Ouch!

I was never comfortable with us going to the tribunal for this, and TBH it's because of the Maynard case.  I absolutely 100% agree that this is different, but he made contact with the head in a brace, bump or whatever you want to call it. It just felt wrong to appeal it. Picket plays on the edge, it's what makes him a great player, and his closing speed will always cause some accidents to occur.

But, he was very lucky with his hit on Bailey Smith too.  If that hit happened today, that would be a 4-6 week at least.

With Kozzie we accept the good and the bad and we move on.

2 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Question. Head contact. Why no HIA by the Crows on Soligo ?? Isn’t that mandatory.  Why not? Because it was farknnnn low impact !!!!  

Can we quickly zoom you in ? Let’s give AA the boot.

On 04/04/2024 at 17:42, demon3165 said:

Problem is most supporters don't know the rules and it's it easy to pot an umpire, umpires don't miss goals 20m out, umpires don't handball to players standing still surrounded by opposition players umpires don't miss 20m passes umpires don't have 30 odd more entries into the forward line and don't kick enough goals to win a game, but yes they miss miss frees it's pretty damm hard when you have 36 players around the ball, try seeing anything through that.  In a game of football that has different variations of rules generally they do a great job but supporters like to blame them in a game played over 120 minutes.

Well go try doing it yourself and see how you go......

I'm not potting the umpires, I'm potting the stupidity of the rules. Do I think that dissent should be stamped out, yes absolutely. Do I think the rules should have given 50m penalties when players are expressing their frustration in their own actions as much as anything, No.

With that said as well, goal assist technology has had a negative impact on umpiring similarly as it has in cricket. In that a lot of decisions that don't need to be referred are being referred due to 'fear' rather than it being unclear.  That doesn't help their mindset.  Also, boundary umpires at the moment are making a lot of mistakes with regards to calling the ball out of bounds. I have no idea why, but in terms of clarity of the rule, it's not a hard decision to make that call. Often we are seeing both a field umpire AND a boundary umpire on the scene yet no calls (Higgins, that Port player last week v the dees, Jeremy Cameron x 2) 

I'll second the view that someone made in this thread that having an umpire in the commentary or media would be valuable (i.e Razor Ray with Whately).  Even Laura Kane talking to the media each week is welcomed, we don't always have to agree, but at least they explain what is going on with contentious issues.

12 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Was a little of both to be honest.

But a while ago you couldn't look sideways at an umpire and now they don't care again.

I think it was overpaid.

I think some of the media asked a similar question to this through the week, and admittedly I think there was a dissent 50m paid in one of the earlier games this season, but this rule is subjective at best, and dare I say is based on how the umps are feeling often more than hard evidence. But no doubt we're gonna get a round where the umps are reminded about dissent rules, and you'll get 20+ dissent 50m penalties in a round!

46 minutes ago, Chook said:

How a fractured thumb keeps a player out for 3-4 weeks but breaking three ribs and a vertebrae is 1 week I'll never know.

Shows the importance of the thumb in handling the ball I suppose.

So the list says 3-4 weeks, but Selwin Griffith in the actual update says hopefully it's just 2 games. Assume that is due to us having the bye after Brisbane?

I have honestly no idea who you are talking about, do you mean Mabiol Chol?

15 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

and what's yr feeling as to the likelihood - or otherwise - of it getting passed through tasmanian parliament?

I actually think that the Liberal party will look to engage with Labor to get this through, not to rely on Lambie or Greens.

Bec White... 3 failures at elections as opposition leader... there are rumours that the party position differs from Bec White.

16 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

There's no way it's costing $375 million.  This cost will blow out.

Ok, I respectfully ask you to read before commenting.

I said, the Tas Gov contribution WILL BE CAPPED AT $375Million. The Stadium is costed at $715, which includes the $240mil from the federal govt, $15mil from AFL, the remainder comes from private investment.

20 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

if the stadium doesn't go ahead / gets blocked by tasmanian parliament, do you think the team will still happen despite the afl's determination that 'no stadium = no team'?

no.

Edit: Sorry just to clarify. I dont' think this will proceed regardless of the support of 200k supporters. The Club presidents of the other 18 clubs will pull the pin on the project. GC, Sydney, Collingwood and some other clubs were lukewarm at best. I suspect Hawthorn and North are 'supportive' but secretly covet the cash that will no longer be afforded them.

2 hours ago, Roost it far said:

An upgrade of an existing stadium to hold 20-25,000 is all Tassie needs atm. As far as I can see it’s ill conceived, the site is debatable, the cost over runs all but guaranteed because of the site and it’s not needed. The AFL has ignored the game in Tassie for so long it’s almost gone at a local level. That amount of money could be so much better spent it’s not even funny. We’ve become brainwashed into thinking we need to spend billions to get anything. In truth Tasmania and the AFL could have a stadium, local level footy club support and all Tasmanians on board for a fraction of that amount. 

