Macca

The Petty high contact that happened yesterday was interesting and related here in terms of head-high contact ... yet no report Sure, Petty ducked his head so he wasn't going to win a high contact free but the tackler gave him plenty of '"After's" to a point where it became purposeful high contact and quite dangerous The outcome was 'play on'? My point is that if intent is going to be clamped down and highlighted then incidents where a player like Petty having his neck wrenched has to be cited The law of inintended consequences comes into play if the duckers get singled out ... it can't be a licence for the tackler to go willy-nilly on the neck area

So surely bad outcomes (resulting in concussion) are more important than intent (resulting in zero concussion) So if we compare the Buddy one to Kozzie in terms of intent/outcome, it's 1 tick for Kozzie but 2 ticks for Buddy Yet Kozzie gets 2 weeks and Buddy 1 week

The Buddy one falls into the protected species category. Happens all too frequently to be some sort of conspiracy theory What do they say in law enforcement? There's no such thing as a coincidence

Playing too many kids is fraught with danger. Especially so these days Need to surround kids with experienced talent. That's the tried and true method (and template) Even the much vaunted '93 baby bombers had quite a number of experienced players in the team So did the Hawks bring in players like Vince & Cross as we did? Later on we brought in players with 3-5 years experience like Melksham & Hibberd, Lever etc In fact, our recruitment of experienced talent goes a little unnoticed as compared to the gun young talent we recruited from the various draft's

Oh I see what you mean now Good point so we could have had Toby & Salem

It is what it is ... Rugby League territory but GWS can operate and maybe prosper with the AFL's $Billions (Broadcast rights money) Money well spent? Time will tell but the broadcast rights money keeps flooding in

That's the point I'm making ... nothing is by the book so we don't know what to expect Where it's different to the umpiring of the sport (with all the grey areas and split-second decisions being made) the AFL has all the time in the world to get consistent outcomes via the MRO & Tribunal But they don't and the name players are protected species (a lot of the time) What I'm hoping for is that Kozzie falls into the above category (protected species) It's the AFL's version of fairness (not) And in the dog-eat-dog world of competitive sport, you push the envelope but don't cross the line

Put a hat on

The poor diddums Real supporters sit in the sun

Are they piping in the crowd noise as well? I've spotted 5 people (in total) in the lower deck in that outer stand *Official Crowd 12,000*

If Cotchin was just an average footballer he would have almost certainly been rubbed out at least a few times with all the incidents that he has been involved in And 11 fines? Shouldn't a player start copping weeks after a certain amount of fines? The AFL are like a mini version of FIFA

The Buddy incident can help us if there was a linear effect in effect. For instance, if Buddy gets 2 weeks then Kozzie 1? (or a fine?) Can't see Buddy getting 4 or even 3 and the outcome with the Buddy incident was far worse than the Kozzie/Smith incident But it's the AFL so who would know? And which incident gets held first? (if both incidents are referred to the tribunal)

Cotchin has been rubbed out once and fined 11 times. The whole process is a standing joke Hall got to play in a GF, Dunkley the same, Cripps gets off etc etc etc

The average football supporter might want Kozzie rubbed out as we as a club are now seen as a threat But if he gets off then many of those same people will tune in Friday night to admire his exquisite skills and openly (or secretly) wish that he was playing for their club ... a quick turnaround in thinking. That's your footy supporter Meanwhile, the AFL know all this and will almost certainly make (or influence) a business decision to suit self-interest. So which way do they go? There are numerous examples ... for instance, the Essendon 34 were set free by the tribunal yet later on all rubbed out by CAS (for a season no less) So with regards to Kozzie, if it was purely about the money and staying in the news (for the AFL) then the rest of it is academic in my view Also, the precedent has been set with star players in a myriad of different sports. It's not all confined to the AFL

