sue

One good thing about Round 1 being a GF re-match is that both teams are '6 weeks behind' or whatever. Gives both an extra week to get back into it (and on equal terms).

Asked my o/s mate. They stream it when it is on but with no advance notice in their match lists. He says currently they are streaming some other practice match. So our game may not be on or missing first half.

But why say anything now publically? I can only presume he is playing to the Cat supporters.

This is the current standard political apology coming from governments. If you say "I apologise if you are offended" with the implication that no reasonable person would be offended, you can appear to be apologising and can't be proved to be not apoogising. I'd reject any apology with this qualification was insincere.

I was in need of a good laugh and reading this I got it: https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2021&rt=LA&st=CG

What is new about the bolded bit?: They will also penalise players who don’t legally dispose of the football if they’re "balanced and steady" when tackled, if they have previously been awarded a mark or free kick, or if they drive their head into a legal tackle.

Sorry if this has been answered earlier, but is any of this event going to be streamed for us Demon supporters who are not in Melbourne? Even those in WA may want more.

With Gawn making those undoutably wise comments, he can expect a lot of flak by the media next year,. Very brave of him.

Thanks for those who answered this. I was aware of the Clarrie and Gawn 'moves'. I just thought there must have been more than that. And Jontee says there may be even less.

Probably I missed it, but I can't recall any posts discussing what coaching changes (if any) were made in the second half. Any ideas?

If only they were joking.

Yes, but could they couldn't do it in time to wind down the player's swearing. Personally I'd prefer swearing to BT.

They also need to consult on friction.

Is that true? I reckon we only hear a fraction of what the umpires say or the whistle blowing volume. And I don't think it is because it is simply drowned out by BT's bliterhing. I assume they wind it down and up?

Yes, but if they got that 1 goal closer they could have overtaken us wihtin the quarter. A team can be apparently far better than the opponent and still lose. That too is footy. If you weren't nervous at that point in the game you couldn't possibly be a Demons supporter. 😀 Anyway, while we had a great year and a great final series all I'm saying is we shouldn't get over-confident about the size of the gap between us and other teams. But if it makes any of us happy to be over-confident, fine. Just as long as the players are not. (Confidence within bounds is of course good.)

But I bet you were feeling nervous in Q4. They had significant injuries, we didn't. Yes, we were probably the better team, but if they got an extra goal at a critical time, who knows... I'm just saying the gap between the teams is not as large as some on here are saying.

I doubt you'd be saying that if you were a Dog's supporter or it happened the other way around. Well, perhaps you might, but you'd be spitting chips.

I have just watched the first final against Brisbane. We could easily have lost that and who knows what would have happened if we did. Too much hubris around here.

Ha ha. No, that was clearly very unusual and especially unusual in a GF as many posters have gleefully stated. I mean uninteresting/tedious as a spectacle for the neutral spectator. Aussie rules has a nice balance between too much scoring (eg. basketball) and too little (eg. soccer). Goals scored from high pressure situations locked in the forward line are often very interesting, though preferably without congestion. I'd be against rule changes that reduce their importance.

Sorry, I 'misspoke'. I should have only said if they move (forward) on the line. Re going off-the-line, you are of course correct. I fear they are almost always too late calling play-on when a player goes off the line, especially if they are simultaneously shouting 'stand'. To mount my usual hobby-horse, I reckon the whole play-on arrangement is the wrong way around. The player on the mark should be allowed to move as soon as he thinks the player with the ball has played on. Let the umpire judge if he moved too early and pay a penalty if so. The only time the umpire need shout play-on is when the player with the ball stands still for too long holding up play.

100% agree. I'm guessing one reason we don't just hear the crowd + umpires is that we'd get crowd+umpires+players_swearing. May not be appropriate on free-to-air, but as an option on Fox/Kayo/whatever, why not.

A question. Would it achieve the same ends as the new rule without giving so much advantage to the player with the ball and avoiding the paying of ridiculous 50m penalties if: The man on the mark was required to start on the mark and stay there, but once the player with the ball starts to move, either off the line or on the line, allow the player on the mark to move sideways. Can't say I have spent any time thinking this through and how different it would be from earlier years, but perhaps it's a compromise worth looking at?

Do we really? While the ball zinging down the ground leading to a goal is exciting for the team scoring (and its supporters), in some ways it is a bit repetitive and even tedious. Whereas some grinding in the forward 50 leading to snapped goal is more likely to look like goal of the year to me.

The thing I 'enjoy' most about BT is his mystical knowledge of which was the ball will turn in shots towards goal, especially when there is no wind. Half the time it does the opposite of what he said, but he takes no notice.

Worked well for what objective? Certianly not the one stated when it was first introduced.