Macca

When you say 'we' pick on Melksham it's more the loud minority here Certainly not me ... I hate scapegoating with a passion (although I did critique ANB on another thread .. without including others who make the same sorts of errors) So it's not just about Fritsch when 2/3rds of the team have a night off For instance replacing Fritsch leaves us with a stack of others who underperformed last night To be fair, some of those who were down like T-Mac, May, Hunt, Rivers & Jordon have all played well this season (to date) Spargo, Hunt, Weideman, ANB, Hibberd, Pickett, Jetta and 1 or 2 others need to find their best form (along with Fritsch) We've been off the boil since the Richmond win, that much is true

I see our team receiving at least 6 lucky free kicks in any given game. What about that free kick to Petracca at CHF? Bit soft? We've had a good run so far this season (mainly because we've been first in for the ball and have finally decided to play in front) But not last night ... we were 2nd to the ball and paid a heavy price By the way, the player in front will receive a free kick 4 out of 5 times (if a free kick is paid) Hey, I get the passion and most hate losing so much that they feel a screaming need to blame the umpires (the collaberators? ha ha) I never have and never will blame umpires because my preferred position is did we play well enough to win? (like a coach would analyse things) Seen the new vision of the so-called deliberate OOB? If so, what is your view now?

There you go hey ... well picked up Mel Bourne If Spargo doesn't deflect the ball, the trajectory of the ball could have ended up very close to his Adelaide teammate (and not necessarily near the boundary line) Others might see it differently though as the vision is a bit obscure

What about the other dozen or so players who decided to have a night off? Right across the board we were awful I don't disagree with you about Fritsch but he's not a physical player and is more of a pure (tallish) opportunist. The question is how many of those types do you have in the same team? 1? 2? ... at the moment we've got more than 2 Spargo, ANB, Weideman, Rivers, Jordon, Jetta, Hunt, Petty, Melksham, Hibberd, T-Mac, Pickett & May were all well down on their best Along with Fritsch that's nearly 2/3rds of the team that took the field It's any wonder we lost

Game goes for 4 quarters (approximately 120 minutes) so the last minute and what happens in that last minute is connected to the other 119 minutes So we decided to loaf and bludge through the game and go away from the disciplined football required at this level ... that's what we did and that is why we lost That's the main reason so why give the players an out? Goodwin will hopefully have roasted the players after the game and I'm damned sure he wouldn't have even mentioned the questionable calls at the end (or at any part of the game for that matter) We're 16 points in front late in the last quarter and lose? Good teams don't lose from that position Focus on 1 or 2 questionable umpiring decisions and you will let the players & FD off the hook Same as the focus is often on Goodwin alone when we don't play well ... lets the other members of the FD and the players off the hook when that happens Besides all that ANB would have had the ball if the call had have been deliberate and I doubt he kicks a goal from that angle. 3 minutes earlier he clangered the ball to the opposition in typical ANB fashion. He might have missed everything in fact So would we be happy with a draw? Not me, I see a draw as a loss against a cellar dweller even though a draw creates separation in terms of premiership points. But I don't believe in giving a sucker an even break. We contributed to our own fate last night. So the only thing to do is look in the mirror You play to win and last night we were not good enough. A soft performance

A way to fix the grey area of deliberate (or not deliberate) is to pay a free kick against the team which touched the ball last before it crosses the boundary line (as it was from 1926 - 1939) But if Spargo touched the ball then they would have received the free (under that rule) And if Spargo did deflect the ball then I would like to see the vision before making any judgement. Besides all that, we lost the game in numerous other ways and if we had have won, those issues would still be being addressed today and ongoing - not sure everyone would have been in raptures Last night highlighted that we are just not that good a team ... we're in the mix with a number of other teams but if we finish top 4 we'll gain an advantage pre finals. Long way to go before that possible outcome though ... the next 2 weeks will be full on and if we play like we did last night against the Pies, we will probably lose the QB clash Last night could be viewed as the loss that taught the team how to go about it for the rest of the season. But if we don't learn from it we're in trouble

Without Oliver today we would have lost by 4-6 goals. Doesn't say much for the rest of the team So many of our players had so little impact. We didn't turn up, it's as simple as that Make no mistake, we lost that game and handed the points to the Crows Played from behind, Outpaced, Soft at the contest, 2nd to the ball, No real system, Crows owned the corridor, No will to win, Poor decision making and below-par skills, A lack of energy etc etc Hopefully that's the shocker out of the way because if we play like that against any of the good sides, we'll lose them all The wake up call but we need to learn from it and not be dismissive

Tim.Tebow is back in the NFL! Signed a 1 year deal with the Jags as a tight end. I hope he does alright 33 years old now but he'd be fit & healthy you'd imagine

Best Bet Doomben (Saturday) R7 No.2 Mugatoo 6.00/1.70 Meets the topweight Zaaci 3kgs better off despite beating it home by 2 lengths in the Doncaster Or ... the place bet in a multi could be used as 1 of 2 bankers. I'd be surprised if Mugatoo isn't in the finish As for your pick Gorg, Streetcar is a big chance!

