sue

We old farts know how to use our smart phones. But we have more taste than to use stickers.

Interesting that TM said that there is more room at Casey than Gosch's paddock. Could that be why we don't do well in the wide open spaces?

All very reasonable except I bet the umps would allow some 'star' players a slow set shot from there. A bit like Buddy's 'natural arc'.

I can understand that pressure can cause problems with set shots. But if someone like Petracca has been shown how to do a low ball drop (I presume he has!) I cannot see how pressure would cause him to revert to a high ball drop. It might mean he is too stiff with his action or something and he still misses, but I can't see how pressure would cause him to revert to a high ball drop.

If so, and TMac wasn't leading to the pocket he should have been ignored

He did the right thing in not try to score because the probability of kicking a point would be quite high giving them the ball. But if he did the same kick but into the pocket there is a good chance it would end up out of bounds or a ball up and burn through more time. He kicked it to about the worst spot possible.

Pity the siren didn't go a few seconds later. Looked like Hunt had kicked the ball past the last defender and may have run onto it into goal.

What really pisses me off is this magical protected zone whose limit seems to vary with the whim of the umpire. Blatant similar ones not paid, blatant worse ones under the old rules (which still apply) ditto. Since the umpires are guessing already, why not have them guess whether the player running past is likely to interfere with the player with the ball. If not, no 50m. Almost every one of these 'in the protected zone' penalties would require the infringing player to tear muscles to be able to change direction to interfere with the player with the ball.

Ben Brown is a must have if we are in the GF, scores level with 50 seconds to go. When he marks outside 50m he can do his usual 100 metre walk up routine, starting at 29 seconds, walk in for another 20 and kick a point. Game over.

have a go at editing the Wiki page.

The trouble with these dedicated slots is that they distort the draw generally and can lead to poor matches depending on how the 2 teams are travelling at the time - there may be much better matched teams to play in the slot and often this will be predictable by the end of the preceding year. (Of course this is not foolproof, but has to have a higher probability of getting it right than just playing the same 2 teams every year). It is hard enough to arrange a draw without these extra constraints (no matter whether the criteria for the draw is be nice to big clubs or one of the other many aims the AFL or supporters may have). While it may be fairer to the clubs which are not already getting these 'featured annual' slots, if the AFL keep on adding more of these annual events it will all get even harder. To produce a better overall draw over the entire season, maybe it would be better to drop the lot of them - even from a commercial point of view. Won't happen though.

ok sorry

That's simple, but it assumes the teams we are playing are identical. I'd prefer sides which was most likely to win each game. Extra runners or talls etc depending on the strength and weakness of the opponent. Obviously that needs to be done without too much disruption.

In fact we seem to do the opposite. Wasn't the public announcement that Nev wouldn't play made well in advance of final team deadline last week?

No doubt whatsoever? I'd love to live in that universe. Is the opening 'we' referring to supporters, or the players and coaches who played with him. The supporters' views would hardly matter. Also I hadn't realised that our incompetent medicos had examined him and rejected him. Sorry, I have a niggling doubt you are right.

They won't change the rule mid-season. They'll just change the interpretation. Will be intriguing to hear the AFL's weasel-words.

Quite right. The AFL has the resources to lean on the VFL etc to do a lot of trialing for it. If 666 doesn't work (and I think its objectives are wrong so I hope it doesn't) it will take a few season before the AFL admits it was a mistake and then they will introduce a replacement which is also not tested.

Why do we need more scoring? Compared to most games, AFL is a goal-fest already. 666 just means more rules and delays. Congestion is not much changed but interesting tactics are probably more constrained. The congestion that occurs nowadays is largely because of the the fitness of players and the big bench. That's where the solution is. Here's a basket ball analogy where there is absolutely too much scoring IMO. Players have gotten taller so it's easier to score. So you raise the hoops if you want to keep the game the same. You don't introduce netball rules about who can stand where.

Last year I searched for the rules and had a similar experience to Mazer R. It's an absolute disgrace. Normally people say in a choice between a conspiracy and a stuff-up, choose the latter. But hiding the rules of a game is so mind-boggingly unlikely as a stuff up, you have to wonder. About time one of our so-called sporting journos at least drew attention to this.

true, but there will be supporters of 16 other teams who will be happy as long as they defeat a team they hate in the GF.

I hated GWS when they first came in as an artificial entity. But now with Scully gone I just look at them as a team which I can barrack for when they play Geelong, Essendon and C'wood (and anyone else if it suits MFC position on ladder etc.) . I'd rather seem GWS win a flag than any of the above teams (and probably some others like Hawthorn).

True. I don't watch horse racing so perhaps someone can tell me if the commentators there ex-champion horses? Employ good commentators rather than ex-stars. The odds of finding an ex-star who is also a good commentator are low.

Of course the bolded bit is right for the actual team, But as the weeks go by (4 is maybe the minimum) it is of increasing interest to supporters to worry (or rather speculate/hope) about the others. If the other teams initially favoured to be top 8 were all at 4-0 and we were at 1-3 then probably it's not worth hoping for results in other matches (so let your personal hatreds rip), but it certainly helps us recover our position relative to them if the other supposedly top teams are also losing games.

Me too. And most of it is name dropping or showing off in some other way.

No.