Macca

As a general rule those who play in front have a much better chance of winning a free kick ... anyone who has ever played the sport will know that to be true. It's very difficult to win a free kick playing from behind An example of that is the Weideman free kick on Sunday ... questionable but he was playing in front. He doesn't get that free if he is caught playing from behind. Did the team thing and got rewarded But as for the winning & the losing, there are numerous other factors including the biggie ... talent levels across the team (and good coaching) An example of that is Melbourne vs Essendon in 2013 ... we could have won the free kick count by 20 or more that day and we still would have been smashed So a free kick is a factor but it's often a small factor ... for instance, the Tigers were happy to give away professional-like free kicks in their 3 premiership years.

We can only hope that the the AFL finally start to realise that this issue (playing for free kicks) is unique to the Bulldogs (as well as a fair smattering of individual players across the league, including Weightman) But will they (the AFL) address this issue wholly? They might, but I wouldn't bank on it

New Season of 'Better Call Saul' released 2 episodes available with episode 3 out shortly

Still only 1 point in it and both teams (City & Liverpool) could both win their 5 remaining games ... so 10 wins combined without a hiccup? It's possible but some other result is likely in 1 of the 10 games Maybe my Hammers can help your blokes out when we are at home (May 16th) to Man City? haha

As for our 4th quarters, the game plan might be ... 'You (the opposition) will find it hard to score against our pepped-up zones and defensive structures and if you play into our hands, we will be able to score' Done with a decent lead of course and that breakaway lead often happens in the 3rd quarters (or earlier) So the days of running up the score (for percentage) could be looked at as less important than saving the legs

We were clearly the superior team on the night but just didn't kick straight - which would be an issue if that sort of thing happened all the time And I don't believe it's happened for quite a while either (where it has been costly) The last time that springs to mind where it did cost us a win was late in the season in 2018 against Sydney You'd hate for it to happen in a final but again, unless the problem is a frequent one, we should be able to reset the next week Just checked and we kicked 10.18 in that loss against Sydney in round 21, 2018 then followed up with 16.12 at the Eagles (Win) and then 15.12 vs GWS (Win) And as we all know, we then played finals where we kicked 10.15 (hmmmm) to 6.10 against the Cats then 16.8 to 10.11 against the Hawks There may well have been other instances since but none stand out like the Sydney game (which could have, but didn't cost us a finals spot that year) And that's 3 and a half years ago anyway Footnote: I know a few Tiger mates who were at the ground and they never thought they were a chance after quarter time .... very impressed with our relentless style and our all-over defence (not just the backline) Fitness and running ability was commented on as well as 2nd & 3rd efforts

Plenty of Mexicans in Victoria but if NSW wants to build a wall, we won't be paying for it!

I recall thinking that the Richmond win was a real turning point ... we held them to 6.12 for the match and that might have been why so many were so enamoured with our performance Not sure they were ever in the game after we held them goalless in the 2nd quarter So scoring freely is one thing but stifling scoring appeals more to those who regard that as being really important (or more important) And the Tigers were sitting 5th on the ladder going into that round 6 game against us ... they were also the reigning Premiers

T-Mac might only be out of the team for a week or 2 if Weideman doesn't fire ... remembering that this is Sam's 4th game in a row tonight Played very well against Essendon, was quiet against Port (on a night, not ideal for key forwards) and only reasonable last week Is reasonable again enough? Maybe, but the expectations are higher Of course, T-Mac needs to fire in the 2nds anyway in order to put pressure on Sam so it's an interesting scenario. Playing today on a small ground like Punt Rd oval is a test for any key forward. Not a lot of space to run into (or available space) The MC would be happy with the duel though. Much like they'd be happy with Smith & Tomlinson putting pressure on as well as Dunstan, Chandler & Bedford being thereabouts as well for midfield/small forward roles And that's with Salem, Hibberd, Lever, Viney all being unavailable! The MC have got their ideal set-up with regards to selection. Injuries are annoying to our better players but that is offset somewhat by the ability of the players replacing those injured players And ordinarily, a team is nearly always going to get a few injuries (as well as factoring in covid protocols)

I don't know about the technicalities but having a stationary arm was what was taught in juniors (in my day) It didn't have to be completely rigid but that arm certainly couldn't be moving about Now, the momentum of the ball is often governed by the hand holding the ball ... I'm baffled as to why these rules are always 'stretched' For instance, for decades a player was required to kick the ball over the mark ... that's no longer the case either. There are numerous other examples of how the game has been redesigned The coaches try it on and the league lets them do what they like (in a general sense) I suspect those overseeing proceedings prefer to see the umpires continuing to cop the wrath Because that's what happens. They (the umpires) are at the coalface and it's just easier to blame them In a way it's an ideal solution for those who are supposedly running the sport because it's just more of the same for the umps anyway. They are so used to all the criticism's that it's probably just water off a duck's back But that has never made it right in my eyes because we rarely get satisfactory solutions Every year is like groundhog day

