John Crow Batty

We would have been better with Grundy instead of Gawn today so far. Reeves is cleaning him up.

I don’t think it’s a wise move to bring Tmac back in now. Takes him a while to get to form after an injury layoff.

Goal reviews won’t get any better until improved technology is introduced and it is clear the 4 field umpire system needs tweaking. There appears no coordination between them. The 4th umpire needs to be an experienced full time master umpire who follows the action but does not make ordinary flow of play decisions. However he needs to have the authority over the other 3 and can overturn decisions, step in when a clear infringement is missed and directs the other umpires on interpretation as the game develops. Like an orchestra conductor to keep musicians synchronised and in lockstep.

I was generally happy with our game but we lucked out. Carlton have been red hot for a while and brought out their A+ game and we matched them. Conditions did not suit us at all. Being switched off at start of games has to be addressed. Just makes it harder for us with our unsettled forward line to regain control. Hope we make a big statement early against the Hawks. Win next week and we can manage the last round depending on other results. If second spot looks unobtainable then fourth and a likely home final is ideal. 

10 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

For anyone that has doubt about the goal umpires call last night listen to the ABC audio interview with Marchbank - it  is clear as day that he did not touch it. 

Cripps after the game was asked about the touched ball incident and he said they got lucky.

I couldn’t tell if the Petracca kick was touched or not but when Cripps was asked after the game he said with a half sheepish smile they got lucky

Win this and we can chill out the last two games and have a home first final against Collingwood 

2 minutes ago, binman said:

The blue states in the USA, tragically partic the ones in the South with the biggest black populations, top every health, poverty, and educational disadvantage measure - not to mention drug overdoses, vioelnet crime, sex crimes, homicides, deaths in custody,  accidental death by gun etc etc measures. 

And ironically the governor of those states (eg Sarah Huckabee) are always complaining about federal overreach and pumping up their own tyres for being so independent yet also dominate the list for receiving federal funds.

If California, the most 'liberal' of all states, was a country it would be something like 6th in the world for GDP and basically subsidizes the southern blue states. 

America would economically collapse without California. Which makes the periodic calls for succession by some blue states, like Texas, so utterly ludicrous. 

And by the by, violent crime and homicide rates are dropping in California and increasing in most blue states. 

Think you are confusing blue with red states. Anyway almost a moot point as both political parties only govern for the elites. Nothing really changes. They are both warmongers who don’t give a [censored] about their people and happy to keep the con going with politics of division like they export to here. 

I wouldn’t write Collingwood off yet. They have been perched up the top of the ladder with little incentive to go hard in the past month or so. Recent form has declined but could easily pick up again.

Blues are pumped up to the gills. Super tough challenge for us. 

AI still has long way to go. Right now given this article about the level of intelligence of your average Collingwood supporter. 

We did very well with the late Jim Stynes and Sean Wight but since then most Irish recruits over the past 4 decades have just been average footballers with a couple rated very good like Zac Toohey. There is far more easily developed talent over here. No gold mine over there.

24 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

An awful lot of softies there.

38 minutes ago, Webber said:

I’m not going to argue with you JCB, but anecdotal perception in this case is meaningless compared to decades of measurable evidence, experimentation and analysis. Needless to say, the game today is also very different from Don Scott’s era. Skiing is a singular sport, in that it requires a rigid, locked in boot-ski combo. It also doesn’t have anything close to the ground impact forces of running, jumping etc, so the foot is spared loading forces. The rotational payoff of this locked foot and ankle, even with quick release boots, is a huge number of knee injuries. ACL’s meniscal tears, collateral ligament tears, and joint surface trauma.I know this, I rehabilitate them. 

I respect your medical expertise but I have worked as a nurse and many years as a manager in the Public Service heath industry. One observation I have made is that with vexing medical issues there is always a yay or nay opinion amongst professionals. But when well financed vested interests are stakeholders their preferred opinions usually wins. Manufacturers hate supportive boots because they are ugly and expensive to make, require custom fitting in many cases and players don’t like them because they slow them down, are uncomfortable and lack sex appeal. The AFL well known for shunning protective gear don’t  like protective boots because they slow down the game down and as well as the other negative image perceptions they hold.
 

Further there is no evidence that supportive boots are detrimental. They haven’t been used for decades and there is negligible current real world experience to test. There was a lot of controversy in the 1970’s when lightweight low cut soccer boots first appeared in football. They were blamed for an increase in foot and ankle injuries in days when ground conditions were primitive as well. Supportive boots are for support only. Twist my ankle slowly it won’t hurt much. Twist it fast then ouch.
As for skiing the only times I have had knee injuries is when skiing overseas and hired boots that turned out to be too soft and unsupportive. There were limited choices. 

s.

