sue

whoops a lot of unintelligible typos and syntax but you may have just got the drift.....

I argue it hat is true then it shouldn't be when that is the only direction physically possible.

So if he doesn't release it there is a good chance he'll be pinged for holding the ball. If he releases it there is only 1 direction that it can possibly go in and that is over the line. Seems unfair to be pinged for deliberate in those cases. So it's down to interpretation as usual. True, he should have just held onto it and rolled over the line as that is the best chance of getting away without a free, but it shouldn't have been necessary if the umps were smarter. But this response all over the ground leads to congestion. In many situations if a player is tackled the last thing he wants to do is let the ball come out, so they hold it in as much as they can. That lead to ball-ups and congestion. If he lets it spill out he'd liklely to be got for illegal disposal. Maybe better to allow the ball spilling out more and use the 'ball came out in the tackle' 'rule'

Watching Norf v WCE, I see a new rule/interpretation of the day. It is not holding the ball if you ony take 2 steps before being tackled. Even if you break the first tackle of 2 in doing so. Heard it twice during the match.

A cunning way of hiding the fact that you already have done it. But tell us which login names are bots.

Correct, I look at video on the AFL/MFC website. I just checked and the audio was good there today (though no split screen with journo and coach). I'm hoping that means the audio will be OK in future on the web.

I have avoided watching Goodwin's post-match press conference recently so I don't know if the AFL has finally acted like the professional body it claims to be and actually made it possible to hear the questions asked by the journos. Last night not only could you hear the questions, but there was also split screen video of the questioner and coach. Is this now happening all the time, or is it just in Adelaide?

No mention of that by the commentators. (Why am I surprised?)

That is the most succinct summary I've seen. The only point you missed was that the commentators on TV are complicit in much of what you listed.

I must be a worse wowser than I thought. I was surprised that any AFL player drinks during the season at all.

One thing for sure. MFC supporters need to find a good cardiologist. Either that or we have good cardiovascular systems

Phew

Trouble for the MFC is that the open door is one of those swinging doors that is likely to hit us in the face. (Another sad MFCSS sufferer)

Are C'wood about to have an honourable loss?Or is there no such thing?

Happy to hear that.

I see the little chat the MFC had about the protected zone after Harmes' penalty (which I expect never happened) has had an effect. Umpire shouting repeatedly to Essendrug player to get out, oplayer ignires him, no 50m penalty.

And the commentators said it was a bit soft. AFL, run by turkeys and comments by Ch7 turkeys. If the AFL doesn't penalise players for that .....

a good start, and not much more needs doing.. But something needs to be done about the protected zone rule (or its interpretation) and ensuring the 30 second kick at goal rule is not manipulated. And I still can't see the justification of a kick from straight in front if a mark is taken anywhere in the goal square, though I doubt it makes much difference.

That would make a lot of sense if there had not been some stupid rules made in recent times. I'd prefer reversing them (or making them more sensible where possible) to putting my faith in the game taking care of itself.

Very funny

And what action taken by our supporters would have made any difference? Microwaving membership cards? Personally while I hang onto just a thread of hope for this year, I think the future looks bright. All I ask is a competitive team and we seem to have one now. Placing all one's hopes in terms of a flag is a recipe for disappointment. After all, crude statistics says a team will win a flag once in every 18 years. A couple of sigma on that will mean no flag in a lifetime is quite likely. Feel free to attribute our lack of success to my attitude. I revel in my unexpected powers.

In the time it takes to ensure merely 2 players are on the other side of the line, it gives all other players plenty of time to congest even more.

Yeah, that annoys me as well. But at least it's not illegal. These ideas of zones at the bounce are insane. Words fail me. The only rational conclusion is that the Russian soccer federation has the dirt on the current AFL management and are plotting the elimination of Aussie rules. Where are ASIS/ASIO when you need them?

Don't wait for the ball to come out of a pile of players, just ball it up quickly before they get there makes a lot of sense. 'm always annoyed when players just jump onto the tackled player and his tackler to create a ball up. They often even tackle an oppo who is in the pile who doesn't have to ball. Why is that not a free?

There is no hope of sense from the AFL. Almost every new rule/interpretation has not been thought through which is why we are in this mess. Even something as innocuous as the 30 second rule is going to be rorted or controversial in an important match. Close to the siren in a close game someone kicking for goal other than Ben Brown will take 2 minutes to walk in from 100 metres away. Ben Brown will be able to because that is his 'natural arc'. Other players may or may not be called to play on at some random distance from the mark or for some walking speed deemed too slow. The problem is that the rule says start moving toward goal within 30 seconds. It should be kick the ball within say, 45 seconds. Too bloody obvious for Gil and his mates.