sue

Presumably Fitzroy is down the bottom of the list because if a club doesn't exist, even the AFL hasn't worked out how to force them to play down there.

I reckon it's inappropriate for a manager to make any such comments regardless. Does his player no good either. Keep it for selling the player to another club at trade time (which will not happen with someone as old as Brown anyway).

Top 4 is more the issue. Get there and a team has a chance, however they limped in.

I don't know what he was thinking. If he had hit Lever, Lever would have bowled Cameron over.

Sure, but no quarantee that a 'ready-to-go year 1' player will be available to fit our specific needs, or that they won't be available a spot or two lower in the draft. I'm happy to leave it to Freo to lose to teams that are no threat to us.

We don't know how the rest of the season will play out so I will be content for Freo to win and give us some breathing space. Hanging out for the possibility of better draft picks is less important than getting into the top 4. And feels (in a weird sort of way) like 'supporter tanking'. Our window is now. Don't need some star pick who may (or may not) develop in a few years. (On the other hand, I realise a low pick may give us a trade to get what we need now.) Also, I hate Essendon.

That last phrase makes me wonder. Has anyone tried to shift blame? No, they are merely saying it is unfair if others commit the same fault and get away with it.

What time of the day is it?

Why? I can enjoy all that and still expect fair dealing. You won't get that in the future if you just acquiesce in accepting bad behaviour in the past.

Ridiculous insufficient intent “rule” is driving me insane. As is the way forwards get away with pushes in the back. Defenders don’t dare fall over to make it clear what happened

Maybe the ARC can’t work near the padding?

I think that is correct. But when a player runs more than 15m in general play, I have the impression umpires pay it from the position where it was when they get around to blowing the whistle. Is that the case? Maybe anything else is a bit hard to fix. But for a kick in there should be no doubt - 15m beyond the square in whatever direction the player was running. (or less if he was running in circles)

Interesting, and would make the umpire's job a lot easier. As long as overhead throws are not allowed or we'll be playing gridiron. Whoops I realise we already have overhead throws masquerading as handballs where zero to 1% of the ball's momentum comes from a fist.

Americans are not a race.

Cwood look wobbly when we started to dominate even when there was little pressure

What a creep.

Pretty rich that fines paid by country teams just go into the AFL's pocket. Surely they should be distrubuted to clubs in the same leage directly. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/10/they-dont-get-country-footy-the-regional-victorian-clubs-saying-no-to-the-afl

Me too. But I'd still be happy to beat them because they are unwell. There are so many 'luck' factors that determine games, many go against our (or any) team, so I'm happy to take the ones that go our way.

Interesting idea. But what if one of the the 2 umpires who press the 'pay free' button wants to pay the free to the opposite team to the other.

If (a) is applied, then when a player is tackled just as he goes to handpass and his punching hand does not make contact with the ball, then it is not a free for incorrect disposal if it was a genuine attempt to punch the ball. No doubt the player was trying but failed. But that is a free that is very often paid because often it is clear to the umpire that the fist missed. I am more confused than ever. Am I missing the context?

No old55 I hadn't missed it. I was just assuming this 4 umpire madness would disappear by next season. And yes, I am aware that there will be umpires injured etc. - hence my stating "in very rough numbers of course"

Agree. While the traditional look of a perfect bounce is great, far too often the bounce clearly favours one side and the umpires do not recall it when they should. The AFL has already made it clear the bounce will die. Why else would they throw it up after a 666 infringement? There seems no justification for not just doing the bounce as usual after issuing the warning.

I agree with ViperP that some serious work on the rules would make the umpire's job easier and it should be first cab off the rank whether umps become pros or not. OLD55 is right of course, the desire to be an umpire is far less common than that to be a player. But some have a passion to be involved in football and if they find they'll never be good enough as a player, umpiring might fill that desire. We don't need as many people motivated to be umpires as we need players. We have towards 800 AFL players and need only 27 field umpires a round (in very rough numbers of course).

True, the is no equivalent for umpires. Therefore the AFL should run such a program out of its enormous budget. In any case, many players play for relatively modest sums compared to the stars and are not treated to a golden future by their club's influential supporters. They play for other reasons and do whatever career afterwards they have either planned or fall into. The same could apply to umpires. It may not produce 100% of what is needed, but it would go a long way towards fixing things.

Just treat them the same as say, the second rank of highest paid players. And club sponsored job opportunities for players can be AFL sponsored ones for umpires.