sue

I agree the umpires are not in a great position to vote, but I'm not sure the coaches rankings are without issues. For example, I expect they sometimes use the vote to make a point within the club, reward someone for doing their job etc, all of which may not be relevant to them being best and fairest.

How about a limit of zero interchanges, just 2 reserve players as it was in days of yore? With no chance to rest footy will no longer resemble an under 9 kid's game. And 16 a side only goes against the laws of the game if the laws are unchanged! Have you handled the out of bounds change yet? A move to fewer interchanges is the moderate version of zero interchanges - there might be a sweet spot where it stops congestion without losing whatever advantage having interchanges gives. Though I'm not sure what advantages they actually give. Can anyone enlighten me? Anything more than could be achieved with more than 2 reserves?)

Well he could do a good job in one area (keeping this season going) and do a bad in another (look of the game). The latter may have a longer lasting effect.

Sorry I don't understand why you asked that. I don't recall addressing how long we should give Goodwin in my post if that is what you are asking. I was just pointing out Dr's remark about Hardwick being under the pump earlier on may be relevant to Goodwin's position. But if you are asking that, I'd think Goodwin better show some very clear progress in 2021. But if someone has the stats on the number of Richmond fans calling for Hardwick's head year by year and when he started to come good, I am open to reconsidering.

Of course it proves nothing but I don't think Dr was saying it did. Just the obvious one that people were calling for Hardwick head before he got to where he is now and maybe, just maybe, the same may happen to Goodwin. Was there any evidence that Hardwick had more ability than Goodwin at a similar stage? If not Dr's 'assumption' was perfectly reasonable.

No. You forgot to say “we all know that”.

Training will be difficult. There is no flat area there big enough for an oval unless the military base is razed.

There is sufficient spectacle in our football game without the need for the manly gladitorial sniping and mocking actions which seem to excite some of the TV commentators so much.

Not by the commentators sadly.

Yes it's not much different - if Rebel thought they could get more publicity by having BT dig a hole and fill it in again, they'd probably pay for him to do it. But since you ask and at risk of getting political in a footy forum (over something AFL related that is essentially political IMO) I just believe a lot of 'economic' activity is absurd - digging up a patch of the MCG as a PR stunt seems so wasteful when better things could be done with the same resources. The argument that Rebel got lots of PR bang for its buck doesn't justify to me doing something absurd. Jobkeeper etc is providing a basic income when there is no work (though its implementaion seems prone to corruption). With increasing automation requiring less and less labour over the last 150+ years, maybe conventional employment makes less and less sense. Maybe some form of jobkeeper will need to become permanent regardless of Covid. Let's spend more time at the footy and less time doing useless tasks like transporting some grass to Qld. Mods - feel free to delete. I won't be responding to the inevitable comments from those who believe if you have the money you can do anything you like and it will be all for the best.

There are a lot of worse things that go on as model behaviour. Eg. gloating and mocking over an opponent when you get the better of him, and well, Tom Lynch.

for even more jobs paid for by rebel let’s all dig some holes and fill them in again. Just as insane.

Sorry to repeat myself, but Rebel could get exposure (that's all they want of course) in other ways that would have put the cash into footy. Instead the bulk of the cash is going to some turf jockeys and a transport firm (unless the AFL has extracted a lot more from Rebel which I doubt).

The percentages of kicking for goal from the boudnary may not be high, but you'll get a lot more shots at goal or the ball will be hit into the corridor where for good reasons defenders do not hit it now. As for a defensive exit causing the curent problem, it will be used even more with this rules change. When you kick it to your tall player near the boundary opposition players often think it is a win if the hit it out on the full, thus turning loss of possesion into a 50 50. You'll be keen to give them more opportunities to do so.

But this won't discourage kicks along the line into the forward zone. Quite the contrary. Kick it there and if you don't mark it, then it will either be hit out on the full or back into the corridor - both cases probably giving you a shot at goal. It would almost be madness to kick it anywhere else but down the line. So the play will be closer to the boudnary than ever.

They could trial this in the GF. https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/that-is-wrong-and-unfair-afl-greats-slams-crazy-rule-change-conversation/news-story/e118ca3e4ac211b1bd75db034e3c9e5d

Disagree. Bloody stupid stunt to do regardless of who is paying. If Rebel wants some exposure, there are ways they could pay for it which would see actual cash go into footy instead.

Just want to congratulate you on the bolded phrase. I am so sick of commentators saying 'he marks the ball at its highest point' when what they actually mean is what you wrote.

From the ABC site: While I doubt the 'rugby state' reference indicates a likely new club for Hogan, I am puzzled why his conviction or not should be relevant to moving to NSW or QLD. Reads like states can ban people from other states with convictions which is nonsense Good luck going to the USA though.

You probably overlook the disasters at other clubs which is a natural bias. Show me the evidence that some other clubs have not done the same, including the Saints before I will feel too glum about this year.

And I bet you would have wagered good money at the end of 2018 that we wouldn't slip to #17 in 2019. Even the most infected by MFCSS is not that gloomy. Always look on the gloomy side of things - it has a catchy tune.

hmmm, not many perfect kicks to his lead in that. Close to zero.

What has St Kilda done in 1 year? We started at #17 and if we won one more game we too could have been thrashed by Richmond.....

Commentators don’t seem to think it is necessary

$750 fine. Wow that will really discourage him and his $%# coach from continuing to snipe. A football penalty is the only thing these guys understand.