sue

I see that differently. Most of us expected to be clobbered in this game (except for a few who always have a gut feeling we will win - dunno what they are eating, but they need to see a quack). So a team with a large number of marginal/inexperienced players with 2 late withdrawals who have hardly played together blew the game. Some see excuses, I see reasons. We finally looked like a decent team again, but blew it. A lot better than most of the rest of this year.

I'm still 98.3% happy with the result.

The age of miracles is not yet passed brothers and sisters.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2019-05-27/levers-ankle-not-a-worry missing a half plus is not a great way to regain match fitness, but better than MFCSS feared I guess.

It is more relaxing and comforting in a weird way being back in situation normal. I think I need therapy; probably too late for that.

Being a MFC supporter, I don't think that will do the trick. Any anti-depressants on offer?

FCS you blokes. I keep coming to this thread hoping there is information on Lever and all I get is people wallowing in nostalgia. Must be a thread for that somewhere else? Please.

Ah, so it's now "three strikes and you're in"

Actually they are bloody good compared to what they were when many on Demonland were young. There was a time when the most reliable prediction was tomorrow the same as today. Fast computers, better models and more input data have made a big difference.

I didn't imply it was acceptable. It's bloody disappointing. But our situation requires more analysis than just comparing a number with Carlton's.

I wonder what their percentage would be if half their best players were injured. Sorry to be looking for excuses, but I reckon some on here would blame the team for losing if the team bus was hit by a meteorite on the way to the oval.

Reward? The AFL sure knows how to fuel conspiracy theories. On the other hand....

If any other organization had those figures and did nothing about it would be subject to a royal commission. (well, perhaps not for football unless there was money involved. Wait... - there is.

I expect so. He was hardly likely to announce his concerns publicly.

Talk about bringing the game into disrepute. In the USA supporters could probably bring a class action against the AFL for these cozy arrangements.

What do you think about that Macca? Was stopping this in your list of ways to improve umpiring? If not, it should be added.

I am totally staggered by what Wrecka45 posted. Umpires go to club's training!!! WTF? You could knock me down with the proverbial feather. Unless they were to rotate around the country and around the clubs uniformly this seems totally unacceptable to me. Fairness must be done AND be seen to be done. Seems neither is fine by the AFL.

RIght on in bold. No wonder we get inconsistent outcomes. Some are helped to avoid breaking the rules, some are warned and some are pinged. What a mess. And this is not the only instance of umpires selectively telling players what the rules are. There are several examples, but the most outrageous is warning a player kicking for goal after the siren to not move off his line. The umpires should keep out of it and assume the players know the rules. It is on-field coaching which is totally unacceptable since there is no way the umpires can do it evenly.

Since this thread has elements of general discussion of umpiring and not just 'why we might be hated or not', I'll add this re Daisy Thomas' woes: The AFL clarified on Tuesday that all boundary and field umpires are instructed to assist teams in ensuring they uphold the 6-6-6 rules before play is officially restarted. So why does any team ever get warned or pinged for infringing? It would require deliberate ignoring of the umpire' assistance, which seems unlikely. Sounds like yet another rule that is left to the vagaries of the umpire's mood. Macca, you miss my sarcastic point entirely and instead yet again repeat your well-known views on which my post made no comment. In answer to your genuine question, I won't explain how umpiring can be perfected since to repeat my well-known views, all I claim is that it can be improved and it is worth trying to do so.

I must congratulate you Macca on your finding a new reason to not try to improve the umpiring - the fans enjoy it when it is bad.

I'm also old but here is one possible reason the club may have publicly said the PF wasn't reviewed (even if they did do it). They may have wanted to make the point that the poor play was so unlike our usual style that nothing could be learnt on what needed tweaking from that performance. For example, they might know the players were absolutely buggered by the many previous do-or-die games or that a radically different plan was required for 2019, so no point in looking for problems with the old one. And when this year came around, doing the latter was blighted by surgeries, fitness and injuries as well as poor form from good players.

the MRP hasn't fixed him up unfortunately

I also thought he played on from beside tte make, not behind at the time. But I haven't seen the replay.

ditto. Some seem to be forgetting that before the match most of us were expecting we'd be thumped because we were out of form, hit badly by injuries and playing in WA. (I omit reference to fear of the umpiring in WA because I know that will set people off).

Funnily enough I find that people can walk and chew gum at the same time and do so on these two issues. Which poster whinging about umpiring has said or even implied we have a team of in form champions? It is not a defence of the poor quality of umpiring or the difficulties imposed on them by the nature of the game or AFL HQ to point out we have some poor players.