sue

I have read these posts without having seen the replay till now and was prepared to believe it was Bernie's fault. But I just saw it and how you can ignore the fact that Sloane spun Bernie around into the umpire is beyond me. Beyond the MRP too it seems. Wasn't particularly forceful but I can't see how he could have avoided contact. The commentators also thought that. Once again the MRP's penalties are more related to the effect than the actual act. Anyway, pay $1000 and chuckle.

Surely 2 stats can result from one bit of play. A tackle which results in a disposal is of more value to the team than no tackle at all. For a start, the tackled player may not get the ideal disposal they would have had if they hadn't been tackled.

Done earlier despite my being in the naughty corner for saying in my view quick snaps from the boundary are not necessarily goals of the year.

I'll probably be pilloried, but I don't think any goals from the boundary should be goal of the year unless something spectacular was done to win possession and get the kick away. They are generally just flukes - kick it 100 times and one will go through - that one shoudln't get goal of the year. I'd rather a goal from dead in front that results from some spectacular difficult play than most kicks from the boundary. That said, there was more to Oliver's goal than just a kick from the boundary.

that's what I usually experience (not the app crashing, just the quality and stalling). But oddly not today from China. Are you referring to that match or another?

OK I'm paranid about the AFL and its shennagins. But is anyone else finding the picture quality of the game from China is far better than it usually is? So far I've seen no patches when the players become a blur and you can't see the ball. At a quick glance it doesn't look much worse than a normal TV coverage. What's going on?

It is improper to hope for injuries to Essendrug players. On the other hand think of the deserving players who will get an opportunity to play to replace injured players. Conscience cleared.

What's happened to the in-the-back rule? A couple of times yesterday there were blatant 2 hands in the back pushes in 1 on 1 marking contests with no free paid, both ways. The most obvious was when Watt's dropped a chest mark. It was almost as if he did not get the free because he was being punished for dropping the mark.

If 18 players were injured in Q1 some of you "no excuses" blokes would still refuse to accept that as a reason or even a contribution to why we lost.

It seems to me in order to reduce concussion a helmet must be very thick to allow the head to decellerate slowly. If you know all the relevant numbers (max acceleration the brain can withstand inside the skull, the initial momentum, behaviour of possible helmet materials, etc.) then it must be possible to say how thick the helmet needs to be (as that pretty much determines the stopping distance and time over which the brain must be brought to rest). Sounds like the answer is ridiculously thick for collisions leading to serious concussion. But for much less serious impacts, perhaps some padding will suffice to prevent minor concussions since it increases the stopping distance from almost zero to a couple of centimeters. On the other hand, perhaps such low impacts don't lead to even minor concussion so there is little point in the padding.

Yes, our team 'should' be able to meet any opposition. But to not be interested in oppo teams missing some of their best players is just pretending to be tough. If we were missing Gawn, Hogan and Lewis I suspect oppo teams would be happy with that and happy to bank 4 points.

no, just perceptive.

Perhaps Melksham is retained this week so that Hibberd has someone familiar nearby.

It is rude put-down, even if you didn't direct the comment to any individual. Why not instead have just said "From watching him play, it is clear to me that Hibberd is a gun...." That doesn't make it seem like you think people who disagree with you are ignorant idiots (even if you think they are). Some may have watched him closely and still come to a different opinion than yours. (Personally I have never taken much notice of him and can only hope you are right about him.)

It's the eyes OD - I'm your age judging from remarks you make. Actually, I think HD stuff looks significantly sharper but I doubt it would make much difference to an AFL broadcast(*). I'm prepared (reluctantly, since I have no other reasonable choice) to watch AFL LIve where sometimes the players are just a coloured blur and you can only tell which way the ball went by seeing where the camera has swung to. So don't look to me on this. (*) Though given the director's focus on showing us player close-ups rather than what's around the player downfield or behind them, I suppose most viewers must be interested in how closely shaved the players are.

I see that the Sydney v GWS game tonight is on 7 in Canberra where they play all other matches on non-HD 7 Mate.

What's with this protected area rule. At the start of the game PA marked and another PA player ran across the mark almost at right angles leaving a Carlton player marooned on the other side. The umpire told the Carlton player not to follow. Admittedly he as far behind, but how far behind do you have to be to be stopped?

Good grief. Did you read the article or just stirring? There is no doubt in his mind that the centre circle would be drawn on the oval, but he added it is up to the grounds staff.

Not true. They and Sydney have FTA every bloody week. The only time an extra FTA slot is freed up is when GWS play Sydney.

I agree there is a case to be made for developing players this year rather than wobble into a meaningless final series. I'm not focussed on finals. I'd say take the development position later in the season rather than risk looking a basket case early in the season, both from the commercial and players confidence point of view as well as us long-suffering supporters. I don't see that Weideman cannot develop at Casey. First there are a lot of big bodies in the VFL who may not have as much skill as AFL backmen, but still players for him to learn to out-muscle and mark against. Second, if he dominates there it will give him confidence which is often half the battle. Getting flogged in the AFL doesn't help that. Nevertheless I take some comfort from ProDee's stats showing he does better when Hogan is around. But that's just my 2 cents, I am sure the coaching department knows better than me (and everyone else on here).

Carried the load? More like he filled a slot on the team sheet. While you may be right that he performs better when Hogan is there, the fact that you said he carried the load indicates you are very biased on this issue. Weideman may well be the future, but we need to win games now.

But many feel Weideman is also not AFL quality at this stage. There is a lot to be said for someone like Pedo increasing the chance of us winning games even if he is not a great player. Without racking my brains I therefore assume the coaches are more interested in developing Weideman at AFL level rather than maximising the chance of winning games. Whether that is a good idea or not, time will tell. Perhaps I'm wrong. You'll enjoy gloating when Weideman kicks 4 goals next week.

You would indeed. At times it just gets so fuzzy that you can't see the ball and each player is a coloured blur. And then it just stops occasionally. It's not my network connection or home wifi, it's the crud that they serve up. How they dare charge for it is beyond me.

Frustrating to see the good quality of the Youtube live stream of the Casey match compared to the crud that the AFL Live Pass serves up much of the time.

dunno about the footy but the video quality makes the AFL Live app look worse than 3rd rate