Sorry this is just total crud, and shows you know nothing about the two stadiums, Bellerive will not upgrade to this size, it's in the suburbs and York Park is NOT IN THE CAPITAL CITY. How many times does this need to be said!!!!

Also, please everyone understand this.  THE COST is NOT $715 or $1Billion to the Tasmanian Taxpayers, it's $375 Million.. the rest is being paid by Federal Capital works money, the AFL and private investors.

If this stadium does not go ahead, not only does the other 400 mil not get spent in Tasmania, but all of the money that the AFL is committing over the next 10 years, (300+ million) for junior development pathways, the high performance/community football etc, that all goes.

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

i think you overrate the international cricket argument.

most profitable cricket is t20 and roof is no problem and in fact a benefit.

odi and test cricket attendances are dropping alarmingly and the chances of a test match(s) in tassie are low, as is true for odi

Test cricket has no rules stating that it cannot be played under a roof apparently. I believe that the issue is more that no country has ever requested that a test match be played in a roofed stadium either, so it's more that the ICC would need to make a ruling on such a thing. 

56 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

Does it really need a roof tho?

Think of the roof as much about protecting the ground from wind as it is about the cold. The proximity to the mountain, and the river leaves a lot of Hobart exposed to severe winds. Both Bellerive Oval and York Park are highly susceptible to wind, and it doesn't make for a good game.

2 hours ago, greenwaves said:

I agree.  I think the AFL has taken advantage of Tasmania's desperation for a team to get a new stadium out of them.

Again, you realise that the Gold Coast Council/Qld Govt had to upgrade Metricon as part of the licensing to get it into AFL. That wasn't the AFL paying for the upgrade, it was Taxpayer money. It was a requirement as part of the license. Similar with the showgrounds. This might appear different, but it's really not.

https://www.themercury.com.au/news/opinion/colin-carter-all-the-reasons-why-a-new-afl-stadium-should-be-supported-built-in-tasmania/news-story/89f786e91033a62e61f6501f526067c2 

This article is worth a read, Colin Carter did an independent review of the business case for the team, he then presented to the AFL commission and the presidents. It was mentioned (although don't think it's in this article) that the business case itself identified that a new stadium is essential for the team, albeit not immediately. The AFL and the clubs decided that it would need to be done as part of the 19th license. It was always identified as being required and being in the city itself.

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The Tassie solution was easy but no one wanted it.

North plays ten games in Melbourne which were designated home games and 10 games in Tasmania. After 5 years the team and its admin is moved to Hobart but still continues its 10 games in Melbourne.

Sure it gives North a leg up financially and a continual home ground advantage but it is better than propping up two teams... North with AFL money and Tasmania with Government money

As to NT getting a team why not Ballarat or Bendigo.. it makes as much sense if not more.

Anyway good luck to the Devils... they may need it

$4M odd penalty every year that the stadium is not built is a lot for someone to find

Hawks since 2001 and Nth since 2012. Given the last arrangement with the Hawks will be $13.5 mil for 2 years ending in 2025) it's not a stretch to assume that the Tas Gov (i.e Taxpayer money) could exceed $200million dollars for the 'honour' of hosting these Vic clubs. The financial / economic benefit has apparently been worth us doing it, so why do people think that a stadium and supporting a single Tasmanian team wouldn't have a greater impact. 

Can I honestly ask for those of you in Victoria, given the way Dan Andrews has wasted money ... would any of you even 'blink' about a project that would cost Vic taxpayers $375million?  Its less than what you are paying to NOT host the comm games!  Also it's somewhat amusing that people seem to think that the AFL has no right to ask for a stadium to be attached to the license. GWS & GC still needed a commitment from govt/councils to make Metricon and the Showgrounds fit for purpose to play AFL there. 

8 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

i still maintain there is zero $$ value in a tasmanian team coming in as the 19th team - adds nothing to the media rights coffers, which is what funds the game at the end of the day

it's definitely got a feed good factor, but tasmania's population hovers around that 500,000 mark - it's dwarfed by the gw$ or gc17 catchment areas for population growth, let alone the value of having two extra teams up north in terms of media rights value

i loathe those franchises, but it was the 'correct' move to bring them in; tasmania is just pandering to already converted footy fans

i'm more curious about when they'll bring the 20th team in - i am assuming it'll be a third team based in perth

So about the same value as your incessant negativity brings to demonland you say?  Sometimes if you don't have something positive to say, consider keeping your views to yourself. 

