sue

Fun to watch because it would show how prone to MFCSS many here are. Would they be guaranteed to not get injured playing in the VFL? Better to have them playing together and with May and getting some knowledge of each other in games, something they have had almost zilch of to date.

Jetta may be back too soon, but looking to 2020, I'd prefer the backs to play together as much as possible this year to get to know each other than increase our chances of winning a mach by an unknowable, but probably small percentage.

It's tempting to believe that because if they were serious about having clear rules they'd get a team of lawyers to re-write the laws properly to clear up inconsistencies. Because of the nature of the game, there will always be difficulties, but there is no need for the current mess. Even getting a copy of the rules from the AFL is not easy which seems to imply they don't want fans discussing the actual rules and comparing them to what actually happens.

Is there a ruck contest which doesn't infringe (c)? Why is a hand more of a block than sticking out a big bum? As for (f) is the 1metre spacing in the rules?

I noticed that one too. It looked like both ruckmen did the identical thing simultaneously, so no way should that be a free against Max (or the other bloke, not that that was ever likely to happen).

On the other hand, as long as the risk of injury is not higher than normal, there is a lot to be said for them spending as much time as possible playing together before 2020. Cohesion. Do either of those two need surgery?

A wrongly called point (which was in fact a goal) could have a big an effect as a wrongly called goal (which was in fact a point). The main difference in reviewing is that touched ball decisions don't affect a point (and balls hitting the behind post rather than sailing through will only affect the score by 1 point, not 6. Seems to me there is a lot to be said for abandoning the video reviews entirely until they have a comprehensive reliable system in place for both.

That’s about the silliest thing I’ve read for a while. Complaining about a specific negativity is not the same as complaining about negativity as a concept as you have assumed.

Good idea. And it is not likely to irk traditionalists as much as other innovations the AFL has been happy to drop on us. But where would be the endless stream of media controversy if they did it. But I don't think you can extend to touched balls or too much of the game would change.

Let's not be too depressed. Though some will doubtless improve, in the nature of things some will also go backwards. Other clubs just have to look at us and say Richmond to see this is the case.

Rather than the odd over-reaction (in either direction) what is most disturbing to me is the AFL coming up with the Orwellian title of "Behavioural Awareness Officers". Add: I apologise, the AFL heavies have read 1984. Unfortunately they didn't read it as a warning but as a style guide.

The umpires could (at the AFL's direction) stamp out all such behaviour very quickly. Just pay a free for the slightest punch etc. Coaches would soon crack down on any players who gave away stupid frees. Instead they ignore the initial punch in plain sight and pay a free against the retaliator which produces a positive reinforcement for doing those cat-acts in the first place. (Yes, I like dogs and don't like cats.)

That title on their backs is so silly that this has to be a fake. Good work ET. (I hope.)

ABC News Headline: The AFL decides not to take action against a spectator who allegedly called an umpire a "bald-headed [censored]", as it maintains it is not coming down harder on the behaviour of crowds this season. Would you believe the censored word is there for all to see on the ABC website. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-12/afl-denies-crack-down-on-crowd-behaviour/11198746

Gawn seems to have his jumper pulled by his opponents very frequently without a free being paid. MFC should have a chat with the umpiring division.

No the umpires have never cost us a flag. But dare I say it: there is more to footy than winning the flag. The poor standard of umpiring and the clear biases which have been documented are not excused by our incompetence. ( I'm not saying you were saying that it was.)

Having some relatives killed fighting wars and even being decapitated as Fork'em states to proudly show how he got over it so easily, is completely different than having your family wiped out in a genocidal event or your land stolen. It takes a little longer to get over it, especially if the oppression continues affecting the survivors for 200 years. I suspect there is a lack of empathy amongst many who take the positions of some frequent posters here - they just can't imagine what it is like. They have always been in the 'in group' and never in a marginalised group like some of us. But nothing anyone says will change their minds.

OK, maybe some people booed him because of his flopping etc. But I'd bet my bottom dollar, a lot of racists felt free to boo him because they had that as an excuse to hide behind. That indicates progress to me - racists being embarrassed to be seen as simply that can only mean that in time those attitudes will only be held by a decreasing minority. Today's PC is tomorrow's social norm. Edit to add: Maybe better to say yesterday's PC is today's social norm.

Come on guys. That's clearly a spoof article. (I hope)

Agree. He now does some good passes compared to the wild delivery he used to do.

Understood. But trying to be as un-prejudicial as I can be, if I knew nothing about the bloke, those comments would have tipped him into my muppet basket. Let's take it a step further - maybe some of the other players should have walked up to Sam and punched his head. (After which several others would have had to stand in a circle and punch the player next to them.)

Sorry Demonland. I can't forget the muppet in those comments. It just confirms in my mind that he is a muppet. (Not that any confirmation is needed.)

He will win it. The umpires think he is such a great player that there is no need to pay him free kicks when his jumper is clearly pulled by his opponent.

I have no military experience but it certainly irritates me too.

True. I suspect it would be useful to practise with goal posts significantly closer together than normal. Then when you see wider goals in front of you under the pressure of a match, you will be more confident. For this to work it must be marked a failed attempt at training if you miss, so no one can excuse misses as 'well I would have got it on normal posts'.