La Dee-vina Comedia

A bit of Grand Final trivia: Q: Who has lost back-to-back AFL Grand Finals this century? A: Collingwood, St Kilda and Daniel Andrews

Victoria's Sport and Major Events Minister (and Carlton tragic), Martin Pakula, has stated that if crowds can't attend the GF in Perth, it will revert to the MCG. So, there's still a chance...

I'm not sure how umpires being full time makes any difference to what Greene did. But seeing as the point has been raised, I can't see what a full time, professional umpire is going to do all week to fill in the days. I am, however, fully on board with a wholesale review of the rules of the game to make it easier for umpires to do their part-time job.

Every year I wish Goal of the Week, and potentially Goal of the Year, included nominations from extraordinary team goals, rather than just individual efforts. It is a team game, after all.

This aged well! Not only has GWS said they won't appeal, but even though he has been suspended, the AFL may be the ones who appeal. I think I should avoid making predictions and stick to bon mots and responding to Demonstone's diabolical quizzes from hereon.

Disagree. They have a new one every week.

AFL considering appealing the penalty, apparently. https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/08/31/mclachlan-perplexed-by-greene-ban-as-afl-considers-appeal/ I suspect the AFL won't appeal. To do so could have the perverse consequence of Greene being found not guilty (unless the appeal can be solely about the penalty).

Well, based on the views of many in this thread, Hibberd's chance of getting a recall for the Preliminary Final have nose-dived with Greene's suspension.

I have a vision of Greene being pushed out of the plane as it taxis down the runway.

On Footy Classified last night they made a point of showing Gawn giving all our players a "high five" (actually a "low five" if that's the correct term, given their hands were all pointing downwards) as they ran onto the ground on Saturday night. It was presented as an example of why he's a good captain.

To add insult to injury, I assume the airline has just imposed an "Excess Baggage" charge on GWS for carrying Greene to WA.

Three weeks seems light, but it may have been strategic as a way to avoid a GWS appeal. Imagine if the Tribunal had gone with a 6 week sentence? Then GWS may have decided to appeal. That might have lead to a Not Guilty verdict. I think keeping the sentence on the light side made it harder for GWS to appeal.

Headline should have been "Toby Greene Flight Risk"

Sam Edmund has tweeted that Greene has been "exccused from the hearing". I see nothing wrong with that. There's nothing further he needs to do and it's not like he's going to be taken into custody when the sentence is delivered.

I'm now tipping he'll get a six week suspension which he'll appeal. Appeal will reduce penalty to 4 weeks.

There's a lot at stake here for GWS and Greene. Perhaps the AFL is trying to avoid potential Supreme Court action on questions of procedural fairness.

I suspect whatever happens today, there will be an appeal. GWS and Greene will want to appeal any suspension and my gut tells me the AFL will appeal if there isn't a suspension.

There is no doubt in my mind that both teams in the Grand Final will use their sub, whether needed or not. If not already activated due to an injury, the team which is behind in the last quarter will activate him for fresh legs while the team which is leading will activate him so he can enjoy the feeling of being a true part of the Premiership team.

Trojan Horse approach to gain eventual access to the Holden Centre?

Players are already being fined for bumping into umpires accidentally. It would make a mockery of this incident if Greene was fined.

Everyone who's commenting on this game saw it on TV - commentators included. How anyone could tell who was playing on Cameron when he kicked those three Q1 goals I have no idea. Certainly, Smith was closest to him for at least two of the goals, but who's to say he wasn't just the quickest defender to react? My concern with Smith is that he lacks experience, continuity and game sense compared with Hunt. It's not Smith's fault and he should be lauded for getting as far as he has. I just think Hunt is a better option. However, if the match committee decide Hunt should replace Bowey, I think Smith may stay in ahead of Hibberd who I fear has reached the end after providing us with excellent service.

I hope I'm wrong, but this may be a sign that the umpires feel they are not being supported enough by the competition so chose not to make a point about it.

I think it's the best Melbourne team I've seen. I was too young to remember the 1964 team. What I particularly like, though, is the balanced quality between the experienced and the young. To have five All-Australians (and seven in the squad) in the same year as having four players all not just being nominated for the Rising Star but all getting votes from one or more of the judges (who could only choose five players each) is quite astounding. That Bowey got votes after playing only four(?) games is extraordinary.

I seem to recall that in olden days (I mean 1970s), players with a previous guilty record were given harsher sentences by the then Tribunal. When we first moved to the MRP where the points system was put in place (1990s? 2000s?), there was a discount for first offences* (which is the nicer way of saying previous offenders were given tougher penalties). If I recall correctly, the past behaviour provisions no longer exist. Toby Greene is the perfect example (albeit an imperfect footballer) of why repeat offenders should be prenalilsed more harshly. That's pretty much the way most law enforcement works. Increasing penalties for repeat offenders with the intention of getting the offenders' attention. *Edit: Actually, maybe there wasn't a discount for first offences. Rather, I think it was a discount for accepting the penalty without troubling the Tribunal.

To be fair, although they appoint people to the Tribunal and appeals board, the decisions aren't those of the AFL. And I don't support Greene getting off by paying a fine. I just think it will be a way for the appeals board to look like they're trying to be tough on umpire contact. It won't work, though. They'll look weak, instead. If it were up to me, he'd be suspended for 4 weeks and be required to pay a fine of $20,000 to a community group.