2026 Pre-Season Thread

[Gadzorks]

do they? and do they go as long in the season?

What more content would you like?

Hawks and gws put out a bunch of clips that come up in my feed. Today was hawks posting the team all kicking goals titled something like the nfl punters school.

I think they are fun, and I'd like us to do similar. Where Jessica these days?

 

[mighty_lions]

Hawks and gws put out a bunch of clips that come up in my feed. Today was hawks posting the team all kicking goals titled something like the nfl punters school.

I think they are fun, and I'd like us to do similar. Where Jessica these days?

Today ours was footage of match sim, there is 5 posts on insta today

Further to that gws today posted on insta Finn Callaghan eats cereal with a fork.........real quality stuff we are missing out big time

 

[Grasshopper17]

Swanny continues his DREADFUL start to his tenure. Introducing quick VAR or umpire assist for 15m kicks dear me.

Nah this has to happen. And also 15m for a bounce. Not to mention actually measuring 50m penalties properly. Get the tech right and get it done.

 

[Grasshopper17]

It's always a judgment call whether there's an infringement or not.

15m is not a judgement call tho. At least, it shouldn't be. It's black and white, yes or no. Something you can easily measure via cameras. Fox do it already with their "lab".

Just. Get. It. Done.

 

[Section 5]

Hey Section 5, what model Canon do you have? I use the 5D mk111 but I haven't picked it up for a while. I lost my passion after a few years working in real estate photography, what a drain on my patience that was. Anyway I need to get back on the horse and landscape, especially golden hour or twilight is my preference.

I have 2 cameras but mostly use the Canon
Canon mirrorless EOS R7. Only have 1 lens a Canon RF 100-400 F5.6-8 IS USM.
The EOS R 7 camera has a crop sensor. This helps extend the range of my lens needed for bird photography.
Like anything in photography, a crop sensor helps you in one area but takes something back in another area.
Yours is a full frame sensor which is usually considered better.

My other camera is an old Nikon D3300 (full frame ADSL) that does a good job on landscapes but not great for birds and fast-moving objects. Three Nikon lenses: Kit 18-55, a 55-300 f4.5- 5.6 and a 35 mm f1.8.

Your camera still gets good reviews so maybe if you want to get back on the horse just try the lens/lenses you have or find a more suitable lens for what you want.
That could be way cheaper than a new set of gear in case you lose your passion again.

 

[Section 5]

15m is not a judgement call tho. At least, it shouldn't be. It's black and white, yes or no. Something you can easily measure via cameras. Fox do it already with their "lab".

Just. Get. It. Done.

I remember this (new technology) being discusses a few years ago with a sensor in the ball.
So, when the AFL went into trials some LBF posters got really excited.
This is how it's done overseas etc etc. About time the AFL went with technology that's proven.

We it pick up - If ball hits post and which side, when ball is over all sort of lines, 15-meter kicks and bounces, was it touched before a pack mark is awarded (90% of the time it is touched) did ball graze the ground before a mark is paid. Those few just come to mind without thinking too much more about it.

It was introduced at certain clubs training for trials and finally introduced to AFLW where it has not been talked about since.
Only reason for that is, it was a failure.
The AFL decided on the "Rugby Union" tracking system at that time.

Never say never with technology in the future but i am happy with a few umpire miss-calls for now.

 

[Maboo]

I have 2 cameras but mostly use the Canon
Canon mirrorless EOS R7. Only have 1 lens a Canon RF 100-400 F5.6-8 IS USM.
The EOS R 7 camera has a crop sensor. This helps extend the range of my lens needed for bird photography.
Like anything in photography, a crop sensor helps you in one area but takes something back in another area.
Yours is a full frame sensor which is usually considered better.

My other camera is an old Nikon D3300 (full frame ADSL) that does a good job on landscapes but not great for birds and fast-moving objects. Three Nikon lenses: Kit 18-55, a 55-300 f4.5- 5.6 and a 35 mm f1.8.

Your camera still gets good reviews so maybe if you want to get back on the horse just try the lens/lenses you have or find a more suitable lens for what you want.
That could be way cheaper than a new set of gear in case you lose your passion again.

My 5D has certainly served me well over the years, all my lenses except for one are L series, 16-35 great for landscapes, 24-105 this is a good walkabout sense, 100mm macro and a Tamron SP 70-300. Mirrorless cameras seem to be becoming more and more popular, but I will stick with my full frame as I have too much gear to change over.

 

[SonofSuperboot]

15m is not a judgement call tho. At least, it shouldn't be. It's black and white, yes or no. Something you can easily measure via cameras. Fox do it already with their "lab".

Just. Get. It. Done.

