Moonshadow

Over doses, me thinks

Drugs will do that to you Flash, my rrrse

Absolutely. It's a bad look for the game and only makes the rules very grey. If only one person can man the mark because of the 5m rule, how is it fair that his opponent can stand right there and shepherd?

It's kind of telling that the Hawks slotted goals on the boundary at 50, nailed set shots from every angle, but a guy like Bugg can't kick a single goal from numerous bread and butter shots. A small forward should have been in his element today. Bugg, Garlett and others around our goals have glaring weaknesses

Surely the defence aren't told by the coaches that they must all go up for the mark/spoil at the same time and leave at least one opponent loose to kick the goal. Happens every bloody week. Could put your house on it

Brisbane played a higher standard of footy yesterday

FMD! Could we make any more mistakes? Are we trying to lose?

Uncle Bitter and I sat behind the Stynes family at the G a couple of weeks ago. Lovely family. Tiernan is tall and skinny like a lot of kids his age. Looks athletic, big mitts on him. I think Brian Stynes' kids might have been there as well, but not sure about that. All very vocal Demon supporters, almost put BBO to shame

Hairball in the throat, I believe

Lever's did initially look at the ball but he turned and his eyes were off the ball looking at Goldy for his last 4 steps. Count them. I did. After this he did not turn and look at the ball again, hence why he was not hit by the elbow on the back of his head but across the chops. And his arms did contact Goldy's midrift. I can see, it's just that sometime I see better without the red n blue tinted glasses

It isn't, though a certain demonlander would like it to be

Drafted 2012, this is his 6th full year. Is it 6 or 8 years for RFA?

If not PA, where would Wines go? Norf or Saints? He will be RFA at seasons end, so not cost a club any picks or trades.

Explains a lot

Lever copped a hit to the head because he ran into him front-on as Goldy's arms were up attempting to mark. Only one player was looking at the footy and going for the ball. In this case the umpire will pay a free to protect the ball player every time. The head is probably sacrosanct when initiated by the opponent (eg. a tackle or bump) but not when accidental (head clash) or when the player likely caused it themself (running into a leading player whilst not playing the ball) I would've liked a call of 'play on', but understand the free was more than likely correct

But Hogan hasn't even coached us yet!!

Wines making sure "his heart is set" with PA before signing on again http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-10/port-star-yet-to-make-sure-heart-is-set-on-staying Very interesting...

You must've missed the last side-on shot where Lever's right arm contacts his opponent's midriff shortly followed by an elbow to the head from the outstretched arm going for the mark. And it looked like Lever's left arm was also making contact around Goldy's body at the same time. Put it this way: one player was going towards the ball attempting to mark it. The other was running back into his opponent without his eyes on the ball. At no point was I convinced Lever was going for the ball. His last 4 steps were spent looking in the opposite direction. In that case the umpire always rewards the player going for the ball. Lever was inevitably going to make front contact and did. The elbow to the head looked bad, but was secondary to the interference on the ball player If the jumpers were reversed I'm certain 99.9% on here would agree with the decision. I disregard Roosy's commentating view as he's clearly biased. But I'll agree to disagree and move on.

Isn't the rule about making front-on contact when not playing the ball (as exampled by not looking at the ball)? Also if you look at the last vision of that clip you linked (side on shot) it's pretty clear that Lever was making front contact to stop Goldy's run at the mark and let Oscar become the intercept. To my mind that's blocking. In that situation the umpire will always reward the player going for the ball At very best it was play on, but in all likely hood it was correctly paid

The replay shows Lever made some front contact with Goldy as he was pushing into the contest. I thought that's what the free was for. It's clear that Lever was not going for the ball but interfering with the man who was, hence his eyes weren't on the ball. The elbow to the head was a free only if Lever didn't make any front contact.

Long bomb to the advantage of a strong kpf is OK. But kicking on top of Hogan's head when there are 3 on 1 doesn't often get results. Nor does the long bomb when Hogan is playing midfield and our tallest forward is Fritsch or Trac. We leak turnovers too often and the better teams will not let us get away with it. Looking forward to return of Tmac or an in form Weid

Whose our tall forward while he's playing midfield? Until Tmac comes back it's Trac. Not ideal. We can get away with it against lowly clubs, not against the better clubs.

Open thread in chrome and you'll see it properly

However unlike other finals aspiring teams, we have had a habit over the last 2 years of conceding runs of goals that cost/almost cost us games. We are better at minimising the damage this year, but in each of the 3 games so far we have let our guard down badly for about 20 min. The Bris game would've been lost last year, it was great to see the boys turn it around We all know of these lapses, so it's not surprising that a cretin like King has final caught up