Clarkson complained about the Bulldogs 'method' of disposal by hand back after the 2016 semi final ... mentioned that his own team would need to learn how it's done, hinting that they would do the same That's 6 years ago now So all the clubs do it and try to disguise it but again, the Bulldogs do it better than the rest (probably in all facets of a free kick, if we're being honest) For instance, as you and most others know, the handpass used to require a clenched fist punching the ball from another hand/arm that was reasonably stationary (certainly not moving about at a great rate of knots) Now, the hand holding the ball can be moving at a great rate of knots and the slightest of 'taps' on the ball is allowed ... so that new interpretation can be exploited and is exploited. And the Bulldogs are the best at it. Again, in close with a mass of bodies around the ball, the release of the ball after immediately being tackled is difficult to see clearly. Especially into what has actually happened My eyes see a throw only being paid when it's absolutely obvious. The rest of the time it's play on And it's gone way past blaming the umps ... this is a rules of the game issue which is an AFL issue

I'm with most here ... something needs to be done but I'm coming from a different direction and heading in a different direction We've probably narrowed it down to 2 real reasons ... either all the umps are all in it together in deliberately favouring the Bulldogs (for what reason?) or we have an issue with a team exploiting the rules or 'playing' the rules with the umpires just paying what they see (according to the rules) I heavily favour the latter argument so we could wait for all the other teams to 'catch up' or address the rules The Bulldogs have been doing what they are doing for a long time now. And that includes their premiership year I'm seeing more people in the media (and a few here on this site) state that the Bulldogs are just very adept at winning free kicks. So once that recognition is established, there might be some action taken The question is what can be done and what is being done? As far as I can see, nothing And there can't be a sour grapes approach ... the best time is a day like today when they have actually lost the game But until the league addresses the issue, we can expect more of the same. And the issue will probably get worse If you can't beat 'em, join 'em could easily be what the other clubs do And, it's not off topic as there is a direct connection re 'questionable' decisions and dissent or abuse Can you imagine if we're still talking about the lopsided free kick count (In the Bulldogs favour) in 2 or 3 years time? How about 5 years?

Yes the Bulldogs being expert at playing for free kicks and the league not addressing the rules that could put a stop to it all The lopsided free kick count in favour of the Bulldogs has been going on since 2015 (coincidentally, when Beveridge took over) And there's no such thing as a coincidence when it comes to transgressing or taking advantage. It's been a well planned exercise to a point where players like Weightman openly talks about how he plays for frees and how good he is at it Multiply that by every player on their list and that's a systemic issue Got a solution?

Pay the 50 on the spot is my view ... for the reasons that I outlined earlier It's probably time we agreed to disagree Sue, we are getting nowhere with this debate

The relationship between questionable decisions and player dissent is obvious. That's why the dissent happens As I said, if we can improve the rulings, there would be way less dissent. So flopping is by far the bigger issue Cause & effect We can either try and fix the A-end of the problems or try and fix what is causing those A-end issues If nothing is done, flopping will get completely out of control and then everyone will be wanting to do something about it As it stands, I see the flopping as a major issue - right now But at the moment there is nothing but crickets

Got another question for you We often carry on and want umpires to be sent to the bush for not getting decisions right (which I don't agree with by the way) So should the umpire last night who didn't enforce the 50 be sent to the bush? Or at least be cautioned or disciplined by his superiors? After all, according to the new rules, he did make an obvious error

And that can happen if all the players can behave themselves Oddly enough, if the players behave we'll be hearing a lot less from the umpires But if you know your footy, you'll know that the players do behave in large numbers. Nearly all the time For instance, there were 47 free kicks last night with the infringing players able to control their emotions on 45 occasions 2 players decided to go against team rules ... one let his team down badly and one got lucky So the issue is not about all the players ... more so those who do not want to accept the umpires decisions A small minority and that small minority are going to have to tow the line You'd pay it on the spot but you'd be conned into awarding free kicks to players who have flopped So the players who are doing the conning would get away with it Which is the same issue that we have now Problem not solved And if you reckon that you'd get every decision right, I'm not going to believe you

Just about ... any sort of chat can't be about questioning an umpires decision, or abuse, or dissent The players are best off saying nothing ... otherwise they run the risk of being pinged And penalties applied as they happen for dissent or abuse so I don't support your idea For instance, the offending player last night had no need to question the impire ruling regardless of whether he was right or wrong. The decision had been made and he just had to wear it. So the player let his team down In the end, he cost his team a goal And I regard any questioning of umpiring decisions as contemptable. Clam up, show respect and and accept the decisions So maybe the infringing players can get pinged on the field as well as having to front the tribunal afterwards. That might have a bigger effect Just like when the flopping for high contact should have been addressed over a decade ago ... they con the umpire (and the fans) and get away with it. So ping them retrospectively after the game because they can't necessarily get pinged during a game But as a realist I can't see that happening until the problem gets so out of control that they are forced to take action A question for you What would you do about players flopping around for high contact frees? And where do see that type of decision going? (worse?) As previously stated, there is a direct connection between that type of decision and all the frustration we see. As well as the dissent & abuse Cause & effect

