sue

Maybe because the lack of numbers would make the artificial crowd noise seem laughable.

I agree about not wanting multiple changing angles. But there are far too many close-ups. Medium wide with occasional wide shots replacing the regular checks on the shaving skills of players who have marked the ball.

Agree about the commentary, but I'm surprised you are happy with the camera angles. I'm in total agreement with the criticisms listed in the article. Yesterday there was a few times when all we saw was a ball bouncing on a green(ish) background.

It seems so easy to fix. At least they should try it for a few matches involving clubs who have no chance of making the eight. I mean the camera angles. There is no way to fix the commentators.

A lot to like in this: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-11/what-if-broadcasters-are-the-source-of-afl-image-problem/12437678 (Mods: couldn't find an existing topic, merge please)

If the player kicking out could signal to other that he is kicking it down the middle and all the other backs who were trying to make space for a short/medium kick immediately ran to pick up the nearby forwards rather than avoid them, then even if the ball came back in you'd be prepared. Then the odds may favour the kick up the middle being done more often.

I presume the OP's title is asking how bad we are now compared to previous years or maybe to other clubs. IMO it is madness to assume either question can be sensibly answered yet (although it is clear we are not good).

Come on. Richmond have an 'enforced' policy of appearing jokey before games. Anyway after their recent previous performances they would be unlikely to take any team lightly. There are lot os reasons for kicking us, but let's not look for evidence beyond the bleedingly obvious.

I doubt it. I think it would lead to a big hole in your life. The club will improve as it has from time to time, but it may never do better than making up the numbers and the odd final series. Sad to say I could live with that. Cue posters saying my attitude is the cause of our status. Cue me saying balderdash - I have no influence. (Cancelling membership would be cutting off my nose to spite my face. Would just lead to your disband option.)

Excellent post Deanox. One issue not addresed is the fitness of players enabling coaches to cause low-risk congestion. We've had suggestions of fewer players, less rotations etc. Here's a new one - longer quarters! And increase the length again if players continue to get fitter. Take that AFL.

There’s not much fairness hereabouts. But I see the GC who have passed us according to the doomsayers don’t seem to be losing to Cats by just a few points.

I do so often, probably more than is good for my mental health.

thanks, but the problem where I am is the other way around. I can only get the radio through digital (either through an app or on my digital radio), and the digital radio is commentary is behind the TV video. I guess I could sync them on something like Kayo where I can pause the video and let the radio catch up, but not on the unpausible free-to-air (where removing the unplausible commentators is most desirable).

I'd love to do it, but I always find the radio is well behind the visual play on the TV. Am I doing something wrong?

Yes but surprisingly they still haven’t made a collection of different crowd noises for different circumstances and trained someone how to use it.

A lot of interesting points here: How did we arrive here? Who, or what, is to blame? And is there a solution? Jonathan Horn breaks down the game’s current malaise An increasingly hard sell: just what has happened to AFL football?

Sorry to disappoint, but 4 weeks is not a fair whack compared to Spargo's 2 - a youngish non-leader got rubbed out for 2 weeks for a far less serious offence than those committed by a senior VC (leader++) of C'wood. I'm staying unrelaxed about the penalty being only 2 more weeks. If Spargo was 1 week and Koz one week or fined, then maybe 4 would be a 'fair whack'. And C'wood are still whinging, though at least they finally decided against appealing.

But it was just Malcom's pants, no?

True That's why I suggested Ralph's article was ironic. But I guess my post suggesting he didn't intend irony was ironic.

Sounds a tad ironical

SImple. Club claims breach was all due to drink and thus unintentional, and then state club will deal with drink issue as breaking of internal club rules. Club in control of penalty. Simple. (ButI can't see them getting away with it this time.)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-01/coronavirus-afl-steele-sidebottom-confused-about-breach/12411762

Keepings off? If that goes on too long don't commentators usually say the defense is so well structured that there are no options to go forward?

For the same reason I'm doing it here. I didn't think it was relevant to the point I was making. I find it annoying when people quote a long screed just to comment on one point in it, often without even highlighting that point. If I misrepresented you in some way I apologise.

Yes, it would be bizarre if Saty (or anyone) had actually said it. But he didn't. He is just saying some things are more important to him. I doubt if he is alone there. I'll go further and say that if (to my surprise) there is anyone who is more emotionally invested in footy than in anything else, then that person may have a problem. Beat me up.