Why, what's wrong with the game and umpires judging bounces for the last 120 years? Don't you like watching it? If a computer stops the game because it's detects a player went 15.03 metres on their second bounce, is it going to make the game better for the fans to watch?
i like the game. I like it that it's a game played by people and umpired by people. There's a fundamental misunderstanding about why people watch sport. It's not for perfection. It's why no one would go and see robots racing. It's for the human drama of it. Mistakes and triumph. People bitch if a decision went against them or they didn't agree with, but really they like that drama, they talk about it all week. take that away by umpiring by AI and you think the game will be better because decisions might be more accurate, but it'll be more dull. It's not perfect umpiring that people want, least of all the ones that like to complain about it all the time

 

[Grasshopper17]

Why, what's wrong with the game and umpires judging bounces for the last 120 years? Don't you like watching it? If a computer stops the game because it's detects a player went 15.03 metres on their second bounce, is it going to make the game better for the fans to watch?
i like the game. I like it that it's a game played by people and umpired by people. There's a fundamental misunderstanding about why people watch sport. It's not for perfection. It's why no one would go and see robots racing. It's for the human drama of it. Mistakes and triumph. People bitch if a decision went against them or they didn't agree with, but really they like that drama, they talk about it all week. take that away by umpiring by AI and you think the game will be better because decisions might be more accurate, but it'll be more dull. It's not perfect umpiring that people want, least of all the ones that like to complain about it all the time

Not everyone "likes that drama". I certainly don't. I would absolutely 110% prefer the correct decision be made, and I'm sure there are a great many people who will agree with me. A good game of footy has enough drama generated by the players without needing any more from the umpires. To say that making correct decisions will make the game duller is quite incredible.

Furthermore, there won't be "a computer stopping the game". The decisions will be made in real time so cause no delay to play.

 

[mpal6]

Geelong fans won't mind a heads up, but a heads up this far? C'mon AFL.

Three Lion kings? The captaincy question facing Brisbane

Josh Gabelich takes a closer look at the captaincy situation at Brisbane

www.afl.com.au

 

[Mayestro]

Intraclub. It starts with Cody Curtin’s mark (yes I had to look up his number).

 

[SonofSuperboot]

Not everyone "likes that drama". I certainly don't. I would absolutely 110% prefer the correct decision be made, and I'm sure there are a great many people who will agree with me. A good game of footy has enough drama generated by the players without needing any more from the umpires. To say that making correct decisions will make the game duller is quite incredible.

Furthermore, there won't be "a computer stopping the game". The decisions will be made in real time so cause no delay to play.

It would stop the game because the onfield umpires would be told by a computer to stop play and award a free kick every single time a player is adjudged to have exceeded by a few centimetres, otherwise what’s the point of it? It would fundamentally change the game and player behaviour in unpredictable ways, going from a behaviour that’s generally been roughly judged by feel to one that is precisely measured and penalised for that arbitrary distance. And the players themselves will never be able to precisely measure it, they don’t have access to computer measurement, they’re just running with a bunch of things to think about sometimes not in straight lines, with variations in pace and stride. So knowing they are being computer monitored, they won’t risk going their full 15m they’re normally allowed and roughly judged on in our fast free-flowing sport, instead they’ll bounce the ball like it’s basketball just to be safe and it will be a different game. Is this what you really want to solve this crisis (crisis being you once saw an opposition player run a bit further without being pinged)? Or is something you haven’t really thought through the implications, but want to change a game that is fine how it is just because the technology exists

 

[SonofSuperboot]

Intraclub. It starts with Cody Curtin’s mark (yes I had to look up his number).

I was a bit surprised when the Lions let academy Tyan prindable slip through to the blues to then nab this big WA unit at what was it, pick 40 or something? But I should know better than to doubt Dom and Stephen Conole. They've made some great picks over the years and this fella looks like he could be the business

 

[Grasshopper17]

It would stop the game because the onfield umpires would be told by a computer to stop play and award a free kick every single time a player is adjudged to have exceeded by a few centimetres

Great. Fantastic, in fact. If a player has broken the rules they should be penalised.

And the players themselves will never be able to precisely measure it, they don’t have access to computer measurement, they’re just running with a bunch of things to think about sometimes not in straight lines, with variations in pace and stride. So knowing they are being computer monitored, they won’t risk going their full 15m they’re normally allowed and roughly judged on in our fast free-flowing sport, instead they’ll bounce the ball like it’s basketball just to be safe and it will be a different game. Is this what you really want to solve this crisis (crisis being you once saw an opposition player run a bit further without being pinged)? Or is something you haven’t really thought through the implications, but want to change a game that is fine how it is just because the technology exists

First of all your basketball comment is a gross exaggeration. And I think you know this.

Second of all, if players aren't quite sure how to measure 15m, fine, bounce it every 14m. Or every 12m perhaps to be safe. It's no different to how our guys last year adapted to the umpires cracking down on short kicks in the back half, by kicking 20m darts instead of 16m.

Being able to bounce the oval ball is one of the defining features of our game. One that is marvelled at, almost in sheer disbelief, by onlookers all over the world. Why on earth would you not want to see players be required to do this?

I strongly suggest you go and read Time And Space. There is a whole section devoted to the bounce and how/why it evolved. The fact we allow players to run 20m, often 25m (heck we've even seen 30 let go in recent times), without bouncing, makes an absolute mockery of the rule.

 

[Section 5]

Furthermore, there won't be "a computer stopping the game". The decisions will be made in real time so cause no delay to play.

