Macca

I'll take your word for it Gonzo as I only tune into our games and when that happens I block out all the noise and what-not and focus in on how we play. But from memory there is too much talk and too many talking. And they're too loud. Back a few years back cable had a facility where you could watch from a widescreen aspect with only crowd noise with no commentary. So no close-ups and you could see the whole ground and where all the players were. It mirrored being at the games and was thoroughly enjoyable. I've never needed the game told to me as the visuals say it all.

And 2 of the 3 games are on free-to-air prime-time. A dress rehearsal for next season in terms of future FTA slots so a win or 2 is ultra important. We certainly don't want to get smashed. Sponsors, memberships and all sorts of other factors are at play. The big one for me is that we need to attract some talent from elsewhere. So we're on show. Cue goes in the rack after round 23.

My argument centres on TV numbers. And the bulk of the AFL's income comes from broadcast rights. So they should be concerned especially when Channel 7 dropped 1 of the 4 free-to-air games not so long ago.

The State of Origin games were 'Excluded' DJ. So you could add on at least 6 million to make the NRL's season total to 100.3 Million. Quite a margin all things considered. Gil can spin it anyway he wants but the numbers can't be disputed. And the rule changes that came in this season were/are designed to make the product more watchable. Not sure it's worked though.

Or google this article ... 'NRL on course for TV Ratings victory over AFL' Not that I'm barracking for the NRL here ... I would prefer it if the AFL was king and bullet proof. But TV rules and if a percentage of the masses are starting to switch off then that's a red flag. Crowds & memberships will always keep the AFL as a strong entity but it needs TV (as well) I'm talking long term ... going from 4 free-to-air games back to 3 free-to-air was a retrograde step which the Melbourne media conveniently ignored. And if the TV numbers continue to drop then we might only see 2 free-to'air games in the future.

Do you not remember the conversation you and I had about the very same subject matter? It was just a few months ago. For the 2nd time ... Google ... 'NRL trumps AFL in TV ratings War'

Many have their own remedy ... bottom line is that 85% - 90% of footy fans don't really have an issue with how the sport is played. To them it's just footy no matter how it is served up. But the concern for the AFL has to be the other 10% - 15%. Lose them and then you have to try and get them back. Memberships are strong and crowds are great but TV numbers have dropped off over the last 4 years by around about 18%. Conversely, Rugby League TV numbers have increased by about the same percentage. The sport has always been best experienced by being at the game though. Loses a lot on TV. So it's not going anywhere but the criticisms of how the game is presented remains. I can't think of another sport where that sports own fans are openly critical of their sport.

Yep ... and the VFA went to 16 a side in the early 1950's. For the reasons why use the Occam's Razor approach. I'd go to 16 a side just to see where it takes the game. Too many are turning away and there are too many complaints. No other sport has these issues. It's just footy. I'd keep a version of 666 though. (6-4-6 if we went to 16 a side) And reduce rotations to 10 per side per game. We might see the clubs recruit more athletes but what we might see the clubs recruit more footballer types. The latter type of recruiting might come later. But the game would have less congestion and as a result, less tackling. Keepings-off would still exist but less-so if the length of a kick for a legal mark to be taken was increased to 20 or 25 metres. All I know is that most people I know watch way less footy these days and I myself barely watch the sport at all. Apart from our games of course. Those who are turning away from the sport need to be catered for rather than condemned. Loyalty is a 2-way street.

Yeah the footy isn't great but it's times like these where you find out a lot about the club Wadda. Tanking aside, we need to still act like professionals. Both collectively and as individuals. The reason I mention tanking (and it still goes on) is that list management and recruiting for needs started way before the point that we're at right now. So we almost certainly have our eye on a certain type or a certain player (much like we did with Oliver) As much as I'm a skeptic with drafting I do recognise that the best of the best are quite often at the pointy end of the draft. So we can do both ... fight out the season and find out who we want to go with as well as having an eye on the future. So I will be watching the last 6 games with avid interest. As well as the Ashes! (along with the golf, le tour, EPL, MLB & the horses) ha ha

I have heard about the Basketball World Cup recently but not sure on the details Wadda. As for the Ashes, my theory on winning over there (or anyehere for that matter) often revolves around individuals scoring centuries. Do it enough times and you set up wins ... and if a player scores a big hundred it's hard to lose a match. So we've got Smith and who else? We need Harris, Warner, Khawaja or someone else to make some big scores (as well as Smith) Our bowling is fine but our bowlers need scores that can allow them to bowl to targets. Can't say I'm all that confident but we live in hope!

Apart from all that drafting is flawed anyway so the debate/argument is based on mistruths, myths, incorrect projections and crystal ball gazing. In a nutshell the draft is a bit of a lottery with lots of hidden nice prizes and any number of busts But I agree with your reply Gonzo ... up to a dozen clubs 'Qualified' for priority picks which were obviously tanked for. We just did what the others did but our drafting results were poor (which, when taking into account how flawed the draft is could have easily been predicted) The draft believers will disagree and that's their choice. I'd rather look at the truths surrounding drafting. Putting an absolute value on a draft pick number is flawed too. The Hogan/May deal with a top-end pick involved as a bartering tool makes more sense. In the end we swapped Hogan for May. A 'virtual' swap per se. May is older but looks to be a good asset and who knows what Freo will get with Jesse. I wouldn't call it win/win (yet) but both clubs got what they needed.

Can't be sure but his payout might have been the same whether he resigned or was sacked Was he contracted beyond this season? My guess is he hasn't lost out in a monetary sense. But not many resign although RDB was never sacked in his 4 stints as coach. Matthews? Jeans? Kennedy?

