binman

Yep, i reckon we ought be careful about casting too many aspersions. We will have our history i'm sure.

Great. I've got kayo already. So now I lose tge benefit of the afl app.what does tbst mean for the replay library and afl pro (which is what I mainly use afl live for)? I have to pay for live pass to use?

Wish this game was at Punt road. I watched us play part of a casey v tiger's match prior to a dees game a few years back, but have never watched a full game or sat in the stand.

same spot as dl4e?

Which is why I said at the risk of generalising Subjective? Yes - which is why i prefaced my comment with 'i think' Stereotyping? Maybe. Is a positive stereotype (assuming you think compromise and preparedness to share power are postive) better than a negative one?

Their CEO (i don't even know who it is) and board must be in the firing line atm. I mean they commissioned the report. It's hard not to think this was strategic in terms of responding to Lumumba's accusations and getting ahead of potential compensation claims. Their own report is then incredibly scathing and includes the finding that club’s racism resulted in 'profound and enduring harm' to many individuals, families, & communities. Which aint going to help them in any compensation case. They sit on the report. For two months. In all likelihood it is leaked because of this decision. So they lose complete control of the narrative. They then green light Eddie to freestyle and respond at length to the leaked report, and try to spin it as a proud day for the club. I mean what were they thinking agreeing to let Eddie front the media (i understand his power - but that is part of the problem). And once they green light Eddie to be the club's spokesperson surely to goodness the CEO is also at that presser. Or even better they release a carefully worded written response and schedule a presser for say Friday to create some space and control. What a complete shambles from a governance perspective.

A shocking rule. As you say it is totally random in its application. Not just because different umpires interpret it differently, but sometimes it paid when the player with the ball happens to turn one way or when a player tricks his opponent. And like all really bad rules (in sport and life) the penalty almost always outweighs the potential impact of the actual infraction.

1. That doesn't shock me. There is however a school of thought that in business there is significant pressure on women who are ambitious and seek leadership positions to play the 'man's game' and adopt the behaviors that go with that game 2. True. I wasn't suggesting men have a mortgage on wanting to hold onto power. At the risk of generalizing, I do think though that at women are better at comprise and sharing power and not as interested in influence or status for its own sake

He's a funny bugger: https://www.titusoreily.com/afl/eddie-mcguire-no-need-to-thank-me-for-ending-racism-globally

This may well be true hem. And some suggest that it is one reason why women make better leaders. However i think the real issue is that it is an undeniable fact that in almost every western, democratic society (and others too no doubt) that men are the ones who have the power, influence and status. And it is equally true that most men are in no hurry to cede their power, influence and status.

I can't see this ever changing - unless they implement some sort of radical netball style zones with only designated players allowed in the 50 metre arcs. Which I sincerely hope never happens because that idea contradicts the foundation of Australian rules football - the philosophy that it is a 360 degree game and unlike all other football codes (with the possible exception of Gaelic football) players can go wherever they want on the field. I also don't mind contested, crowded footy but understand the desire for more one on one contests and with it more scoring. My issue is that this desire (harking back to a perceived golden era in footy in the 1980s before footy became uber professional - a time we are not going back to by the by) has driven almost all of the rule changes in the last decade. Which is all well and good - except for the fact that, perhaps with a handful of exceptions, the changes have been spectacularly unsuccessful in terms of increasing scores or one on ones. And almost all the rule changes - and almost as significantly, changes to how some rules are interpreted - have had unintended consequences that more often than not have made the game less attractive and more messy (third man in says hi) I'm not against rule changes per se, but I'm definitely in the camp of minimizing rule changes and letting the game find its level and sort itself out. The way footy evolves is one of things i most like about it. I'm no expert on soccer or gridiron but my feeling is that AFL football evolves more fluidly. I'm sure those other codes are constantly evolving but AFL seems never to stand still tactically. Perhaps it is function of the sport having been fully professional for only 30 odd years (as opposed to 50 plus for gridiron and soccer) and maybe the size of the ground, the aforementioned 360 degree nature of the game and the number of participants are all factors but footy seems to be in a constant state of evolution. I have heard coaches say footy evolves tactically within seasons, let alone year to year. Look at last year. After 5 rounds people were going crazy about the chip and mark, go slow tactic teams were employing and the resulting low scores. The sky was falling. Footy was dead. But by the end of the season coaches took a more aggressive tack, the ball was moving faster, there was much more switching, more run and carry, scores went up and the issue was forgotten. And that quicker ball movement meant that across the board there were more one on ones inside 50 as teams could not flood back as effectively. That tactical shift happened without any intervention by the AFL in terms of rule changes. Freo was the perfect example of this shift - unfortunately for us, as they decided to be more aggressive with their switching and ball movement when they played us. And we were hopeless and shutting their movement down.

