web search. But it makes mistakes, even with simple things. Try asking AI to write a job application for an imaginary job like Chief Executive Platypus of the Yarra river. You'll get a mindless but polished application which would impress if you nothing about platypi(?) or rivers.

Possibly because (if I remember correctly) there was a pause between 'my job' and 'my passion' which could have sounded like passion was an after-thought which he felt obliged to add.

Presumably we will still be stuck with the 'insufficient intent' mind-reading nonsense within the arcs?

I guess that mean if you are watching live (or otherwise) and you decide to go back 10 seconds to review something, an add will appear. Is it clear if that is a video ad or h=just the screen filled with a static ad for x seconds. Either way, yuk.

Kayo/Fox have already started putting ad bars at the bottom. This goes along with Kayo often failing entirely on Friday night matches. And then there is the actual telecast which is getting worse and worse. I've ranted before about: the unnecessay close-ups of the player with a mark/free rather than showing what options are ahead of him the ball disappearing out of the field of view when it is handpassed - it's a guess whether it's going to a teammate or if it is, if he is in the clear. Presumably because the unertainty is extra exciting for us. A new 'feature' is endless replays of a goal where they don't switch to the next ball up till after it has occurred. Even if they do get to it in time, there is never enough time for the viewer to take in the setups each team is using. (I'm not talking about re-showing the actual play - extra showing of the player celebrations.) In the finals, in short breaks, not only do we get the usual pics of 'celebrities' in the crowd rather than a chance to see where all the players are, but now we are treated to multiple drone views of the stadium which tell us nothing about the game. They must have hired a drone and want to get full value from it. A lot of this is because we now have 'entertainment' rather than footy. /end rant

The dark shorts GC has doesn’t help

Couldn’t care less whether pink or whatever. But I find it hard to distinguish the teams on TV

As I posted elsewhere I'd prefer Geelong to lose to Hawthorn (and I hate Hawks as much as the next person) because it means King is on board a week earlier with us. Given the list management issues of the ensuing weeks an extra week means more to us I think than the extra experience that King would get by being involved in another GF. Just a guess of course. If Geelong make the GF I might think differently.

I have no time for either team, but I want Geelong to lose so that our new coach is freed up earlier. A week or so is more important to us than some extra GF experience.

I think the committment issue is paramount. If we took Buckley and he still had half an eye on Tassie he might bolt in 2 or 3 of years when Tassie might actually have a team (or being closer to player related decisions at least). Particularly if things weren't going well at Melb.

I looked at the vision and there certainly was no deliberate attempt to injure, not even much carelessness, no sign of White attempting to take possession of the ball. White was hit because there was an unusual hook and long follow through of the kick across King's body. Was there a 'kicking in danger' free paid? A genuine football act, unlike some we all recall.

Good grief. Some always look for the speculative negative even when there is a perfectly good speculative positive which is just as likely. If it is true that Buckley wanted to wait in case Tassie came through then that is a big negative for him and a positive for us in putting the question to him. Of course I'm only speculating , not having any inside info.

Surely it's the other way around - we don't want our news lost in the GF/Brownlow tsunami.

I wouldn't read too much into that and what happens in 2026. I'd say he is just not an inspiring public speaker.

You forgot the comma in the last sentence.

A lot I agree with there. Separating ruckmen by 10m at boundary throw-ins would be a pleasure to watch. And as I posted elsewhere, the stand rule is an abomination. I defy anyone to deduce what the rule actually is by watching what happens in a game. Monoccular is right on. But it's even worse because of inconsistent application. The following won't be popular in the desperate pressure to increase scoring these days, and a concern it will slow play, but....: What about abandoning all these out of bounds rules entirely. No penalty if a defender kicks it out on the full or otherwise or deliberately. Just part of the game's tactics to boot it out however and whenever you like. No need for umps to read players' minds anywhere on the field or for fans to get frustrated. If you combine this with Monoccular's suggestion about 10m separation for rucks or just throw it in quickly and allow any (single) player from each team to go for the ball, that might mean play wouldn't be slowed by allowing more throw-ins. Too radical?

Don't get me started on the 'stand' rule and 5m rule. I defy anyone to work out what the rule is by simply observing what actually happens.

I agree @YoungBlood. I cringe when I see our players doing that sort of stuff.

I don't follow US football, but I guess they don't have commentators revelling in a bit of biffo and melees like we do.

The replay is now up on the AFL site. https://www.afl.com.au/vfl/matches/8007 Pity you have to see the score before you click the play button. What is the AFL thinking!?