rjay

Not surprising...

Seems to be rule of the week...they were red hot last night as well. edit: that last one was so ridiculous no one knew who it was against.

It's the CEO I meant & I hope he's not going to hide away behind the glass. Interested to see.

Will the GM be mixing with the fans tonight? I'm interested 'Ghosty'...

Kingy... Neeld 2.0 or Blight 2.0 (Adelaide Version)? Time will tell.

I'm sorry to see it go. It's part of the uniqueness of our game which has been diluted further by this move. I would have changed the rule so they did not have to bring back a bad bounce. Also would have brought back the bounce around the ground. If they want fair then change to a round ball. ...and as for the sub, I would have eliminated it and not added another interchange player. 4 on the bench is enough. Cut the rotations to a small number a Q...and you won't need to be worried about disadvantage with injury.

History can be insightful. Howe was playing forward until injury (to defenders) forced him back which is where he has remained for his career apart from a few cameo's forward. Turns out he's good at it. Nothing is a given.

The same thing happened with Jeremy Howe, wanted to play forward. Buckley and Collingwood sold him on being that forward at Collingwood and guess where he's played ever since they figured he wasn't the forward they needed. He's been a back man for them and Roos was right all along. No guarantee the same thing won't happen to McVee at Freo...Cameron kicks 5 and who is Longmuir going to move onto him.. just a tip, it's not going to be Clark.

Might not have a choice...

Do they still exist? Asking for a friend....

Really miss Dennis, not so much Bruce, but as a pair they were streets ahead (states/countries really).

Sad as it is...I'm more disappointed by the deception. ...but you are right, we're better off without them.

Pathetic post...

I think this annoys me even more than his going...

He certainly looked dazed but it could have been from the pain of his injury. Either way, the care of the player should be questioned.

I don't either 'old dee' but he was poor...

Plenty of leverage, we can let him walk to WC.

Yeah, I thought he was great. Fletcher or Andrews for me but we got a mid. I mean Ashcroft did play well but...

Yep, agree...the sub rule should be scrapped. There's no reason we can't go back to 4 but of course the AFL we go to 5 which to my mind is stupid. Yep, I'm sick of the creep here as well...you can just see the push for an injury sub again in a few years can't you. The answer is cut rotations way back... I think he could see it and this whole thing is a bit of a smoke screen...of course the sub was there to be used for Cameron but he chose to sub out Stanley. 'old dee' I think he and Stanley were probably on a par as far as contribution goes. Yep, it wasn't a good look and not the first time. I like this... I think so...it was a big risk but with big risk comes big reward. Being able to hold Neale on the bench as a sub for half a game was a huge advantage when they let him lose in the 2nd half. They knew he didn't have a full game in him but gambled he did have half a game and it paid off. 17 disposals and 7 clearances after HT at that rate he would have romped in the Norm... If they had an injury in the first Q then it would have been seen as a bust perhaps. ...but they didn't and he broke the game open. I reckon this is what Scott was really pointing too but the media were too dumb to pick up on.

Not a knock on Scott - more the AFL but lets come back to him & the media later.... The Sub (that's what this is about). In my time we started with 19th & 20th men. Very rigid & unless there was an injury you were lucky to get a few minutes junk time at the end of a game. The idea of interchange came into football in 1978, 2 interchange players replaced the 19th & 20th men. This was a great idea I think & added some flexibility. Particularly in local footy as a young kid going from U17's to senior footy I found myself on the bench for just a few minutes of game time in the senior side a number of times. In 1994 the introduction of the blood rule saw interchange go to 3 Then in 1998 they thought 4 would be a good number...now we are running into problems as we move into flood territory with too many fit players with unlimited interchanges. 2011 we bring in the sub...3 interchanges 1 sub. This was due to coaches whinging about the advantage the opposing have if one of their players get injured. The idea of 21 fit men v 22....now smart people would have said this wasn't going to work. How about we cut heavily on the rotations then the effect of losing one won't be as great. ...but no we went with the sub. Then the coaches started whinging about the sub, Roos called it the worst rule change ever invented. Anyway I could go on with the history...the point is they got rid of the sub then brought it back & now it looks like it's going again but we keep 5 on the bench. Why? They have reduced rotations but should cut them further & reduce the bench to 4 max. this will even it out if you get an injury plus open the game out. Back to Scott, he made some point about Cameron & not being able to decide what to do around the sub...but, when he introduced his sub he subbed out Stanley & left Cameron on. Thanks to a limp media we are none the wiser. Was this more about how Brisbane used Neale? It seemed a strange thing to bring up.

No, I was meaning the "Norm", I know it's not voted by the umpires by the way but just making a point. ...after all the whinging in the media, when they get their chance they still vote a mid. I thought Andrews deserved more votes and probably should have won it. At least Kate McCarthy thought so too. Interesting to see just reading now that there was a lot of negative comment on her being on the panel. Well I think she stood up well & didn't just go with the flow. Well done Kate.. Without looking at the stats I don't know how Luke Hodge gave McLuggage a vote...I just looked at the stats and see why. He looked at the stats. In the first half when it was on the line he did a couple of nice things but was quiet. I'm a big fan of McLuggage by the way but I think a lot of his stats were from when the game was broken open.

It's not about who we miss out on...it's just time to close this loophole down. If it's a serious competition then it needs to be done properly. Seeing as we want to change everything else that made this game unique, then this one is a no brainer.

No, if you want a fair draft it's time for F/S to go....

It's a midfielders medal. Can't let the umpires vote on it anymore ...lol

Good effort though from a wingman...kid can play.