Diamond_Jim

Need some clean ball

Schache...... Sub This team gets stranger by the minute

Not sure if it's been posted but lovely now and then story of Max Gawn from the Age. Hearing the now famous Gawn voice come out of a 17 year old in the draft camp interview is amazing. Thanks Max https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/max-gawn-a-video-portrait-of-the-artist-as-a-young-ruck-20230914-p5e4o7.html

This is it. We joke/despair about the lack of a Plan B but.... Also the existing gameplan even if successful is so automated and conservative it's draining on players and supporters. At the very least I'd like to see more freedom at VFL level even if it is only for alternate matches or halves. Can Tommo or Laurie play forward. Does TMac still have it down back if needed? We'll probably never know

Not impressed but selection has never been our strong point

Can't see a 3:20 start in Qld Next Thursday for example has a predicted top of 33 degrees A hard fought win in the draining heat of Brisbane was one of my many fears in this final series. My logic would be the Qld match on the Friday night but nothing about the AFL is logical as we all know

I'm having flashbacks to last year when many on this board including myself expected us to pick JVR for the finals. It made a lot of sense at the time. Will it be the same with Grundy?

Gleeson's instructions to his tribunal members When we come to consider the rough conduct (high bumps) provision, it was fairly and appropriately acknowledged by Woods (AFL) that, in order for us to find that this was a bump, there needed to be a voluntary bump, not a bumping into someone, but a bumping of an opponent. What in the hell happened to careless acts !!!

In the meantime you may care to read this article on the baseball team known as the Savannah Bananas https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2023/sep/12/savannah-bananas-future-of-sport Perhaps they are the future after all

Interesting As a prosecutor you generally prepare a list of the components you must prove to to get a conviction. AFL Counsel presumably knows what must be proved

The Football Act.... Ihle (Collingwood): Maynard was entitled to come forward off his player, he was entitled to jump when he saw Brayshaw about to kick.

It was Gus' fault,,,, Ihle (Collingwood): Although we're not critical of anyone moving or deviating from a path, that seems to be a factor that has contributed significantly to there being a collision.

Biomechanist: Once he's airborne, he's essentially a projectile. He's like a frisbee with arms and legs. Damning to say the least and it's Maynard's witness

Not addressing the issue It was impossible to adjust because he chose to leave the ground in a manner that attracted a dangerous outcome ie a careless act

OMG the quality of sports reporters.... The biomechanist has arrived four minutes early. She is officially better than any medical professional I have ever visited.

Woods (AFL): This type of contact isn't common. Leaping forward in the air with force to an opponent running in the opposite direction holds a key risk of badly injuring their opponent. It's a dangerous action to undertake & it breaches the duty of care owed to the other player.

AFL counsel went easy on him judging by the blog summary

That one struck me as well

The bio mechanics professor Thought we'd heard the last of those shysters.... (Daddy I couldn't help it.. t'was gravity)

Thought it was now... 4pm

Is there a link for the transcript or better still a video link Thanks

Goodwin said this morning he is going in for a scan (presumably a brain scan). Not an expert but as I understand it they will compare that scan to his base former scan. Frankly if he was unconscious for 2 minutes as reported in the media he won't be back for the prelim and why would you risk his health for the GF.

At 9:43 in that video they show several instances of what is now described as a "football act" intended to exculpate Maynard. Not one is similar to the front on flying charge undertaken by Maynard. Perhaps they are meant to support the other furphy being promulgated namely that Maynard had a right to protect himself by raising his shoulder. He lost that right IMO when he chose to leave the ground in an uncontrolled manner. On a separate note the discussion about knees to the head in high marking attempts certainly raises issues but has nothing to do with Maynard's infringement

Look at the replay It's not a smother .. it's an uncontrolled head on jump from metres away Never seen one like it before

Yes (have never seen it done).. the question is what happens to substitutions. Seems hardly fair just to even up the game and say you've both got to put in your sub player