Ouch!

I can't believe that Adrian Anderson, the same guy that managed to get off Charlie Cameron for being a 'good bloke' handled out case so poorly. It was a disgrace, and I'm still disgusted like you are.

He intended to hurt Gus,... I don't think anyone could 'intentionally' try and knock out another player. But to your other points, I agree that the topic would be uncomfortable, but if he was involved in a car accident where someone was injured or killed. What would she say then? I also don't think people who do cowardly king hits, are intending to kill people when their heads hit the ground either, but actions have consequence, and yeah based on my original view that he intended to physically hurt Gus,... sorry Mrs Maynard, your child ended the football career of one of his 'friends'. You and your son will have to live with that fact.

Definitely one of the nicer steaks you could get in Hobart IMO!

I miss Gus :( and absolutely not underestimating his loss.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't AMW playing was playing as a small defender. Apologies if not correct, but that being the case, who exactly is he replacing? it's all well and good to say Petty is in horrible form, but we aren't replacing a tall forward with a back pocket. He would be contending with Bowie, McVee and possibly Woewodin. Deserving a place is one thing, team balance and having a vacant place for the player to fit is another. I'm gonna be interested how match committee goes about this weeks selection, it's Kings Birthday weekend! not the game to bring in a first game player, but I'm not seeing too much form at Casey that excites me. A part of me says no change, put the heat on those who played so badly, and make each of them look Neil in the eye before they go out and play this weekend! ... I miss Gus :(

Bit unfair to say we don't have a 2nd Ruck on our list. Fullarton, Verral and Farris-White are rucks. Arguably Fullarton and hmm.. Schache can play the role. In terms of using them, we tried two rucks last year if you remember.... didn't work out so well. I think what you are trying to say is that losing a star player like Gawn leaves a hole that is bloody hard to fill, because Gawn is *THAT* good.

Taking two half forwards out for two defenders? Might be a little unlikely.

Who said they were playng defensively? But lining a good player on Steward means he is to be accountable for a dangerous player, and cannot just be left to intercept at will. It's exactly how we try and shape things for Lever. Even if Turner was placed onto Stewart.... he may have blunted Stewarts output marginally, but 7 intercept marks and going at 83% efficiency is still a good night. Guess we saw things differently on the night.

21 disposals 7 intercept marks, 410 meters gained going at 83% efficiency... pretty poor ;) But I get your point, but Turner needs to have his own positive impact. That said, I don't think Van Rooyen is setting the world alight either, but he at least can be involved thru the ruck contests.

I thought Woey had a solid game, but understand that Bowey if fit is likely to come in for him. No one seems to think Turner could go back out? Good game two weeks ago, but was pretty much unsighted for most of the match on Saturday against Geelong, not sure who would replace him at the moment, but if BBB is fit, I'd like to see him return. Billings, was ok but for someone rated as an elite kick, he had a couple of horrible shanks. Looks like he's deer in the headlights, counting down to Melky's return if I'm honest. NO CHANGE 🤣

Quick update today: As expected and predicted, new opposition leader for Labor, Dean Winter has come out and changed the party position on the AFL stadium in Tasmania. They still say they'll hold the govt to account on the spend, but they are now supporting the stadium, and the jobs that it will bring both in construction and ongoing. Wasn't all that surprising given that many Labor figures are involved in local football, and they typically like to position themselves with the unions, and about jobs and infrastructure. Not over the line by any means, but less of a political football now (sorry bout the pun!)

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.

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

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.

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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.