2017 - Non Yeo Discussion (Formerly Non Freo Discussion)

[Taylor]

They can't kick. If they don't improve that and add some class to their midfield in the summer I think you can rule a line through their rebuild.

FTR, I have nothing against the Saints (well nothing major) but they butcher it in open play and in front of the sticks WAY too consistently to threaten the pointy end. Need a massive improvement in that area.

I agree. Their list manager will ring the phone off the hook to get Lachie Weller if they can't land Josh Kelly, Whitfield or another ball user.

 

[estibador]

Watching the replay of the Tassie game - that non-payment of Brown's mark has to be one of the worst umpiring decisions of the year!

 

[Outshined]

- Richmond: Still doubt their style will work when it gets really heated. If they can bounce back over the next couple of weeks (us and Saints), you've got to say momentum will give them a shot. They also have a style built for the MCG which is obviously an advantage.

As harsh as it sounds, Richmond's biggest impediment is Hardwick atm. No coach is quicker to publicly heap expectations on an already intensely scrutinized playing group. After they knocked off Port he claimed their style was made for finals and they were only going to get better - that was followed by the St. Kilda thumping and his petulant reaction to Cornes' tweet. Even this weekend after the Geelong game he complained about the home-town umpiring. Ok, internally we all know parochial crowds can and do influence umpiring decisions (ahem...West Coast), but it's so salty for a senior coach to even mention it after a loss.

I think they'll struggle tbh. How he's survived 7 seasons for 2 elimination finals losses I'll never know.

 

[Taylor]

He got on the umpiring because he is playing in Perth this week and the umpire bias here is very noticeable because of West Coast.

He just wants a few extra paid this weekend

 

[Outshined]

He may have his reasons, they may even be valid.

It can still appear to be cringeworthy deflection.

 

[Frank J Moose]

Watching the replay of the Tassie game - that non-payment of Brown's mark has to be one of the worst umpiring decisions of the year!

There is a lot of competition!

 

[estibador]

There is a lot of competition!

Well it's in the top 100 or so.

 

[Admiral Byng]

There is a lot of competition!

Just for that game, or just generally?

 

[Taylor]

In 2006 the AFL amended the sunset clause that gave Fremantle access for 20 years post entrance to the AFL to players who had played enough WAFL games. The amendment retained the clubs access to those players if the qualifying WAFL games occured before the AFL club's entrance to the competition.

2003 the AFL raised the father son qualification from 50 to 100 AFL games. So when Stephen O'Reilly left the club his sons were qualified. His son was already born when the rule was changed. I am curious to know if the qualification changing denies a natural justice for someone who was already qualified.

 

[PapaJ]

As harsh as it sounds, Richmond's biggest impediment is Hardwick atm. No coach is quicker to publicly heap expectations on an already intensely scrutinized playing group. After they knocked off Port he claimed their style was made for finals and they were only going to get better - that was followed by the St. Kilda thumping and his petulant reaction to Cornes' tweet. Even this weekend after the Geelong game he complained about the home-town umpiring. Ok, internally we all know parochial crowds can and do influence umpiring decisions (ahem...West Coast), but it's so salty for a senior coach to even mention it after a loss.

I think they'll struggle tbh. How he's survived 7 seasons for 2 elimination finals losses I'll never know.

Yeah, that's well put and I agree. Your post also reminds me that they have very little finals experience from top to bottom. So, with all that in mind, you'd probably have to take them off the table as a real chance - but still, the MCG factor does give them a bit of an advantage and if luck goes their way ... Bulldogs last year is a reminder that you don't want to write some teams off too quickly.

 

[malpaso]

Not quite. As average as they are, they have been and still are far more organised as a team across the park than us. Some of that is maturity, they've got a core of seasoned players out there of course, but I think they are well coached and always shape well right across the ground. It probably helps them overachieve in some ways and certainly means they don't get blown away like we did today.

I think their forward shape is the only thing that stands out to me and that's because they have a gun FF. The rest is shite.

 

[theGav56]

In 2006 the AFL amended the sunset clause that gave Fremantle access for 20 years post entrance to the AFL to players who had played enough WAFL games. The amendment retained the clubs access to those players if the qualifying WAFL games occured before the AFL club's entrance to the competition.

