chookrat

Is anyone having issues with Kayo pausing and buffering. I'm getting a clear 100 Mbps on my internet connection and have absolutely zero issues whatsoever streaming with any other service except for Kayo.

Yes, solid second quarter. Need to keep it up in the second half. Good job boys 💪

Not a bad outcome to only be down by 4 goals given what we served up. Look forward to seeing our response this quarter as we cannot afford to go into half time chasing tail. I trust our team to get the result today.

Thanks, I've got sound now but still no video

Kayo is absolute garbage, still not working will have to go to the pub.

Kayo not working. Between buffering and poor video quality and this it is a very substandard product for $25 per month.

The AFL response to this is underwhelming to say the least and the way the AFL media have towed the company line makes me very cynical. I'd love to see a Journo start to ask questions including what was in Port Adelaide's formal response, the role of the AFL marshall in reporting the incident, what will happen if another club does the same thing during finals - will it be a $100k fine or something else.

Thanks La Dee-vina, while it provides some context for the work that club Doctors do I don't see this justify in any way why the Port doctor make a determination that both players were not concussed. Even more bizarre is that the Doctor was able to make a split decision that not only was Jones not concussed but instead had a migraine.

BDA, the doctor is one cog in this and while they probably should lose their job and potentially have their medical license suspended, there is a whole line of people including the coaches and football manager who should step in and ensure the players enter the concussion protocol. Looking at the trouble PWC are in re leveraging confidential information it obtained in advising the ATO on tax while at the same time leveraging the same information to profit by providing companies advice to avoid paying the same tax. In this case none of the Partners challenged what was happening. It seems what happened in Port Adelaide is similar and the sanctions need to be club wide and also address individuals that should have known better and had the ability to speak up or authority to act.

Monoccular, my statement you highlighted was a general one followed by the sentence below specifically referring to the incident. "....noting in this case the incident was as clear as day and obvious to anyone who saw the footage that both players should take no further part in the game." What I'm trying to say is there is some chance that a Doctor may miss an incident but not the one in question.

I think there is some room for a Doctor to make a mistake re concussion, where for some reason they do not see an incident, noting in this case the incident was as clear as day and obvious to anyone who saw the footage that both players should take no further part in the game. The Jones 'migraine' substitution reinforces that the objective was to circumvent concussion protocols. When it comes to penalties; 1. Considering we were fined $500k for bringing the game into disrepute when we made selection and positional changes to ensure we lost games to finish below a certain ladder position, Port should be fined at least this much for making a mockery of concussion protocols. 2. Because they sought a advantage to win matches by circumventing the protocols the most appropriate penalty should discourage this objective, e.g. taking away premiership points to the value of 2 matches or 8 points. The AFL need to ensure this doesn't happen again and also include fines for bringing the game into disrepute.

I wouldn't be against rotating 2 - 3 players that could do with a light week but also wouldn't want us to take this game lightly. It's Clarko's first match back and North will likely play with emotion on what is essentially a suburban ground with a howling wind. North will keep us honest and we will need to bring intensity early to control the game and make sure we don't find ourselves playing catchup. Melbourne by 60 - 80 points.

I agree Old Dee re docking premiership points, both as a Melbourne supporter who stands a good chance to finish top two and a fair minded person who wants to see concussion protocols as something that should never be circumvented to win a match or have players available the following match in pursuit of on field success. I reckon a 2 match penalty when a club deliberately circumvents concussion protocols graded to a $50k fine where they accidentally miss something they should have picked up, e.g. 8 premiership points, which reverses an advantage a club would obtain for the duration of the two week protocol. I'm not sure what the penalty should be for this during the finals, treating the match as a loss/forfeit and points for the following season is probably the most straightforward penalty for a deliberate act. I think Port being ruled out of finals all together is probably a bit unnecessary to avoid this happening in the future. No club will try this on of they stand to lose 8 premiership points or forfeit a final and lose points for the following season. Also re the calls to have independent doctors assessing concussion, I think this has potential to create it's own problems and as long as the penalty is suitable I think club doctors can manage all injuries including concussion tests. Someone here mentioned that our club have always used the medical sub to the letter of the law (unlike some other clubs) and I think with appropriate sanctions all clubs will take concussion protocols seriously and not as a source of comparative advantage.

If we finish 3rd I doubt we will play Brisbane away unless Port are docked premiership points for concussion-gate, we lose to Carlton and Brisbane win all of their remaining matches.

There is probably a case that failing to run Aliir Aliir through the concussion protocols, could in isolation be seen as a mistake, but combined with Lachie Jones being subbed out with a 'migraine', only for both players to show concussion symptoms on the Monday cannot possibly be a mistake but a deliberate act to circumvent the AFL's concussion protocols. This is a very serious matter. The questions that come to mind are: 1. How will Port Adelaide explain this to the AFL. 2. What sanctions will the AFL impose on Port Adelaide. I don't think fines will cut it and I don't believe draft sanctions are appropriate given their impact os delayed. Docking premiership points makes sense given their immediate impact and that they directly address the short term incentive to play concussed players, noting I'm not sure the penalty if a club does this during finals. 3. Will the medical regulator review the Doctors medical registration. I'm not sure the should be trusted to advise people on medical matters. 4. Is this something WorkSafe could get involved in or is this too low level, without sufficient legislative cover, for them to get involved in.

He only had 6 touches to half time.

I reckon a condition of entry to an AFL match should be to undertake a quiz re holding the ball rule. The Richmond supporters would literally call "Ball!" every time one of our players were tackled.

It's a steep price, but he finded off and flopped to the ground and then held the ball in. Kossie earned the free from his pressure.

How good are Collingwood in discovering Howe as an intercept defender and then trying him as a forward. You never know what you may find playing someone out of position - very brave of them!

In fairness $1 is probably fair value for the product they are selling.

No it wouldn't.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.triplem.com.au/story/billy-shares-the-hilarious-story-of-when-bernie-vince-nicked-damian-barretts-glasses-for-three-hours-132402

Spot on Mickey, I never used to mind DB when he'd break news or make an observation and ask an analyst what they thought of it but now he is offering up his own analysis. Personally I think he's been salty towards Melbourne ever since Bernie Vince stole his glasses in the urinal at the Brownlow.

While maintaining pressure on the Board and CEO lets them know this is important to us supporters I think putting pressure on State MP's (provided 10's thousands of members do so) is a good way to let our elected officials know this could cost votes in the next election. The challenge would be to have sufficient numbers in a number of electorates that could swing results to an extent the MP's of all parties would support.

Rab D, I agree from a short term perspective but over the medium to longer term the most important figures become how many younger members we sign up, how many of these become rusted on supporters, how many of these rusted on supporters procreate, and how many of their offspring convert to members and supporters. I'd also argue that Richmond, Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton have more supporters than us because the the cycle from birth to procreation is much shorter among their unwashed masses compared to us and therefore they have a higher effective reproduction rate.