On another thread I have talked about retrospectively pinging players for staging & flopping (or anything else like that for that matter) And over the years here I have made many other such references ... especially when it comes to the biggie - the contentious high contact free kick (which is getting worse) I distinctly remember having a long discussion many years ago about that type of free kick with dc But I'm also a realist so if those sorts of actions were to happen, public opinion and the media would be talking about it (at least) And they aren't, not on this site either But we are creatures of habit and we don't like change My view on the 50 (paid or not paid) keeps leading me back to the overall and the big picture. In other words, we can sweat the small stuff as long as we address all the issues that are in fact, in my view, bigger issues So 2 x 50 metre incidents last night vs 15-20 high contact (possible) incidents ... it has to be remembered that players flop about and stage for free kicks but they are not always awarded the free. Our players do it from time to time So if you were to ask me what is (by far) the biggest issue it's the high contact free ... miles ahead of player abuse & dissent, which by the way, we can still curtail at the same time There's probably 10 issues to address if the truth be known as holding the man, in the back and marking infringements are missed or paid too There is a simple solution for the players with regards to the 50 ... don't argue the point or question the decision and you won't get pinged And all this 'robot' talk is nonsense ... for instance, there were 47 free kicks paid last night and on 45 occasions the infringing players all managed to control their emotions 45 from 47 is a decent result So I saw last night as a positive ... if I was a perfectionist, maybe not

Always nice to back the first winner of the day (a bonus 50 on winnings too!) And worth following is 'Tokorangi' too - impressive winner

I saw a more than a dozen soft high contact incidents last night ... some were paid, some weren't. As viewers, we don't really know if the whistle is going to be blown (or not) for that type of incident So we have a far bigger problem with that type of decision ... which, by the way, leads to player frustration and possible dissent or abuse. Holding the ball - similar issues. In the back - similar issues. Infringements in marking contests - similar issues. Etc etc etc As for the non applying and the applying of the 50 last night. One player got off the hook and can count his lucky stars (although if he was pinged, the player he infringed against (if awarded the 50) wouldn't have had a shot at goal) Whilst the other player got rightfully pinged and cost his team with his selfish act. His act resulted in a goal. Don't react at all and there's no penalty You can bet he won't be doing it again and if he does, his coach will be furious with him (again) So the coaches are instructing their players to clam up if a free kick is awarded against the player. Eventually, the reacting players will have the finger pointed at them And that might happen more quickly than people think The rule is going to be applied and there will be the odd inconsistency (as there was last night) Just as there is with nearly every other type of footy incident

Long term the league would be better off with the average of 4 FTA games staying as it is with the other 5 games all being available on another source or 2 (as it is now) If they split the 5 non FTA games up across various platforms they'll be asking for trouble and if the FTA content is reduced, the same For the greater good, the league can't be too greedy looking for a cash grab (and that opportunity will present itself if Amazon & Paramount enter the fray with the big bucks) As it stands, there are a number of AFL fans who will watch the Rugby League on Thursday evenings if the AFL don't have a game scheduled for that day

Well, we eventually turned Scully into Steven May & Tom Sparrow I believe. And at the rate that Sparrow is improving, he could easily have a better career than Scully. May was All Australian last year and a premiership hero So Scully goes to GWS and we receive a compensation pick in the mini draft (Hogan) in return Eventually Hogan goes to Freo and they give us picks 6 & 23 in return (we gave them some inconsequential pick in the 60's as well) We give pick 6 to the GCS for May and use pick 23 (eventually pick 27) in the draft on Sparrow Turned out alright when factoring in Gawn at pick 34 as well All's well that ends well

Dropping T-Mac does add clarity to the one position in the forward line other than the positions filled by Fritsch & Ben Brown Weideman needs to perform to stay in the side but T-Mac also needs to also put pressure on Weideman's position ... so if Tom replaces Weideman down the track, the same scenario applies with roles reversed So it's no longer a debate about which player plays the best (in the same side) and who goes and who stays But Tom does have another avenue and that is as a reserve backman but with Smith seemingly ahead of him and Tomlinson in reserve, that path is a more difficult one So it's over to you Sam but ... Tom needs to stand out for Casey as well And Sam will almost certainly play across the half forward line and further afield ... a role others here have mentioned that he may be better suited to. Lead up marks and then dishing off (quickly) could be his go (as opposed to playing as a deep forward)

The game tonight was ok only. Was expecting better but GWS just seem to lack real purpose when the heat comes into the game They don't use the corridor enough and can't seem to get on a run when needed. Not a lot of physicality although they were better than last week. There's something missing though As for the Saints - hard to judge them tonight but they do keep winning. As Ben mentioned above, their defence is decent They are a reasonably good team but I'm not sure they can reach great heights just yet. A top 4 spot is within their grasp though with a 5 & 1 start to the season. And if you're top 4 you're a chance