Macca

I'm of the belief that players breaking the rules of the competition supercedes any advantage that a club can get Pushing the envelope has boundaries but there's a ton of nuance involved ... thus the disagreements But you what LDvC? It's ok to disagree ... it's like we're just chewing the fat in the pub (whilst trying to avoid covid!)

Getting back to the theme of the thread, layz I'm ecstatic that soft, high contact, frivolous free kicks will no be paid ... and I'm allowing for a 15% error rate

Once you handpass the ball a tackler is allowed to linger in the tackle (as long as they don't go overboard) But if you 'don't' handpass to a teammate then that should be regarded as in possession (in my view) We don't see it much anymore anyway. The rule could be that it's not allowed and that's maybe why we rarely see such instances Also, if a player handpasses out in front of himself then it's also his intention to regain the ball again ... so he's in possession Again, I want to see clean sport, no cheating The umpires' job is hard enough as it is!

Question for you Do you reckon that Heath Shaw was dealt with harshly when he copped a 10 match ban for having a $10 bet?

As LH pointed out, Viney didn't re-sign until very late (after the season?) so we could assume that he was also exploring free agency It's pro sports and in other countries all this waiting around is quite normal

Length of contract might be an issue too There's a big difference between $4Million over 5 years as opposed to $1.8Million over 3 years Secured & guaranteed income extending to five years is very appealing

1 - Cheating - free kick against. If not seen on the spot, fine the player later ($5k) 2 - Still in possession - holding the ball. Isn't that the ruling anyway? 3 - Cheating ... if not seen, fine the player who pushed the player into the square ($5k) I'd have much bigger fines as a deterrent to transgress but the CBA agreement doesn't allow that (generally) By the way, Essendon should have been thrown out of the comp for 5 years for their PED drug taking program They got off lightly ... as for the innocent victims bs. Cry me a river Sport should be played in a fair manner as much as possible. Players & coaches will always push the envelope so that's why the sport needs excellent governance Most of the cheating that can go on can be knocked on the head immediately. Let it fester and you end up with much bigger problems The sandpaper taken on to the field in that cricket test? The 3 players got their just desserts but I'm not convinced that all the players didn't know what was going on (including the most likely to know - the keeper) Russia got thrown out of the Olympics because of their PED use but were let in the back door competing under a different name ... poor governance The American athletes have been caught out numerous times yet no ban of their country? Inconsistent outcomes makes things even worse

Not if the money we are offering is in the lowball area, Gonzo. I'm not saying we are lowballing Brayshaw by the way, but it's a possibility The offer on the table from our club might be seen by Gus and/or his management as unders Exploring what the market is for a free agent like Gus is due diligence and has to be an expectation. The club would be expecting that to happen as well. It's pro sports And then an offer (or 2) elsewhere could be quite substantial. Money talks and loyalty has an end point It must be remembered that a lot of the other teams haven't got all that many good players and they all want to get into contention and they all want to win So they need talent and are prepared to pay overs for that talent. Stands to reason We've done it ourselves (over the years) in order to be a better team

Big ask Mono. Tough sport to umpire correctly We can only expect the umpires to get it right maybe 80% - 85% of the time Any more than that is a bit of a pipe dream All the teams (over time) will get their fair share of lucky decisions going their way Where I reckon we'll see greater consistency is in the forward 50's ... forwards won't get soft high contact frees (but the backmen might get a few) In a general sense, if we see a lot less whistle blowing, that's a great result Just let the game go and only pay really obvious frees works better in footy Just my thoughts as I'm not necessarily right

Well, it is trying to con the officials isn't it? How else would one describe faking a high tackle? I care deeply about the sport and it's traditions. So the sport needs to be played to the rules and in the right spirit Anyway, the cheats will no longer get away with their cheating which is great for the game Sooner or later the perpetrators will stop playing for free kicks especially if they start getting pinged for holding the ball or incorrect disposal And the new ruling isn't going to necessarily reward the tacklers per se ... in fact, I reckon we're going to see a lot less tackles as the ball winner will be compelled to dispose of the ball quickly. Or use evasive skills or breakaway speed Those who can't do that will fall away replaced by those who can

Well, prepare for the worst or prepare for a stalemate or prepare for LJ to re-sign haha Our trading, list management and drafting has been first rate in the last 10 years so there's probably a lot going on behind the scenes at the club that we don't know about Could be that the club is all over all the permutations with fall-back positions in place for all scenarios I doubt we're going to be caught out unawares ... for instance, I doubt we'll be happy with an end of first round pick for Brayshaw. Nor would we be happy about a team like Essendon landing one of our better players for nix (remembering that Sydney acquired Buddy for nothing ... apart from his salary) Footnote; Not at all sure about Mitch Brown in the ruck!

