sue

More off topic, there is a difference between the ABC promoting itself and promoting commercial organizations. If they promote Colgate toothpaste, McCleans will feel hard done by. When the MCG is called Facebook Stadium, I for one will be relieved that the ABC still calls it the MCG.

These video reviews are worse than useless until they get the technology right (if ever). Why is so much weight given to reviewing a kick for goal when a similar review of a free kick paid in the goal square is not? Both can affect the result equally. I say don't do either until the technology is up to it. (Which for free kicks would be a reliable AI algorithm using multiple views, i.e. it will never be viable). Until then rely on the umpire. They make mistakes all over the ground, often affecting the score, so why treat the shots at goal differently. The answer seems to be 'just because we can'. But the AFL can't yet.

Even worse, sometimes they don't pay advantage when a quick kick just after theh whistle is blown goes forward and is maked by a team mate.

Error city

I have little idea about trading, but surely a proven quality young player is worth a lot more than a couple of early picks given what a lottery drafting is.

Dual citizenship so we can deport behalf of him

Apparently not (if you are enough of a 'celebrity' and play for the right club.)

Applying for a footy journalist job are you rpfc?

Of course it is also possible that a big enough $ offer now may not be offered again in 2 years - who knows what might happen, form, injury etc. Tempting to cash in now rather than an uncertain later.

It's been noted on DL, but I haven't seen any mention of it in the media. Not many clicks in a hug compared to a whack.

No. A dual citizen. Won’t see him in Parliament at least.

Yes the AFL missed a great opportunity. Most of Canberra's early growth was public servants being trasnferred from Melbourne who of course had an aussie rules background. At worst the city was 50:50 between rugby and footy. But the NRL got in first with the Raiders and provided a team for Canberra and so it took off. Canberra now supports both a league and union team, but a shadow of an AFL team. The AFL missed the bus badly.

An interesting article in the Canberra Times today about the ACT govt's support of GWS and why GWS needs Canberra more than Canberra needs it. On these crowd figures, GWS should just rename themselves and move (or dissolve): Manuka Oval: average 9804 (39,216 total) Sydney Showground: average 6103 (36,617 total) Manuka Oval highest crowd: 11,661 Sydney Showground highest crowd: 8754

Did anyone in the media focus on Cox's knee jab? No discussion/video clip?

Sorry a bit off topic but arises out of the dogs hawks match. An example of the AFL not thinking clearly about the rules they come up with. A player is on the ground and an opponent pushes the ball under him hoping to get a holding the ball free for pulling it in. The umpire tells them he is not paying the free. Quite right. But why not penalise the player who pushed it under? The “pulled the ball” in rule was instituted to stop players holding up play. Whether you pull or push the effect is to do just that. So it should be a free against whoever did the action to hold up play. Why not?

As LilRedFE said, the umpires have enough difficulty umpiring the game without having to keep track of who the best and fairest player is. And they naturally focus on the players they see most - midfielders. Coaches votes are much better, but I wonder to what extent they are affected by internal management of players by the coach, eg. coach gives a player a vote as an encouragement award. My guess is that wouldn't have much affect on the outcome for the top players.

Yes, but if you want to know 'what happens if the Saints kick the next 2 goals', the live ladder won't help you.

If you want to fill in the gaps in Grapeviney's nice table regarding % and the Saints' score, just copy and paste the following into Google search to see the score Sydney has to get to beat our percentage: For example, if the Saints have scored 80 points, then paste into the search field: =1.30546190155091*(1542+80)-1979 that gives 138.459204316, so they need to score 139 points. Replace 80 with whatever the Saints have scored as the match progresses.

Agree. Very odd choice of words.

The commentator keeps tellinbg us the score (which we can see on the screen) but has he told us which way the wind is blowing?

I can't stand most of the commentators, but I like the crowd noise. Umpire mike and crowd noise would be best. But since that's not provided, I find I can tune out of most of the commentary. Occasionally something they say registers which just confirms why I don't listen to the commentators.

Some in the media won't be happy until they can make public whatever upset Petty without having any concern that that may be more upsetting to Petty than what happened on Friday night.

Does he say anything in private? If so, it's having little effect.

Still confused - excuse my aging brain. If we lose we stay on 60 points. If Freo win and Bris win the ladder is: Geelong 68+ Bris. 64 Fre. 62 If C'wood win they are 64 and we are not in top 4. If Syd win they are 64 and we are not in top 4. So we need both of those 2 to lose if we lose regardless of percentage. No?

Aren't you forgetting Freo? If they win they are on 62 so we'd need both of those things to happen if we lose. Or am I confused?