sue

It would be interesting to see the data broken down by years. I bet that in the days before the AFL became3 a corporate profit driven monster all teams got a similar number of games in Geelong as fairness was the driving motive. C'wood's nmber probably has barely shifted since then.

The short article on the MFC website gives me confidence that we will appeal. Nothing definite, but not the usual 'we will accept'. Melbourne will provide an update on its position regarding the incident in due course.

I agree with much of what you said but I think your remark about conspiracy is a bit off. Favouring certain well known players and clubs with big membership, ie $$ for the AFL empire seems corrupt and to have media complicit smells of conspiracy to me.

They must appeal.

What’s cwood fan’s excuse for booing Franklin?

Well he probably is a moron, but you are missing the fact that the AFL doesn't worry about reality, but how it will look.

I agree. And would be happy if the AFL applied its rules consistently, but sadly they don't. I'd forgive them the occasional line-ball decision - it's difficult. While I, like others, see things through red & blue glasses, there are enough cases which do not involve MFC (or teams I hate etc) to make it clear that the AFL cannot be trusted to be consistent.

I don't think his action was much different from a slightly clumsy attempt to spoil. I can't see what he did that was wrong. All attempts to spoil from behind have a 'potential for serious injury' so what is the criteria for suspension? Surely it must be recklessly trying to hit the player and not the ball. There is no evidence of that in the current case. If the player hadn't been stretchered off this would be a non-event.

You have to stretch things to breaking point to make that the definition of front-on contact. You can say reckless, nasty whatever you like, but you weaken your case by adding front-on contact to your list of (dubious) sins.

All true. Though: We would be less predictable if May actually kicked out to the right occasionally. Or do we never have both Gawn and Grundy in those positions when they are both on the ground?

How about the AFL claiming all the rights regardless of who uses the AFL's microphone?

Front-on contact? You must be joking! Look again at the video. And how do you know where his eyes were? because a biased commentator told you so I guess. And just because the player is carried off does not mean high impact in terms of injury - if a player holds his head (on the oppostie side to any impact) and tells the docs something went crack the docs will carry him off as a precaution. (Though it is high impact in terms of losing a player for the rest of the game). If he gets suspended we should appeal even if JVR supposedly needs a rest.

Somehow or other the journos currently take turns to ask their questions. Let them put hands up, someone selects one and hands them a microphone. Might mean a few seconds of no audio and delay but that is better than even more seconds listening to a question you can't hear.

Agree about the cameras. Trouble is the AFL also likes controversey. However why not do away with cameras and have 2 goal umpires and just let them decide. They'll get it wrong from time to time, but mistakes by field umpires influence games much more than that. Goal umpires are more likely to be plentiful than othr rumpires - could do several more games a week. (Though I don't know how many they do now. Anyone know?)

Just made the mistake of watching Goodwin's press conference. Not because of anything he said - he rarely says anything much. But how can a mega-dollar organization as the AFL not manage to have the questions audible. Do they fear the journos will steal a microphone if one is anywhere near them?

I see the crowd last nightwqas 11000. Is that normal for GC games? What percentage were Demon supporters?

My eyesight is not great but the commentators kept acting like JVRs fist hit his head but I thought his fist :arm went over his right shoulder and Ballard felt the other side of his head probably because JVR’s shoulder hit it. ?

I wonder if players walk off the line, say the the right for a right footer, and hook it not just because they are trying to get extra distance but also because they feel they are avoiding the man on the mark a bit by going around him rather than over him. If so, perhaps in training they should stop using the current vertical cutouts to represent the man on the mark but use some shape which encourages the player to kick over the man on the mark.

What's the definition of hit out to advantage? If it is hit directly to a player who is sure to be tackled instantly I wouldn't consider that to be an advantage (except when a team is trying to ice the clock).

I haven't seen that, but maybe he means that every other team (bar Sydney) should always play away when they play GWS and at one of its 2 venues. Smoking is perhaps more plausible.

About as good as any other theory I read here.

There was a lot of poor panicky play by cwood in the last Q. A good team would have put them away I suspect

I thought you couldn’t push a player away if the ball was further away than 5m or some such. Yet I see a Hawkins all on his own metres away from the bloke he pushed over just as a 49m pass is kicked. So he pushed the bloke over when the ball was even further away than 40m. No free. Do that to him and he gflays his arms about and gets a free

what's wrong with the Australian "youse" as the plural of you?

Nothing wrong with gents. If it is short for gentlefolk. 😀