A forced trade can only happen if we match an offer ... and if we match the offer it might be $800k per year for multiple years. Or more. Who knows? What if our club doesn't want to fork out that sort of money? Also, we might have an issue with fitting a larger salary into our salary cap If we match an offer, Brayshaw could easily end up staying for the matched offer ... that play can't be ruled out There's 17 other clubs and at least one of those clubs will be happy to pay overs for Brayshaw A lot of the other clubs are short on talent as we once were (thus, the play for Lever, May, Clark etc) The other part of the equation is whether Jackson stays or goes ... and we'd have a substantial amount of money put aside to pay LJ for next year and beyond If Jackson goes, there's more money in the kitty for Brayshaw (if he can get it) My gut feeling is that we've got our eye on some established talent elsewhere anyway ... like the Hogan/May scenario We do need a key forward and another bona-fide ruckman (if Jackson goes) But there's a lot we don't know about and I'm only speculating

It's cheating pure and simple If I want to watch fake sport I'll watch WWE Selwood for instance will always be remembered for his cheating ways ... the sad bit is that he's a great player and never needed to duck & play for frees But we all see things differently Vive la difference It's a great word to describe what we see on the footy field. Floppers, stagers - they cheat the sport Back in the day it was frowned upon As for Matthews, he's completely out of touch with his views (as is Whately) Down the track (and it may not take very long) the footy will be so much better to watch without all the stagers, floppers & cheats I've already noticed the difference and that includes our game against the Doggies Did you not notice that players from both teams weren't playing for frees very often (certainly at nowhere near the levels of previous games) ... and also, that the players were disposing of the ball quickly? Zero tackles in our forward line also told another story (apart from our inability to lay a tackle) We ended up with fast, open, free flowing footy ... the sort of footy that my eyes demand I suppose if people love congested footy and a billion stoppages then so be it ... each to their own In some ways you are right though, layz The word 'cheat' is often an overused & misplaced word ... specifically when describing umpires (especially on the game day thread)

Great news on La Liga re Optus vision I used to get for free now it's $7 a month Less than 2 bucks a week is a small price to pay

So the AFL intervention is for the unreasonable attention to Ginnivan after the initial tackle I can live with that and fair enough deanox's post above is very good as well but all things considered, I'm tempted to declare a 3-3 score draw on the Tuesday debate with the usual suspects involved @kev martin @John Crow Batty@daisycutter Bottom line is we're all looking for a game of footy where players should rightfully get punished for playing for free kicks The game does not need it and it is a better game when we don't hear a lot of the whistle, rjay

Razer Ray said that prior opportunity only applies if the player leads with their head (or suchlike) He stated that dropping of the knees or shrugging arms is not prior opportunity as (in his words) the umpires can't be sure if that has happened (all happens too quick according to Razer) And this is coming from an umpire with vast experience So it's play on but the way I read it, the player with the ball must still dispose of the ball correctly ... and if the tacklers arms are up around the head/neck area (because of the shrugging or knees dropping) the player with the ball might or could/should have his arms freed to dispose of the ball (somehow) Previously, the player had a high likelyhood of gaining a soft, frivolous, high contact free kick I like the new rule in principle but it could take quite some time until we see consistent adjudications. And that's no fault of the umpires either ... it's a real grey area

Win 2 from 4 and we could get passed on percentage or on premiership points ... a 30/70 chance of that happened But it's more likely that we'll finish top 4 with a 2 from 4 result (70/30) ... the biggest concern might be Sydney's percentage surpassing ours if they finish level on wins (with us) Win 3 from 4 and we're assured of a top 4 spot and would likely finish 2nd (maybe 3rd) Win all 4 and we finish 2nd (maybe 1st) Win only 1 from 4 and a top 4 spot almost certainly won't be attained

The other bit that has to be taken into account is that in the same game (earlier) he had tried to milk high contact and wasn't awarded free kicks So he has burnt his bridges and if we put ourselves into the shoes of the umpires, they were almost certainly going to be expecting more of the same (milking high contact) JCB & kev martin also made very good points about the leaning (i.e one shoulder dips low towards the tackler) All very clever and it all happens in an instant but the contortionists are being found out There will be some teething issues but hopefully, this blight on the sport will be a thing of yesterday Interesting that there wasn't a lot of staging in the Demons/Bulldogs game (in terms of what we would have previously seen) ... those who won the ball quickly disposed of the ball Less congestion, a more open and free flowing game and lots of attacking footy resulted. Maybe just a coincidence but the Pies/Bombers game was quite similar

Well, on the decision, we disagree And we are allowed to disagree ... no big deal but one things for sure, we probably agree that the frivolous high contact free kicks have to be a thing of the past

If players stand tall in the tackle they won't end up in a wheelchair

And if the umps are in payback mode so be it ... they are not robots

Yeah, I didn't mean to do that (clumsy editing)

Ginnivan has lowered his body at the precise moment he gets tackled. Hips lowered and knees bent ... 25 cm's is all it takes as the tackler is trying to pin the arms Besides all that he has conned and fooled the umpires so they won't be doing him any favours. Effectively he has embarrassed them and now an umpire has been individually embarrassed Weightman didn't get a free kick for a good month after all his cheating ... just desserts

The tacklers arms are waist high in reality ... Ginnivan has lowered his body by a foot or more that's why the tacklers arms look higher If Ginnivan hadn't lowered his body the tacklers arms would be waste high in relation to Ginnivan How about I book an appointment for 'you' at the local optometrist?

He's a known cheat so has forfeited his benefit of the doubt To get rid of all the cheating there has to be some collateral damage That's how it works ... zero tolerance to the duckers and we've got a better sport And the game becomes easier to umpire