sue

How Ed Langdon and Lachie Hunter have changed Melbourne's wing strategy in the 2023 AFL season

is there a German word for premature schadenfreude? I suspect a number on here are suffering from it. Time will tell.

So did I. The AFL's explanation seems to overturn that. But since when has the actual written rules affected AFL decisions on anything.

The MFC app seems official enough for me. 4-6

Perhaps it's already been said (I don't have the stomach to read the entire thread), but have we just seen an argument against a night grand final?

try:https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/media-street-scott-gullan-gives-you-all-the-latest-sports-media-buzz-from-around-the-afl/news-story/431f94af08144b4f30576a075aa31c29?amp

While I think the MRO and Tribunal decisions are too often a toin coss biased towards famous players, I'm not inclined to bag our club for rarely appealing. But given Crows are appealing for an almost identical hit as Pickett's which actually injured the opponent, I am perplexed. Are we too compliant, or Crows to much the other way or maybe Pickett didn't want the fuss?

my thanks to all who've replied.

Does anone know if row BB in bay M55 level 1 is undercover? Travelling to MCG and short of umbrellas and raincoats. thanks

I have no problem with the 2 weeks based on the potential to cause serious injury. I've always though just basing things on outcome is stupid. But doesn't knocking someone out also indicate a potential to cause serious injury? Buddy?

If the MRO is now including a factor called 'potential to cause injury', then they should not bury it under the level of impact but instead have a seperate line for potential to cause injury. Furthermore, there should be levels for that, just like they have for impact.

Real indiots sit in the sun when there is shade available.

I expect the crowd is indeed small, but the TV shows the side of the opposite side of the ground to where people are sitting. And where there is shade - the temp is 34C in ths shade.

yeah, but he got off on an (outrageous) legal technicality. No such option for Kozzie.

Has there been any discussion of Clarry's kicking the ball over the fence? (I avoid the game day thread religiously). What motivated him?

Really ? I thought there was a more than usual slipping. Almost ice rink like (or whatever the ground is called these days).

This is not a knock on McVee, but Dusty did SFA last night as well.

Good question. Why can't you buy non-reserved seats?

Ticketek is a disgrace. Admittedly we are not young, but it's not as if we are out-of-date oldies who are fazed by technology. This household has at least 3 professional IT people in it who have even written the sort of stuff Ticketek is trying to do and we struggle getting it to do what we want in an efficient manner.

Don't like the idea at all. Why hand out our money? The award itself should be sufficient. What's next? money for winning the Brownlow (handy for some to pay their lawyers I guess).

Because they do it in the USA so therefore it must be right.

All the goals: https://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/1278945/practice-match-all-the-goals?videoId=1278945&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1677979418001

From what I saw (on TV) it looked like the ball was going to hit the post but bounced unexpectedly vertically and then did not hit the post. So it was a goal. No need for in-the-back free etc. But who knows.

Where did I say it was going on these days? I just said playing vigoursly is not the same as targeting a player's injury.

Strange response. First being hard at opponents is not the same as deliberately stomping on someone's foot who has a known foot injury (yes that is how you can exploit an opponent with a foot injury - stomp on it again). And it seems you assume DelightfulPlay must approve of May or Viney deliberately hurting opponents in that way, just because they are MFC players. Perhaps he disapproves of it for all players. I do.