sue

I deserve a medal. I lasted till 1/2 time.

Sure. Just an example of basic arithmetic, doesn't invalidate what I said. MFC would have to do that in every game for our percentage to fall to the lowest in the current 8.

That's going a bit far. Medicos have to approach the player to make a diagnosis and perhaps stop the player from trying to stay on or even run off. So it will be a 'danger' that physios and quacks could take on runner duties while searching for fake injuries, but I think such deceptions will become transparent pretty quickly.

Just keep runners/drink carriers off the field during play. Let them on only when a goal is scored or when there is a major injury, perhaps also the blood rule, perhaps not. If a player needs a drink or advice at other times, then can run to the boundary, either of their own volition or being summoned by the drink carrier/runner. With modern technology runners don't have to start from the bench. They could occupy the position of ball carriers. The 2 roles could merge though I expect runners need to relate better to coaches and players than drink carriers. But is the AFL threatening Sydney FC or the runner in question? And what will be the penalty if he/club infringes again?

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-19/afl-slaps-swans-with-warning-over-runner-laidler So Sydney given first and FINAL warning. Does anyone know if they have been told the consequences of doing it again? Or can we expect rules made on the fly courtesy of the AFL? (And probably applied to another team....)

A brief period in the top 4 means nothing. You have to stay there till after R23. I'd too prefer us winning but until we are a certainty to make the top 8, I'd hope that other competitors for the top 8 lose as best suits us to stay in the top 8.

To fill an injury hole, rest a similar position player who needs a rest, or stop team members from slacking off.

Only if the games were high scoring. Best illustrated by taking extreme examples: Lose by 1 point in a 3 points to 2 points game and your total for and against for the year hardly change. Lose by 1 point in a 5001 to 5000 point game and your percentage will be 100% since the previously accumulated for and against will be insignificant compared to 5000. Therefore losing by 2 goals in a low scoring match won't change percentage as much as losing by the same margin in a high scoring game

If you lose (or win) games which are low scoring the percentage change can be small.

A team can lose a match because of the umpires without it requiring a conspiracy. Just bad decisions (or non-decisions) at critical times. And then there are things like the umpires being too generous to the local teams in WA. I think that is generally agreed. Probably due to the crowd, but it doesn't require a conspiracy.

Yeah, of course. But these threads are for those who wish to discuss the outcome of likely realities rather than improbable dreams (ie win all matches and it's no problem making the finals). And the predictions get clearer week by week. Let's hope the predictions for the MFC don't get too clear too soon.

Ah, the AFL. Such a professional organisation. Actually an amateur organisation paying themselves 'professional' salaries.

Now there speaks an optimist.

If the AFL ran the criminal justice system, an armed robber who dropped the loot when escaping would get a lesser penalty than if he didn't drop it even if all other aspects of the crime were identical.

I dimly recall we didn't win any Brownlows during the great run of premierships in my youth and the reason why was we had so many good players taking votes off each other. Happy to see that happen again.

yep, and as I've posted earlier, I'm risk averse. If we make the finals outside the top 4, the season will be a success. If we don't make the 8 there will be wrist slitting all round.

The North result is debatable. The only really bad one was bloody Richmond not beating GWS.

While that is all very positive, I suspect failing to get into the 8 is such a risk to the club that it's wiser to hope that teams below us fail than hope we sneak into the top 4.

I'm not so sure. And then there is the 'I hate C'wood' factor. We still have to make the 8 so I'd prefer to play WCE when they are not desperate rather than plan on a top 4 finish.

It shows how petrified players have become about idiotic decisions by umpires that Gus has said: "It's funny. People might not believe it, but I didn't intentionally kick it out of bounds," Brayshaw told AFL.com.au. when it was so obviously not a skill error but a titanic skill disaster.

I doubt one win proves your point. There are many factors why we lose games, including the ones after Darwin and including the fact that we are often crap. But it's drawing a long bow to effectively say that Darwin has negligible effect. I bet the coaches would prefer we didn't have to play there.

If they paid that all the time there would be 300 frees given in a game.

in Q1 Adelaide player marks the ball. Moves his arms as if about to handpass it but doesn't move either foot an inch. Immediate play-on call from umpire 5 metres away. No wonder they can't deal with difficult decisions.

True. Furthermore who knows what mad rule changes the AFL will implement which may affect the style of play and hence type of player required.

True, but they are more likely to get the AFL to change the rules to ensure 'big' teams can kick more goals.