Extending the 666 rule for other types of stoppages has been talked about rjay ... again, worth of debate

You make a lot of good points there rjay With no prior we'd see a lot more holding the man adjudications ... the would-be tackler can't assume that the player will take hold of the ball. If he does, the tackler gets pinged It's way more complex than those who believe that the tackler would all of a sudden be favoured

Chess is even more difficult unless you're some sort of maestro! With no prior players would become more adept at grabbing the ball and disposing in the one action (or soon after) I have actually seen the above in action for over 2 decades. You won't have but that's not your fault Cue Cat Stevens

To ease congestion the VFA went to 16 a side in the early 1950's whilst the VFL built a 'perceived' oversized ground out at Waverley ... the land was acquired in 1959 So these issues we have are far from new. It just seems that way to the youngin's

For those trying to remember re prior opportunity ... does anyone remember the phrase being used back in the 70's, 80's or 90's? (if you were around back then)

Deliberate out of bounds? First talked about early in the 20th century and actually implemented from 1926 through to 1939 So it's not a new thing We can learn a lot from the past. Or at least, we should do Prior opportunity is a relative new rule in the whole scheme of things ... and the new rule had led to a myriad of other issues

When I played there was no prior rule nor was there such a rule in the VFL/AFL Most have forgotten but it is true. And it was in the rule book. The onus was on the player grabbing the ball ... get rid of it quickly or get pinged As a result there was very little congestion and the ball was in constant movement I'm showing my age but others of my era will agree (if they test their memory)

The cry of 'ball' has always amused me ... never joined in on that bit. But lets face it, footy fans love it when a player is pinged (yaaay etc) So a lot want the tackler rewarded but want to keep the prior opportunity ruling ... go figure I just want to watch footy the way it should be played ... fast, furious, open with long kicks and high marking. Dashing wingmen, high flying forwards etc etc Scramble ball doesn't do it for me. Dreamteam & Supercoach freaks who love all the dinky possessions will disagree but I could care less

My opinion is that the ruling should be open to debate not shut down (because people are afraid of change?) Personally, I want to watch football, not scramble-ball. And I'm tired of all the complaints about the umpiring (the tin-foil hat brigade) The way it is right now is unacceptable even though I believe the game is being umpired quite well The man on the mark ruling is artificial but it has opened the game up for the better But more needs to be done with regards to the actual ruling with regards to the tackling adjuducation If nothing is done the argument will rage on for years with the umpires copping the brunt of the frustration

Thanks for taking what I said out of context again rjay. Edit out the stuff you don't like hey? I'll have to try that You left out the thrust of my argument where the prior opportunity ruling has led to all sorts of other issues including incorrect disposal, numerous packs with congestion etc etc. Along with supporter frustration And I'm not at all blaming the umpires either. They are doing a fine job given the circumstances. This is an AFL ruling issue so the problem lies with the custodians or the rulemakers Too many coaches are talking about ditching no prior for it to be for selfish reasons in my view As previously stated, the current ruling has led to a compromised outcome where other issues have been created (throws, ball held in etc etc etc) The law of unintended consequences

What we've got now with regards to a player being tackled are handpasses that aren't really handpasses, the ball simply being let go or allowed to dribble away, the ball spilling free, a part of the boot barely connecting with the ball being regarded as a kick, futile fake attempts at trying to dispose of the ball along with tacklers making sure the ball is trapped in with the player being tackled etc etc All things considered the umpires are doing a fine job sorting it all out. What was once illegal is now legal, nothing is clear cut and quite frankly, it's a bit of a mess. The new man on the mark ruling has improved the game as a spectacle but more needs to be done Most watching are left frustrated and tearing their hair out. I never see any bias or favouritism but what we see now is far removed from what we used to witness I'm normally very cynical of the coach's motives but their 'No Prior' is worthy of debate ... it wouldn't necessarily become a tacklers league as some might imagine either. Lots of clearing taps, knock ons and as a result, way less congestion and packs is how I'm picturing 'No prior' But do nothing and the frustration will remain. There's not much more that can be done with the current prior opportunity interpretation

Against a team like the Crows you could play tall but would you contemplate playing that tall against the Doggies or Lions? If not, don't bother doing it against the Crows. Wasting your own time & losing an opportunity to continue to practice what has worked so far I'd be very surprised if another tall doesn't make way for LJ ... probably an unlucky Weideman

Yes Patches ... we have an attacking side where Langdon, Hunt & 1 or 2 others run in tandem (and it's working) Speed, good skills & execution And on the other side Brayshaw is often at the forefront of a defensive style with the opposition being continuously stifled It's such a vital component of our game plan where we get to play the games on our terms. Make no mistake though, the opposition are going to come at us with a will to breaking down our game plan. The more that it is exposed, the harder it will be to maintain Goodwin made mention of it yesterday ... along the lines of that as the game goes on, our game plan eventually wins out Rinse & repeat but again, we can be broken down but we've got talent on our side where as the oppisition need to find a way to hunt us down. We should be relishing the prospect of being the hunted

He's being scapegoated, whipping boy, whatever you want to call it. Coming 3rd in the Brownlow has annoyed more than a few here Since 2018 he has mostly been played on the wing. Not his natural position as a footballer. So a degree of leeway needs to be applied because the same sort of output won't be forthcoming As it stands, he's making a good fist of it (again, all things considered) But if people were being fair in their evaluations they'd be pointing out every one of the 11 times that Oliver turned it over to the opposition on Sunday Brayshaw is not starring but he is doing his job admirably

Up until we put Brayshaw out on the wing he would have played all his footy on the ball ... bit like Greg Williams, Terry Wallace or Greg Wells being told to play the wing position Not as easy as it might seem for a bloke who would have played as a centreman in days gone by I'd prefer to see him play in his natural position (do what you do, do well) but for team purposes, he needs to be played as a wingman So suddenly the boundary line is constantly in his vision as opposed to the vast expanses of the corridor I reckon he's playing quite well all things considered and he should be judged on his overall output

His disposal was quite good after 1 early error (the spacial awareness turnover) The other possessions where the ball didn't directly go to a teammate was when he was under pressure and in that situation he (like anyone else) needs to dispose of the ball ... or he gets pinged for holding it. Winning a ball in congestion and then executing perfectly (every time) is the stuff of dreams. Won't be happening Oliver turned the ball over to the opposition 11 times ... 10 coaches votes yet he had more 'clangers' than anyone else