We're 5 & 11 after coming into the season where the expectations were very high (from most) So it stands to reason that there would be mounting tensions. A shake-up of the assistants with at least 10 changes to the list is my tip. As for Viney, when he is fit and raring to go is when we see his value. His kicking efficiency drops away when he plays hurt. At his best he's a bull who can break tackles and then deliver the ball unimpeded (it's then up to the forwards to produce) His value decreases quite sharply when not fully fit. He's not the most accurate of field kicks so he needs to be 'freed up' to hit targets (or kick to advantage or space) Being co-captain he'd want to always play and he strikes me that that is how he is wired anyway. Which in turn makes it tough for the selectors if they want to rest/rehab the player. Unlike others, you only have to look at Viney from the get-go to know whether he is ready to go or not.

June/July are huge in terms of Overseas sport and then the EPL starts up in less than a month. The NFL not long after. Spring Carnival and then the home tests vs Pakistan & New Zealand. Until then we've got 2 more weeks of the Tour de France, British Open Golf and our Demons might even win a game or 2! I'm a bit of a fan of Rugby League these days so there's that too. Rugby Union World cup in September. Champions League? Oh ... and a little urn gets played for kicking off in just over 2 weeks! There's a bit goin' on.

Yeah ... was talking to a few people today and they couldn't fathom why they would schedule all 3 at the same time on the same day. Plus, the 'Tour' was on as well so there was a feast of sport. There's probably a dozen world-wide sporting events that need to be watched uninterrupted and the Cricket World Cup & Wimbledon are 2 such events for many people. There's a point of difference with the FI's & Cycling but events such as the GF, State of Origin, Boxing day cricket and such like need singular attention. The Open Championship (Golf) is another and that will get most of my attention next weekend. Big sport just never stops Wadda!

They won't be replaying the match Wadda as the World cup just returned home! The Poms might be all about fair play but there are limits! Deciding the World cup by the most amount of boundaries is high farce. Who thinks of these things? Laughable really. A tie would have satisfied some but finding a winner of a sporting tournament isn't rocket science.

We could but Preuss doesn't have good hands. And he's up forward to take grabs. If we had some decent small forwards then Preuss providing a contest would be of more value. He can at least do that. We know he can ruck and is very able back-up to Max. The effort was there on Sunday ... he's just not a threat and doesn't really know how to play as a key forward. But who else is there? Petty did ok and Tim Smith might be available (?) Weideman again? You may be right Bub ... give the big boy 6 more games and see what comes of it. Season is shot anyway and Preuss might just start clunking them.

Yeah that was a questionable decision but the umpire might have thought that Stokes had completed the 2nd run. Again, he has to make a quick decision. To be honest, I much preferred the days when we just accepted the umpires decision and got on with it. The rub of the green. But I have never been one to question umpiring decisions so I prefer to take the good with the bad and wear the odd bad decision. The LBW ruling is different as we're talking about bad rulings by the lawmakers It's those who I have a problem with. We make it hard for the umpires in cricket much like we do with footy. And the most boundaries decides the World Cup? Schoolyard type ruling Just keep playing another over each until you find a winner.

Re the technology ... I don't trust ball tracking but might prefer it if more than half the ball was hitting the stumps for an LBW appeal to be upheld. Anything less than that and I'm not satisfied. But that's just me. As for the reviews and the howlers ... the only way to get it close to 100% right might be to review every appeal - which creates another issue of course. Unintended consequences kicks in. But they (the ICC) should at least be able to find a better way. But it's the ICC we're talking about! Bottom line - Taylor wasn't out. And it's a World cup final and Taylor is a gun batsman. But I don't have a problem with the umpire giving Taylor out ... like many, he probably thought it was out and has to make a quick decision. If the process of ball tracking was quicker the umpire could have sent the appeal straight upstairs. But how many times before it could become farcical with numerous frivolous appeals?

Ì Was all of Australia barracking for Roger & the Kiwis last night Wadda? Loss/loss but that's sport for you. And both lost in such a narrow margin that would really sting Still, it was a great night of sport ... bleary eyed today though!

I'll be heading over to the tennis soon ... cricket on audio with the F1GP commentary online! Federer winning Wimbledon again takes precedence and I really hope he can do it. A perfectly behaved all time great hey? Should be more of it ... nice guys don't always finish last.

I didn't see it Wadda but you can't be behaving like that after a dismissal ... it's just not cricket! Looking at how the match is panning out you'd reckon the Kiwis are going to have to get to 250 at least. But at 5-186 after 42 overs they'll do well to get to that figure. New Zealand's bowling has been very good throughout the tournament so you never know.

Why bring in technology if that technology can't be used as originally intended. Now it's about when you use a review and when you don't use a review. Again, not the original concept. We still have howlers. In a World cup final. Rub of the green worked better ... the whole LBW technology ruling is all over the place. The same result can be out or not out depending on reviews or whether the appeal was given out or not out originally. We're back to where we started from.

Kiwis have started nicely ... 1-91 off the first 20 overs. Hard to know what a competitive score might be (all things considered) Anything over 250/260? The rule of thumb is often touted as you double the score of a team from the 30 over mark (with enough wickets intact of course) So if the Kiwis could get to 150 off 30 overs they might end up with 300. Edit: Kiwis are now 4-152 after 35 overs (lost 3-61 off their last 14 overs) 250-260 would be a good result from their position now.

Weekend Special MLB Monday 06.07am Oakland Athletics vs Chicago White Sox Oakland Win (-1.5) $1.90