51 minutes ago, Webber said:

The old chestnuts. It’s a clinical and evidential truth that high ankle support boots are pointless, cos they don’t offer ANY support. EVERY player has both ankles strapped EVERY game and training session, cos it’s the only evidence-based (external) intervention for ankle injuries. As to the stiff boot/sole/hard cap toe idea, these are an unmitigated disaster in a fast running multi-directional sport. What you limit in movement through the foot (which only creates areas of specific load, thus habitual stress risk) is ultimately born higher up the chain - ankle, knee, hip. The foot and ankle are mobile structures, so we try and protect them from extremes without immobilising totally - flexible orthotics for the foot, strapping for the ankle. 

It is well documented that many old time footballers in the past had career ending knee injuries but I don’t recall many with career ending foot/ankle injuries.

I know it’s a different sport but try skiing with overly flexible light unsupportive boots. One would end up with sore ankles, knees and well as shins and thighs. Rigid supportive boots limit the risk most of these issues especially skiing fast or difficult terrain. I know well as I am an experienced skier.

Maverick Don Scott used to be plagued with foot injuries until he started wearing custom supportive high ankle boots which helped him through a long career. Granted it slowed him down but speed wasn’t the be all and end all of the game then.

1 hour ago, binman said:

There were no injuries related to running around in work boots and playing at glacial speeds back in the day?

Implementing protective footwear and slowing the game down to help minimise injuries. That’s outrageous.

1 hour ago, binman said:

Pretty handy I'm guessing when you're running 10 to 15 kms a game.

I guess the trade off is to reduce player safety to keep the game faster.

4 hours ago, bush demon said:

Soft modern-day  football boots is the problem.  The past players' association should insist on our players only wearing  Ron Barassi boots with  appropriate metal caps (ouch, kicking in danger) and thick leather soul and hard leathered skin.

And high ankle support. Modern boots sacrifice support for flexibility and mobility. 

We have been playing all of the season with an unsettled forward line mostly without Petty there but currently sit second on the ladder. Brown or Grundy can still do the second tall job. Fritsch will be back soon as well. Smith is also a handy replacement forward or back for Petty.  Not to forget about Clarry. 

2 minutes ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

Does some impressive things but hoo boy, not a real smart kid

Like De Goey but without the scandals yet.

Good to see Hawks showing their wares. We won’t be taking them lightly in a couple of weeks.

The AFL had the perfect opportunity to make a strong statement here and put the fear of god into cheating clubs but they didn’t. Basically saying if the match is important enough, go ahead and ignore the rules and face a flogging with with a feather.

The football media it seems are pushing the narrative that it was an honest mistake and not a deliberate cynical action to flout the rules as it appeared to anyone with average vision. Shifting the goal posts to turn the discussion into something else. How can a club doctor not see what everyone else saw? The vision of the collision and aftermath was damning.

5 minutes ago, layzie said:

Last night on SEN Gerard Healy opened with a 2 or 3 minute monologue about AFL club doctors. He made some great points about this not being an ideal profession for these people because you get paid less and much more possible scrutiny like this, he also went on to list the amazing practitioners he's had at club level and still sees as his personal doctors now. Kane then came in and echo'd his statements and they both went on the defend people in these roles and how good they have been and that Fisher was a brilliant doctor who made a mistake and will serve the appropriate punishment.

Will choose my words carefully on this because this incident has really stirred things up. I appreciate Gerard's take on this, I really do. It's important we get opinions from people who have been around these people longer than any of us, and these opinions have their place. However with the highest respect to these people, at this point in time and on a very rare occasion, I do not want to hear from ex players on this issue. 

I want to hear from completely independent sources. Experts in the field, scholars, people who have studied these injuries and written theses on the subject. I want to hear about what needs to happen, what needs to be different about processes, protocols etc. I don't want to hear Kane Cornes saying how doctors have it so tough and have to tend to so many things in the moment and could easily make a mistake by missing a potential concussion and requirement for a SCAT5 test, because to me that just means there is scope for another mistake to be made in future. This is absolutely not a time for the old "You wouldn't know because you never played or worked in a footy club, you don't know how hard it is" routine. 

No excuses, we need solutions and we need the select few people who actually know the subject back to front to come up with these. Not people with a conflict of interest or sticking up for mates. 

 

Sounds like a an attempt to whitewash the situation. It was an honest mistake, nothing deliberate and tactical is the narrative. Players get hefty suspensions for mistakes. But the language is always different, rather than a mistake it’s labeled as reckless, careless or deliberate. 

11 minutes ago, SFebes said:

How is this story tracking - I've been away a couple of days, any heat from the AFL? 

The more I think about it the more I think Port have blatantly cheated here. No test for Aliir and Jones subbed off with a "migraine" reeks something dodgy. You could understand a tiny amount if one of those but not both together.

I'm no lawyer nor know the exact rules but surely this is bringing the game into disrepute, ie; "abuse of position in order to obtain a benefit"?

If the AFL are serious about their head injuries then I think a harsh penalty of a decent fine, stripped of the one game premiership points for which they have erred in and loss of draft pick. Either all 3 or a combination of 2.

The penalty has to be severe to kill this kind of egregious flouting of the rules once and for all.