sue

A reversal is more than a double penalty these days because all the defenders have probably rushed forward and will be out of defensive position

While fines on the basis of wealth may look attractive, total wealth can’t be calculated without appraising and valuing properties of many kinds. And then you discover the offender can’t pay a fine without selling a house. While income can vary from the previous year it is easier to measure. your idea of not disqualifying from the Brownlow is a good one. If someone is rubbed out for many weeks for a really bad act then they won’t be getting any votes during that period anyway. But we have to punish the act more than the outcome.

Good on the NRL, let's hope the AFL follows suit. True it is more difficult for society in general to have fines proportional to income since loads of rich people don't appear to make any money so their taxable income is vanishingly small. But I'd still base fines on the last tax return which would cover a good fraction of the population and produce some equity. Don't have to publish the fine if that is a privacy issue. (Sorting out the tax dodging classes is a relatively difficult project.)

We don't know. But if he wants to stay we'd be mad to trade him for anything other than an ace player - which is very unlikely to be offered. So I reckon the real question is: if he wants to go, how hard do we go to make him want to stay?

Fair enough. Perhaps the current discussion needs a different title however.

I don't like the title of this thread.

How many suffer from their version of MFCSS? Or are we unique?

Well someone has to balance the "all is lost" and "it's in the bag" posts.

The fact that no one has posted a summary is pleasing - it means very few subscribe to that Murdoch crud.

Definition of no common sense: AFL umpires

You are assuming it takes no effort to plan a strategy. Planning two is harder than one. While the decision on the day may be as simple as long stops vs short, the work needed to develop and manufacture different types of stops is the relevant analogy.

Yeah that ruined my footy career too. (Pre contacts)

Because there is no one else perhaps. Or maybe we will spring a surprise.

That was the striking thing about that video. Clearly under direction by the coach. How can the umps allow that. I hope the club released the video.

What extra does he get if he loses an appeal? If his career is likely to be sunk with 4 games missed in this truncated season, maybe it's worth a punt to try to get back earlier. Especially since there seems to be some support in the media that the 4 weeks is too harsh and out of line with previous decisions. (I leave aside the question of whoud he be selected in any case.)

Hah. No such thing in the AFL, they just change to rules.

AFLitis is a cruel disease Binman, but things will look better in the morning.

I'd have put this in a general umpiring thread, but couldn't find one. Another rule -not-of-the-week is players in the so-called protected zone. Being ignored at the moment (eg. Frisch's mark at 4:50 in Q1) Personally I think that is a good thing - so many have been paid where the offender would have had no effect on the play. But watch the umps pull one out at a critical moment to the despair of half the supporters (actually probably far less than half).

I don't see a problem with complaining in public if you have brought it up with the AFL and nothing changes. It's not just Gawn, but anything Gawn-related. As I and others have mentione elsewhere another standard tactic used to curb Gawn's dominance is to start tackling our mid-field players before the ball arrives. Happens all the time and rarely is a free paid.

I agree it should be stamped out even for far less aggressive actions than AVB's. But the hypocrisy of the commentators is sickening. I'm not so much referring to what they did in the past (you could forgive that if they have seen the light), but the fact anytime niggles start increasing they get so excited. Like a bunch of schoolboys shouting 'fight fight'.

Tackling our receivers at bounces before the ball comes to them seems to be a standard tactic against us to counter Gawn's dominance but a free is only rarely paid. The club should take this up with the AFL.

Kicking skills of both teams pretty woeful

So flaming obvious. Indicate to the 'small' players that the next tap is going wide and belt it. Instead he taps it to a player about to be tackled (or often, already tackled before the ball arrives) who then passes it to someone else also under pressure. Mix it up FCS.

Perhaps the club was misled by how well we played in some matches that Hogan missed.

Let's just hope he is right and the deficiencies are fixed asap.