I agree ... it's a week but once it's a possible week then things can get argued to a fine I also believe that a player should have the option to pay a higher fine as a bargaining chip. Right now, there are maximum fines with the CBA agreement But if Smith was hurt, it's different ... you pay the price The outcome was negligible so a heavy fine would be sufficient ... unless, as you stated, it's about the 'look' Also, the camera can paint a different picture to realities. For instance, the Kossie/Smith incident looked far worse than the actual outcome

But we can still refer to the Cripps incident in pure footballing terms (ignoring all the stuff that went on in the background and/or any loopholes) That stuff doesn't have to be brought up and the 3 tribunal members may not be au fait with any previous technicalities. It only takes 1 member of the tribunal to see the Cripps incident as a precedent and away you go on a strong defence. Remembering that they are generally ex footballers who aren't trained lawyers (some are) And the Cripps/Ah Chee incident is very recent. The other thing is that when it suits, the AFL panders when it comes to self interest (they often make stuff up on the run) Kozzie is a star player, there's a big Friday night game coming up etc etc. Call me cynical but I don't trust any of the AFL processes and I don't know anyone who does So the wheel turns ... suddenly we're a star team that people want to watch with a star player which the football world admires

We can argue outcome though and go very strong on that aspect And the outcome was that Smith was not affected in any way. If he'd stayed down and was concussed, different story The camera angles we've seen makes it look like Kozzie has cleaned the bloke right up ... but Smith bounced back up as if he wasn't even hit. And with no ill-effects It wasn't a good look but the Cripps/Ah Chee incident sets a precedent regardless of the legal technicality I reckon it's 1 week or less

Yes Smith's head went flying back but the way he bounced back was extremely quick. In fact, has anyone ever seen a player bounce back like that after seemingly being cleaned up? Most players would milk the contact even if there is only minimal contact. Smith bounced back like he was the inflatable man! Weird! We can certainly argue minimal impact (and/or contact) Where as Cripps knocked Ah Chee into tomorrowland ... and got off!

Cripps getting off allows Kozzie to get off. But whether that happens or not (getting off) is subjective and obscure. The MRO is often inconsistent as is the tribunal Maybe the best course of action is to argue and (possibly) appeal with a view to limiting the suspension to 1 week (which isn't too bad of an outcome) I'd take 1 week if it came to that and get on with it ... get him back for the Sydney game Fritsch & Viney could be back next week and May is an outside chance so the make-up of the team will still be super-strong for the Lions clash (especially when analysing our dismantling of the Doggies last night)

Neal-Bullen with the party trick Been a good night

And yet we still managed to win 16 games in the season proper despite not firing on all cylinders. So if we get it right and if we have a reasonable run with injuries, logic tells us we'll win at least 16 this season Last season we closed down the opposition (often from half-way through the 3rd quarter's) in a lot of those wins. But by 3/4 of the way through the season, we started to wilt. In my view, we looked tired from about round 8 So our first 3 games this year will be testing. Dogs, Lions & Swans where none are guaranteed wins. If you offered me 2 wins from those 3 I'd take it in a heartbeat (starting the season with 4 big outs - Fritsch, Viney, Salem & May)

Well we can pressure them a lot better than Geelong did tonight. But we need to do that as well as bringing our A game elsewhere And we need to fix our delivery into our forward line which is something the club has been talking about and practising in the off-season. We can learn from the Pies with regards to our ball movement into the forward line. They just don't waste opportunities and that's why they're so efficient We've got just as many skilled players but we can't be wasteful

We've had our troubles with the Pies but we can beat them. Don't ask me how, ask our coaches and our MC! We're going to need a good plan as it's hard to get the ball off them when they're firing. And a lot of their scoring opportunities emanate from half back with continuous possession

Their run last year was tremendous. Their ball movement from half back through the middle and into their forward line is something a lot of other teams can learn from. Precision skills And they are quick The Daicos lads don't get tackled (for instance) ... just like their old man! They are a team we need to get past if we're going to salute

Did you seriously downplay the Pies for this season, layz? Most I know were predicting at least top 4 ... they are probably the most skilled team in the league and are getting better The Kings Birthday clash will be an absolute ripper. But who starts favourite?