sue

Just when you think the bottom of the barrel has already been scraped through.

Taking that seriously, aren't you disappointed that it is even arguable whether he did or did not do anything wrong. Shouldn't he have just KO'd the bloke to scare people in future? And we should be disappointed if we don't have at least 2 or 3 blokes on suspension every week just to show how tough we are.

agree, except knowing the AFL 'will' should read 'should'.

There is a difference here. An accident is over in a second without video replays. Here people see the same video replay yet still can't agree. Hopefully he'll get off on the level of impact and the nonsense about not returning to the ground. In my view, he was clearly not totally innocent however you spin it. May be a worry. (pun intended)

I think that is more do to with lack of goals and maybe lack of pressure. Not doing enough thumping of people off the ball is not why he is not in the team.

Yes, I was wondering how many Richmond membership cards were heading towards the microwave at quarter time. We looked really slick, whereas when Richmond dominated it was a bit scrappy.

Furthermore DeeS, just because you were wearing headphones it doesn't make you permanently deaf - they can be taken off in a jiffy. Further furthermore, it is well known that C'wood have headphones attached to directional microphones......

yes

Come on, clearly the idiot is on the right. The only evidence that the Chief is an idiot is that he hasn't sacked Max.

The AFL should employ a decent lawyer to check their rules. If the letter of that law is applied, any of the other 17 players on the infringing team could delay the game.

Holding up signs gives too much away to the opposition. All instructions to players should use the cone of silence.

I did read it Skuit. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the words 'moved on' but said ' not desperately retained'. I stand by my remark that it is reasonable for fans of a club receiving a player to ask why he departed from his original club. The reason can be anything from glad to get rid of him, through good, but surplus to requirements, to we were [censored] off he left. All I'm saying it is reasonable to ask, not judging Preuss.

As much as I dislike the AFL's obsession with changing rules, I reckon this is partly why I don't like soccer (sorry, must be sportingly-correct, football). For a start they could widen the goals so there is less chance of me falling asleep. Likewise basket ball could raise the hoops. /end-rant

Well obviously it is not always because of a flaw and let's hope other factors are involved with Preuss. But when you consider the glee which many here saw the departure of players like Watts (and others), you have to admit it is reasonable for supporters of the destination club to ask why his original club moved a player on.

Why? Because right-wingers would claim it was insulting to Nazis?

I'll say one thing in favour of AFLX. It made AFLW look very interesting. (Good luck to the AFLW players, but I generally find it pretty tedious to watch.)

There seems to be a lot of love for Preuss here. He looked OK to me, but maybe only Jake Spencer plus plus. I understand that 2 ruckman may make a lot of sense this year. But..... I keep wondering why North were happy to let him go. I apologise that this has probably been raised and answered elsewhere.

I watched it for over an hour. But then I realised I had spent 95% of that time web surfing - clearly the whole thing was so absorbing I hardly ever looked up at the TV.

Agree. But at least that will mean a little less time boasting about their own glorious past, what a genius coach they would be and who they know.

RB, I hope that you have no reason to change that view during the season.

Well it is summer so I'll waste some more of our time by replying. Obviously if it "is an assault on their senses" then I suggest people look-away. But I think it is reasonable to be upset by AFLX. If something you love is mangled in your judgement , whether from good motives or to just increase Gil's bonuses, then angst seems very understandable to me.

If you read my original post you won't find any evidence of angst or any concern about AFLX. I was just making a general point based on my experience of the game I play having "progressed" but gone downhill.

maybe if you define progress as simply progressing rather than progressing with improvement. Just because cricket had obvious problems (was a snore fest to me) doesn't mean all progress is good, especially that driven by the $. At least in the game I play the "progress' wasn't driven by the $, but by amateur empire builders. If AFLX started to dominate the world (fat chance fortunately) and normal Aussie rules footy vanished in 10 years, I'm sure we'd all be happy with that as an example of "progress".

true, but be wary of such innovations. I play a game where a simpler version was introduced some years back. Far less interesting both physically and tactically but much easier to pick up quickly. The original game is now almost dead with fewer and fewer players.

I was aware of that. Doesn't change my view that it may have been deliberate. For a start we don't know to whom they sent that release.