I believe you are wrong on the $$ value, I believe the feel good factor alone is more than enough of a reason to have Tassie in the competition, and the predicted 200k by easter foundation members that incidentally include a significant number of people who support other teams and live on the mainland would suggest that it does too.

Who gives a stuff about the catchment areas when we are talking about this issue?  I'd love to know the TV viewing numbers that have gone with the GC and GWS, I suspect the AFL wanted to get into the NRL market, and I doubt that the ratings are that solid, I firmly believe Demetiou made the wrong call, and I suspect the vast majority of people would now consider that to be true.

Hobart as a market, is very similar to Geelong?  Heck.... Victoria is a state of 6.5million, and you have 10 teams, roughly speaking thats 650k per team, Tas as a population is 550k, but Tassie will be supporting and behind one team. No one is 'Pandering' to converted footy fans. Tasmania deserves a team, and has done for decades. 

22 minutes ago, Billy said:

Essendon are a joke, you can’t manufacture toughness, Jack Viney & Steven May are tough Nick Hind & Peter Wright aren’t.

l can understand why they’re trying to have the Essendon edge (haha) because they’ve been irrelevant for 20+ years, but talk about it behind doors, now that it’s out in the open the footy world is going to have a field day

TBH if the AFL were serious about stamping out dodgy actions, they should notify clubs that if any player is seen to be doing what Nick Hind attempted on Chad Warner that they will also cop a 2 week suspension or a hefty fine regardless of whether it makes contact or not. That elbow could easily have broken a jaw or cheekbone. Gutless cheap shot by Hind and I hope someone from his club calls him out on it. 

21 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

I thought the Hawks targeting of Oliver was unsporting.

But it was funny they gave him all their focus while Tracca had a day out.

At least the Hawks were targetting him near the play of the ball. Gawn is getting dropped sometimes 30-50m off the play. Those hits, body checks and bumps are the ones that are poor because he's not expecting contact, nor should he.

39 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

I propose a system if exponential fines per game for these junk incidents which only detract from the game. We all know some little bumps and 'interactions' will happen over the course of a physical and directly competitive game like ours, but there's no value in letting clubs come out with instructions to rough people up to interfere with their game.

$1 for one incident, $2 for the second, $4 for the third, then 8, 16 etc...

The fines would be trivial and ignorable in any normal run of play, but if you end up with 20 individually trivial incidents you'd be looking at... a bit over a million dollars. That oughta shut it down real fast.

Also Collingwood should be stripped of their 1958 premiership. Obviously. #sixpeat

we'd need a 5th umpire for looking at behind the scenes stuff... and we know how well they are going with the review system and the boundary umpires keeping things in bound.

Anyone a little confused by comments coming out of Sydney (Tom Papley in particular) about Essendon and their behind the ball hits on their players?  I'm confused by some in the media discussing this too.

Two words. "Max Gawn"  If you are so concerned Tom, call out the players that took hits at Max behind the play as he's going from contest to contest. Knocking him over, bumping off the ball 30-40m away from play.

Sydney and Port Adelaide constantly bump, and knock Gawn to the ground. Some media condone it, and saying that because Max is such a good player that every team should do it, even calling out MFC players for not doing to opposition teams or defending Gawn. Can't remember who it was, but someone actually called out the Dogs, and why they didn't do it, yet others are saying it should be stamped out, and I agree. Umpires need to be aware of it, and call frees.

Tom Papley, you can't have it both ways, either you are happy with bumping players off the ball, or the tummy taps, or you aren't, but then don't do it to other teams, or target players like Gawn.

Langdon playing a good quarter.

What the heck is this game plan that the Hawks are playing.... I mean by all means keep playing it :D 

1 minute ago, monoccular said:

Clash jumpers - more marketing for the AFL.

https://www.nblstore.com.au/collections/tasmania-jackjumpers?page=1&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwzN-vBhAkEiwAYiO7oCFv9SwMEpGzhYgLUaPWI0AK9z7qNnUZT2bc5QgJeAIylxvD8b38zRoC86QQAvD_BwE

I thought the same thing, looked at the NBL store for one team. It's crazy how many different tops they have!

4 hours ago, greenwaves said:

What's with the logo?  I've never seen a Tasmania Devil with green hair.

 

next you'll complain that they didn't put a facial tumour on the image.

27 years? Wasn’t that when port came into the comp?

GWS and GC were around 2010?

point is still valid tho I guess!

1 hour ago, Bates Mate said:

I'm all for Tasmania having a team .Good numbers but they are $10 memberships.

I think they will be a great addition to the comp and probably be about of peoples "2nd" team. That jumper though is seriously rubbish . Giants showed how you can create a modern jumper that will hold up for decades to come. Logo looks good

Agree they are not actual memberships, but it’s indicative of the support this team will have.