The term the 'boy's club' seemingly refers to the idea jobs goes to 'good blokes' who are connected and that those in the club ALWYAS have each other's back. It seems to me in Melbourne (and perhaps Australia) the 'boys club' also incorporates the powerful network of private school boys where power is jealously guarded. But it seems that more often than not the term 'boys club', whilst it is usually used as a criticism, it is almost always a pretty weak criticism. (not saying that's how you are using it JD). That's to say it is used to explain a scenario (like Healy reflexively defending Eddie) but that's are far as it goes in terms of critiquing the poisonous impact of the concept. But really the 'boy's club (which might as well be called the white anglo boys club) is at the heart of issues such a systemic racism and systemic gender inequality. It is rife in Australian business and even more so in our big sporting codes. With the AFL it infects the clubs, the AFL (polo anyone, or perhaps drinks at the Warrnambool carnival?) and the media that reports on it. And the motto of The Boys Club? Status Quo

These quotes from Eddy further make your point AOB: 'If we were found wanting in the past' The past? - At the same presser, Peter Murphy, a member of the Collingwood integrity committee said though Collingwood has improved in some areas 'they 'still have a long way to go'. 'we’re not a racist club' Isn't that precisely what the report's finding is? About Lumumba: “What we want to do more than anything is put our arms around him and take the heat out of this constant race debate.” Code for make it all this yucky business go away. What 'we want'? Lumumba has made it crystal clear that he doesn't want them to put their 'arms around him'. How typically patronizing. He doesn't want to be mollified. Or comforted like a toddler who has stubbed his toe. He is angry. And people are uncomfortable with that. What about acknowledging what Lumumba wants - addressing the systemic racism at the CFC. Take the heat out of this constant race debate? Really? Take the heat out? Read dismiss it and hide all this unpleasantness away. Constant race debate? Poor old Eddie, the constant desire for some people to constantly bang on about race and racism must be so tiring. Um Eddie, i don't want to be the bearer of bad news but the annoying little race debate 'ain't going anywhere soon, as much as you and your ilk would love it to. For someone who makes living in the media Eddie is remarkably poor at communicating messages - or hiding his true colors. Never has the phrase 'part of the problem, not part of the solution' been more apt.

That's an interesting point AOB - a valid one i reckon. I was listening to a podcast (the excellent fivethirtyeight podcast) yesterday that made similar point about the republican party in the states ie the Republican party claim not to have a racism 'problem' but have essentially stood still on the issue for 20 years whilst the Democrats (and the society as a whole) have shifted considerably towards a greater acceptance of the reality and impact of systemic racism

The truth?

That's the first recent photo i've seen of him. Jeez he looks like his dad. McQ, do you know if if Freo have any interest in Kobe and if not why not? Alos am i right to assume Kobe and his Dad still live in Perth? If so its pretty big commitment to be over in Melbourne for a whole preseason.

The skills are so much better accross the board as young women who have played multiple seasons at junior level come into the league. Bannon, for example, is a completely natural footballer. Exhibit A was tge free she won herself near the end of tbst quarter by not taking possession of the ball and getting tackled without it. They must be loving playing in perfect conditions. It feels like 75% of our games have been in windy or wet conditions. Sometimes both.

Footy is back. Go dees.

No you're right, it's swallow. Or perhaps it is Spallow.

Would be harsh on maxy, but to be honest it wouldn't surprise me.

Becoming one of my all time favourite demons.

Too bloody right. I wouldn't have let the [censored] in. How likely is it that someone who has down played the severity of the virus with his view of vaccinations and seemingly very cavalier about transmission risk (by the by all of which is pretty easy when you are a spoiled rich boy) that him and sycophantic entourage will follow the quarantine requirements in Oz?

How did you find a photo of me?

Agree pollyana. As I think bing181 noted the dees have lacked strong on field leadership for a long time. I think we are heading in the right direction in tgis regard but I fully concede that could be wishful thinking.

Thanks Dworship, interesting stuff (the post and the clip). My takeaways are: It reinforces the importance of coaching, however as you suggest more in terms of the importance of coaching as it relates to the development of players, particularly personal development Nick Saban does not explicitly make this point but implies that the development of players is a team effort, with the involvement of range of coaches and key staff Nick Saban emphasizes that helping players develop than elite mindset is critical - they need to have 'champion' mindset The top of the pyramid (the team goal) is not winning a championship - it is everyone being the best they can be, a champion team 9and a team of champions?) and a winning mindset (eg dominating their opponents). The implication being winning will take care of itself with these other things in place Saban doesn't mention himself as one of the key parts of the winning 'pyramid' or things about tactics, game style, technique etc etc (he might have them as elements, he just didn't mention them) Your post and the Saban clip reinforce the good points that Deespencer made about success being a function of any number of detail, samll and lareg - eg admin, governance, resourcing, facilities, development, etc etc And finally, perhaps it is is confirmation bias, but it also reinforces that the key element of success is the players. As Suban notes ,it is the exception, not the norm that some people want to be the very best they can be and strive for excellence. Of course development is critical but the base he is working from is players who want to be the best. Good development program gives players the best chance of realising that goal - but no amount of development will make up for a lack of personal drive. Which is why elite sports put so much emphasis in the drafting process on character. And the other related point is development and indeed tools such as mindfulness area all about preparing the players for optimal performance on game day. Development as investment. But once the whistle blows it is pretty much all down to the players to ensure their performance reflects that investment and they perform at their optimal level.