sue

Your point? That people do disagree? Personally, I haven't made up my mind (probably because I can't be bothered - there are plenty of other MRO decisions which are so blatantly wrong/biased that I don't have the energy to engage with this one).

all true, but there are too many pessimists on here who are unrealistic in their pessimism.

No, that is realism. Because we do play 2 such teams and we are missing the Captain. It's pessimism to say we haven't got a hope of winning a single clearance and just as well play Billings in the ruck.

The best hope is that he will bend over backwards to get Heeney off and then would find it difficult to explain why Melks' was worse. But I probably underestimate his talents as a contortionist.

At least we don't have to fear him missing games in 2025 with appendicitis.

Nah, I reckon they don't barrack for any team but enjoy pouring cold water on every team on the supporter forums.

Just to prove I don’t only whinge when we lose : that insufficient intent given against the WCE player who belted the ball forward was absolutely stupid. He was clearly trying to get it to 2 teammates all on their own 30m away. Came off his fist slightly off and went 20m and went out. Good grief

That's an interesting idea about HTB. If they made the rule 'if you take posession of the ball and are tackled you have to get rid of the ball legally in a reasonable time' and forgot about prior opportunity altogether, then the only 'vague' thing would be 'reasonable time'. It would reduce ball ups resulting from players taking the ball knowing they will be immediately tackled and lead to more tapping the ball to advantage etc. A more open game might result. Doubtless there would some downide to the idea but worthh considering.

Same for me. I'm embarrassed at the number of times I have had to say "ridiculous free (or missed free), but since I'm barracking against X, I can't complain".

spot on

Sadly most of the commentators are 100+ years old mentally.

Geez, don't hit him too hard with the feather of 'poor form'. Maybe he should have been fined, not zero times as has happened under the unbiased MRO, and not once but 2 times. Once for exaggerating a mild shove to the upper chest and secondly for holding his head pretending it had been hit. Make all the excuse for the AFL you like but you will not convince many that the MRO is not corrupt.

Sure if he faked it, he should be fined. Doubtles you think the guy who gave him the slight push should have been fined - oh wait, that's only for non-C'wood players. Why do you think pointing out bad things our players do somehow makes it impossible for us to call out the AFL for blantant inconsitencies and biases? I hope you are not one of those people who like to show how independent and unbiased they are by taking what they think is an unpopular position no matter how ludicrous. Virtue signalling gone awry.

Why can't we have a discussion about umpiring without someone bringing this up. For anyone interested in our game (ie. not the AFL, but our game), it is an important topic and if a few more people join the debate because we are not winning, so be it. Yes, we do have to win more games and even a flag (oh, we did that), but it doesn't mean we can't criticise the standard of umpiring and the AFL's rules/interpretations.

DISGUSTING. At first all I could do was laugh. AFL is [censored]

What legal expert writes these rules. Doesn’t say if those points are all required AND between points or just one or more are OR between points. You have to deduce it is OR from your knowledge of footy but that is not the way to write clear unambiguous rules. Might explain a lot about the state of the rules.

Maynard to be retrospectively traded to a small club.

I think he was justifying it - can't see any other reading of the words, but will take his word if he says he was not doing so. But you are right, that is how it gets applied.

Excuse me, but I think that is a ridiculous distinction. Surely faking your head was affected is exaggerating the contact. In any case, Maynard was holding his head when bent over on the ground - wasn't that pretending his head was affected? Or is there something special about being contacted by the ground rather than someone fist? Do you have a job with the AFL propaganda department or just hoping for one?

Watching on TV makes it hard to judge, but if Andrews was hampered from playing his usual role then how can you say Fritta had mimimal impact? Given he's not been kickng goals recently maybe it was a brilliant coaching move. Yes we did lose the game, but I bet we did a lot better than you expected.

Non recalled centre bounces are a disgrace to the game. Just throw it up. I’d love an explanation of why after a 666 warning they throw it up rather than bounce it. Says something presumably

Not even a vague “he went down a bit easily”.

I did just the same as the bolded bits. Still made plenty of errors.

I'm not reading the whole thread having read a few doomsayer's posts. Before the match most of those posters thought we'd be done by a large margin. I see it this way: 1. Brisbane supposedly in great form and on their home ground. Us out of form. 2. We played a lot of players with little experience and were supposed to be smahed in the middle without Petracca and an out of form Oliver. 3. Yet a game we came close to winning (and even closer to drawing bar one mistake), regardless of which team missed its chances etc. How can anyone not take some confidence in that?