sue

On ABC Radio National from 1:05pm. May be depressing listening.

I think we can make that excuse (provided the other team isn't also playing its B-team). But it does show a lack of depth, such that if a few good players are injured we will get done for sure rather than probably (as appropriate for our current status). For example, the loss of our only forward last year was fairly disasterous. A top side may have several to step up.

Thanks SP. The quote from Neeld says 2 down in the second half. What's the story there?

Apologies if I've missed it in the orgy of wrist-slashing, but what happened to Garland? Posters say he didn't play in the second half, yet the 'official' report says nil injuries.

While it sounds like the tweeter is keen to make excuses, I'll be radical and wait to see the context in which Neeld made that remark before saying anything.

That gherkin is leaning to the right. BH would love it. Seriously BH, it is not left wing to disagree with you about footy, nor are weak arguments the sole preserve of leftists, nor does a 'wrong' remark about footy expose a communist stooge. If there is a generalisation to be made from posts on this forum, it is that right-wingers are prone to call others childish names. But since I base that on a very small sample of a single poster who proudly flaunts his right-wing leanings and abuses others, it can't really be a valid conclusion.

I presume he was referring to the comments of people who have been bagging Frawley or expressing disappointment that he wasn't AA last year. If that article is accurate, (and is there a reason to doubt it?) then presumably some posters would wish to modify their criticisms. Though some on here would say explaining poor performance because a Demon played with a broken leg would just be making more excuses.

> Ben Hur: > Funny how those opinions are OK, just not some others. Are you from the left ? That's how they think too. That's about the silliest thing I have read recently. Not liking the opinion of others can be said of people on the left, right, centre or any flaming where. Perhaps you should keep your right-wing politics out of footy discussions. Pop them in when there is a discussion of the political aspects of AFL, but the topic here is Grimes.

Sorry Old Dee, but when someone effectively states an accused is guilty before a trial they need to be criticized. This is one of our basic freedoms, fought for over centuries. If they think they can justify their medieval position by saying the legal system is screwed or comparing it to a government they don't like, then they need to go live somewhere where there is no rule of law. I doubt mjt would enjoy that unless his buddies were running the place. BTW Olisik, I don't think anyone has argued that the rules should depend on the colour of your skin. I thought people were referring to understanding an individual's circumstances. The law is the law, but if courts don't take into account an individual's circumstances, you end up transporting a starving mother for stealing a bit of bread or her kids. But you are right old dee - a spell is in order -there is little point in arguing with some people on these sorts of issues.

Do you mean actual physical pressure or mental pressure? If the former, wouldn't the coaches get him to practice kicking as he is about to be tackled. If the latter, wheel in a psychologist.

I'm bewildered. How can you say that after he pulled a couple of rabbits out of the hat last year?

Gloves banned

What will be the penalty for exceeding the cap? (couldn't spot it on the AFL website)

Nor would I sadly. A good telecast would switch between close, mid and wide shots as appropriate - not a big challenge for Fox/7. I assume they focus in on the player about to take a free etc rather than pull back and show what is happening down the ground because they believe the female audience wants to see close-ups of fit young men in short pants. Lots of ways of non-footy ways of doing that. More seriously, I think they do it in close so that it is more 'exciting'. Suddenly a player appears from nowhere and smashes someone or whatever. It's a bit predictable if you can actually see a wider view (though much more interesting in seeing how things develop).

I posted this on the match thread, but more relevant here: Only watched Q1 but I wish Fox etc would learn a thing or two from the Port telecast. First, the commentator actually described the footy (and did a reasonable job considering on the MFC players) rather than the usual self-promotion and nostalgia talk we usually have to suffer. But more importantly it was possible to see what was going on rather than learning via endless close-ups how closely shaved each player was. Instead of zooming-in on a player about to take a free, they often zoomed out so we could see what his options were. Admittedly a bit hard to see what was happening in a distant pack, but a small price to pay. You'd think Fox with its multiple cameras could do a bit of both, but no, it's close-ups all the bleeding time. A good telecast for someone like me who lives interstate and can only get to games rarely.

Only watched Q1 but I wish Fox etc would learn a thing or two from the Port telecast. First, the commentator actually described the footy (and did a reasonable job considering on the MFC players) rather than the usual self-promotion and nostalgia talk we usually have to suffer. But more importantly it was possible to see what was going on rather than learning via endless close-ups how closely shaved each player was. Instead of zooming-in on a player about to take a free, they often zoomed out so we could see what his options were. Admittedly a bit hard to see what was happening in a distant pack, but a small price to pay. You'd think Fox with its multiple cameras could do a bit of both, but no, it's close-ups all the bleeding time. A good telecast for someone like me who lives interstate and can only get to games rarely.

Interesting that Sylvia is the odd inclusion. Could it be that he has been told he has to show something to justify his status.

I agree that it is yet another rule for the umps to 'interpret'. But maybe this is a more necessary one than some of the others the 'interpret'. I think it is wrong for players to launch their head at the feet of an opponent who may be about to pick up the ball and get a free. It is worse than ducking for an over-the-shoulder free because there is really nothing the opponent can do to avoid it. The previous post looks a sensible interpretation to me - certainly more sensible than the HUN article. (I leave aside the danger that going in head-first will become compulsory to prove you are not a whimp, with the resultant dangers.)

I'd be interested to see people's view of this new rule. (Is it for the real season?) This is what MR said in the Hun:

Just watched the Richmond game again. When I saw it live I thought we were thoroughly thrashed in the first half. But on a second look it wasn't as bad as I thought. Apologies for being a bit optimistic.

Did the journos say why they weren't interested in publishing anything on it? Was the fact they had decided the AFL wouldn't do anything implicitly the reason? Or had the AFL cowed them in some way?

I was confused because I have an old Telstra SIM card in my iPad and when I found I could see the NAB games for free I assumed that the charging would only start for the real season. I think it is free overseas. I had no idea why having a SIM should entitle me to what I thought was a new service, hence the confusion. I feel better now..... thanks to all

thanks - that explains my problems. Will give it a go when the season starts - not paying Telstra $15 to not see Demons playing in the NAB.

Or I am confused and the NAB Cup is not free on the AFL Live app?

I think you are correct. However, if I remove my SIM card the app still knows I had one. But I have just discovered that if I remove the SIM and re-download the app it doesn't. (Looks like the app peeks at the installed hardware when it is first started.) Hooray, it looks like it will work over WiFI. But while I can see how I can pay my $15/month or $90/season, it is not clear how I first see the free NAB games. I don't want to pay $15 for the coming month if it is otherwise free to see non-Demons games. And I don't want to sign up for a season at $90 till I know the quality will be better than I got using my SIM for the NAB cup to date - it was totally unacceptable. At the moment, with no live stream actually running, when I hit 'watch nab cup live" the app puts up the screen where I can sign up for monthly or season pass. There does not seem to be a 'free NAB trial' button. Maybe if a live NAB stream is being broadcast it will just go straight to play it - though that seems an over-optimistic hope since I'd imagine Telstra is always keen to display the sign-up for $ page. If anyone has set it up to use WiFi, please let me know how you sign up or whatever for the NAB cup. thanks - and isn't it nice that the footy is started.