2003 the AFL raised the father son qualification from 50 to 100 AFL games. So when Stephen O'Reilly left the club his sons were qualified. His son was already born when the rule was changed. I am curious to know if the qualification changing denies a natural justice for someone who was already qualified.

Cunning. Hope this question gets asked.

 

[Taylor]

Cunning. Hope this question gets asked.

It would be fair for those already born when the rules were changed to keep their qualification.

That would be my request. We have twelve months for the decision

 

[PapaJ]

In 2006 the AFL amended the sunset clause that gave Fremantle access for 20 years post entrance to the AFL to players who had played enough WAFL games. The amendment retained the clubs access to those players if the qualifying WAFL games occured before the AFL club's entrance to the competition.

2003 the AFL raised the father son qualification from 50 to 100 AFL games. So when Stephen O'Reilly left the club his sons were qualified. His son was already born when the rule was changed. I am curious to know if the qualification changing denies a natural justice for someone who was already qualified.

I think the AFL will employ their usual high standards to make sure natural justice is afforded. It will include asking the following questions:

1. Will it upset the Victorian football establishment?
2. Will it impact their TV right$ deal$?
3. $$$$$?
4. Will it take a high draft pick away from GWS?
5. Will it keep Eddie happy?

As long as it doesn't contravene those underlying principles, I think O'Reilly's son will qualify for us.

 

[scon]

Toby Greene $1500.

 

[G Mus]

Toby Greene $1500.

Good

 

[estibador]

I think the AFL will employ their usual high standards to make sure natural justice is afforded. It will include asking the following questions:

1. Will it upset the Victorian football establishment?
2. Will it impact their TV right$ deal$?
3. $$$$$?
4. Will it take a high draft pick away from GWS?
5. Will it keep Eddie happy?

As long as it doesn't contravene those underlying principles, I think O'Reilly's son will qualify for us.

Well it would be denied on the basis of point 1 then. Anything that benefits 'interstate' teams upsets them.

 

[youmewe]

Greene guilty of misconduct not rough conduct.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-14/mrp-greene-and-wines-fined-dog-cops-two

 

[Kram]

Toby Greene $1500.

Ridiculous.

 

[meima]

Ridiculous.

Eagles fan will be complaining ?

 

[Nightrain]

Toby Greene $1500.

Fn joke. So now you can stick your boot out when going for a ball that's above your head and the onus is on the tackling player to move his head out of the way. A bit like the Simpson's episode where Bart and Lisa are having a fight and Bart says well I am going to move arms like this and if you get in the way then that's your fault....

What a farce this game is becoming. Administered like a glorified Sunday league.

 

[Deathly]

I'm sorry but 1500$ fine for that incident is the correct and only call. People who were calling for weeks throughout the weekend are idiots and may the salt continue to storm through.

 

[Allikat]

Misconduct was 100% the wrong call. It was rough. But a fine under rough conduct would've gotten Greene a week and that's the only reason for the decision.

The real farce for the week was Ollie Wines hit on Tom Langdon. It was super late, he jumped up, and it was a huge bump of Wines' elbow to Langdon's face. Only got a fine because Langdon didn't get concussed. Why are the MRP judging things solely based on injuries caused this year, rather than the act itself? It was so dangerous!

 

[Square Peg]

Fn joke. So now you can stick your boot out when going for a ball that's above your head and the onus is on the tackling player to move his head out of the way. A bit like the Simpson's episode where Bart and Lisa are having a fight and Bart says well I am going to move arms like this and if you get in the way then that's your fault....

What a farce this game is becoming. Administered like a glorified Sunday league.

The only farce is that he got punished at all.
When Peter Faulks had his face caved in by that Cam Wood going for a mark, was that misconduct?
It's no different. Greene kicked his leg out leaping for a handball and gets a guy running back against the flight. s**t happens.

 

[Allikat]

And for anyone that hasn't seen it, because I know not many Freo fans would've watched Pies v Port (it was such a terrible game, you didn't miss much)