sue

Sorry to cause you pain Superm, but rather than saying it's too ludicrous to argue, you might try arguing the point. I agree it's not representative of the entire game, but isn't it odd that so many professional leagues have violence problems. Why did the culture of the sport glorify crowd violence like no other? Why did it happen? I just say while there are lots of factors, the nature of the game is one significant factor. I can't prove it, but just dismissing it as ludicrous is a cop out.

Doesn't explain why other sports don't attract people exhibiting the same behaviour. Doubtless there are a variety of factors, but I am convinced the nature of the game (ie. long periods of little progress or player interactions) is a factor. Even AFL crowds express frustration with the relatively recent introduction of kicking it backwards and sideways . But at least that doesn't last long.

You're right. The cheats are back at AFL headquarters.

True. But some posters (e.g. me) said the bad behaviour at soccer matches was in part due to the nature of the game itself, and we were all off and running. We are all friends - no one has said you have to be some sort of [censored] to like soccer. Some like it, some don't. But if anyone on here says you have to be an [censored] to like footy, then........ PS I'll like soccer when they take into account that goalies are probably more agile and 30cm taller than they were 100 years ago and so they widen the goals accordingly. And stamp out diving. (And maybe get rid of off-side. Hockey seems to have survived dropping that.)

Fork-em is right. No AFL crowd would sing for more than 30 seconds. Unless there is a big break in play for some reason, even cheering and booing usually can't last beyond the next kick. Now that we're into knocking soccer, can I also point at those unpatriotic rugby fans who don't support OUR UNIQUE NATIONAL SPORT. (Where is the safest place to duck RAB D N?)

One reason that soccer is popular is that young people (and older people) can play informally in a very small area (*) and practice the skills of the game regardless of size. That makes it attractive to develop an interest in the sport generally. In response to some earlier posters, while a score of 0-0 with 5 minutes to go may be exciting, I feel the cummulation of frustration for the preceding 85 minutes is a factor in the behaviour of spectators. The most likely result is still 0-0 and frustration abounds regardless. Footy matches may be over if a team scores 6 goals to nothing in Q1, but maybe not, and the losing supporters have an hour or two to internalise the result and enjoy the odd goal your team scores. Soccer 3-0 at half time, and you may be tempted to entertain yourself singing or throwing flares. Don't get me started on matches decided by penalty shootouts. *Not something you can really do much of with footy.

Soccer will have badly behaved spectators until they find a way to increase scoring. It must be the most frustrating game to watch if you are invested in one side or the other. The AFL could give them advice on contrived ways to increase scoring and maybe introduce ad breaks.😁 I also have read reports that ethnic origins of supporter groups is creeping back into soccer. That won't help.

I don't think he was stereotyping 'Aussies' as beer swilling wastrels - just making the point that such people are often in the front line of racists, blaming anyone else for their situation and being jealous of success in any migrant group. Migrant and refugee families tend to work very hard - that's usually the reason they came here in search of a better life, especially for their kids. Just after WWII it was possible to become well established here if you worked hard. Sadly, there are many racists who are not beer swilling wastrels. SEN should act.

I agree with all that. As for 'alcohol mates'certainly it is not explicit like some gambling ads, but any product which shows happy groups of people, totally unrelated to the actual product, is manipulating the you'll be happy with lots of mates and sexy women if you drink this stuff line.

If there is a liquor ad code that expressly forbids suggesting "you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A" then it is more honoured in the breach than in the observance, to misquote Hamlet.

Agree. But I go a step further. Why do they need to be advertised? Have you ever seen a beer ad that actually gives you any evidence as to why brand A is better than the rest other than suggesting you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A. What a waste. At least the gambling companies offer slightly different products whose differences can be explained in an ad (though they still largely rely on the mates/girlfriends motivation. Perhaps a better word is manipulation).

At first I thought that was funny. Then I realised that they were probably already planning that. And are now [censored] off that he current scandal will put a stop to it.

Can you be sure the votes are all in sealed envelopes? These charges increase my suspicion that that isn't the case. Might also explain the ludicrous appeals in the Cripps case.

The difference is the ease and low cost to whoever gets the list of email addresses (and whoever they pass it on to) to spam us, including phishing etc. The cost of doing it by snail-mail on paper is relatively prohibitive.

Doubtless true, and those posters may have been wrong. But being wrong about the sincerity of his message is not even a possibilty if he didn't make the appropriate farewell message in the first place.

Sadly the amount has overwhelmed the number, particularly in the last year or so. (Good luck critiquing that sentence.)

I don't recall selling my soul old dee. More like my having had it extracted by Voldemort.

It is totally inappropriate for anyone to reveal private matters affecting a player's choice, though reasonable speculation should be acceptable on a site like this. A number of posters have complained that if he knew he was going it would have been better for the club if he left last year and have stuck into him for not doing that. That is why I asked if those who imply they know the personal reasons could state that those reasons didn't arise till this year. If they only arose this year, that should shut those complainers up totally. Not that they have much of a leg to stand on anyway.

Do you know when did this legitimate reason arise ? During the last 12 months?

It's OK if there are private reasons to account for some of this. Some people have hinted that they know what they are. To mollify those who are annoyed Jackon didn't go earlier, could those people in the know say if these private reasons only arose this year?

If he can't get to WA and doesn't go to North I'd prefer him to sit out rather than play a year at Melbourne. That would be disruptive in all sorts of ways. (But a deal will be done is much more likely.)

Surely if it comes down to Jackson not being able to get to WA he won't go to North. He'd re-sign with Melbourne (except in a fit of pique). Not that I think he will end up in that siutation.

Wrong meaning of confidential. When you are asked to tell your story and told that the review is confidential, it doesn't mean your are gagged forever telling your story anywhere else. It means the reviewer won't release you details. Who would ever agree to make a complaint on the condition they can't tell anyone else - especially if they had no confidence it wouldn't be swept under the carpet.

In other ways it doesn't. It adds credibility to the indigenous families' claims since it is independent evidence of his controlling behaviour. The degree, extent and nature of the controlling behaviour in the case of indigenous players can still raise the question of racism.

Whoops. Typo made that post obscure. Last word was meant to be “reply”.