This part i think is a long way from reality in the game of AFL footy.
I think this was one of your arguments a few years ago along with the technology already exists
Apologies if it was not you.

NFL, soccer, baseball all have a huge chunk of money to invest directly into their particular sport for this type of technology
The AFL is big in Australia but compared to those it's a minnow.
Also, AFL is a vastly different sport to any other (maybe Gaelic) for them to try and adjust to others technology.
Money is most likely the reason the AFL tried to adapt the Rugby Union model rather than start from scratch specifically for our game.

AI is improving rapidly (so they tell us) so something will eventually happen. I will consider the pros and cons then.

You may not like the drama, but i sort of agree with SonofSuperboot.
I would not call it drama though i would call it crowd involvement.

I mentioned pack marks in another post. 90% most likely have a touch on the ball before the mark is awarded.
One of the joys of watching our game and i believe there are fewer each year with the pace of ball movement increasing.

If you program a computer to tell the umpire in "real time" the ball is touched, hardly any pack marks will be paid.
You would need the computer to have this ability for judgments on goal posts, boundary decisions when ball could be touched either just after leaving the players boot or going over the boundary. Then of course goals being overturned

The occasional player running to far is a very small number. Actually, bouncing the ball during a game is a small number

Kicking the ball around or under that 15-meter mark is really the result of coach's game plans over the years, be it the defending team getting back in numbers, running down the clock and others.
We see umpires making some mistakes but overall, i don't see it as a big problem. Just becomes part of the crowd involvement
Coaches could change their game plan in the future so this may not be an issue.


They have snicko now but only use it as a last resort after watching every goal post and line marking angle possible.
What we don't know.
Is snicko showing lots of other "snicks" that have nothing to do with the ball.
Unlike cricket a footy goal square has multiple players and an umpire all gathered in the one area moving around justling or being pushed

Lastly when this technology becomes proven at some stage or other what is the expense going to be to set it up on all AFL grounds.
Gather round won't have it on most ovals nor will Ballarat, Alice Springs, Darwin nor will any AFLW game
Of course, those ovals when played on now probably don't have other technologies like the MCG etc

 

[SonofSuperboot]

Great. Fantastic, in fact. If a player has broken the rules they should be penalised.



First of all your basketball comment is a gross exaggeration. And I think you know this.

Second of all, if players aren't quite sure how to measure 15m, fine, bounce it every 14m. Or every 12m perhaps to be safe. It's no different to how our guys last year adapted to the umpires cracking down on short kicks in the back half, by kicking 20m darts instead of 16m.

Being able to bounce the oval ball is one of the defining features of our game. One that is marvelled at, almost in sheer disbelief, by onlookers all over the world. Why on earth would you not want to see players be required to do this?

I strongly suggest you go and read Time And Space. There is a whole section devoted to the bounce and how/why it evolved. The fact we allow players to run 20m, often 25m (heck we've even seen 30 let go in recent times), without bouncing, makes an absolute mockery of the rule.

you accuse me of gross exaggeration and then you say that players aren't required to bounce the ball? The fact is what you're suggesting is fundamentally different to the stand rule. None of these things are officiated by computer but by the on field umpire who have their own discretion and judgement. But you admit it will change player behaviour so they will stop actually bouncing the ball every 15m as they're allowed to under the current rules to be safe, we're just arguing about how much they'll have to reduce. If you want players to bounce the ball less than 15 metres they currently are allowed, you should be clear about it and why, because this is really what you're advocating for along with this massive change.
We don't "allow players to run 30m", there might be one or two cases that get missed each year that you and every other complainer and the tv pundits goes on about, just like there's a few missed in the back or holding the ball and every other type of free kick that get missed. it's part of the game, rather than a problem that needs to be solved by computer monitoring and AI umpires. I think it will lessen the game, not improve it.
Have you ever heard a soccer fan say "I used to hate the game because there was an occasional missed penalty, but now with VAR it's great". I lived in england and brasil and mostly people hate it. Yes they used to bitch about the odd penalty decision that was unfair or went against them. an FSA survey, what was the largest survey of its kind on VAR, had more than 33,000 supporters polled were almost unanimous in their opinion – 95% of those who had experienced VAR in-stadium and 94% who had watched matches on TV said that VAR had made watching football less enjoyable. 44% of all regular matchgoers said they would be attending less due to VAR. But hey, it made the decisions a little more accurate and that's all that matters, isn't it? But there was some soccer fans once whose decision went against them once and they said "We could get rid of this by technology", and now there they are.
So again, you want to fundamentally change the behaviour of players bouncing and introduce computer ai constantly monitoring players and auto-calling freekicks because you saw a few players runs a bit over their 15m in the season? I disagree

 

[Tom14]

Nah this has to happen. And also 15m for a bounce. Not to mention actually measuring 50m penalties properly. Get the tech right and get it done.

Have you seen how other sports have implemented technology? There will always be a temptation to cut corners so the technology will never work well enough, and it will be implemented stupidly and badly. It’s not a problem that needs solving.

 

[Dalions]

Great. Fantastic, in fact. If a player has broken the rules they should be penalised.



First of all your basketball comment is a gross exaggeration. And I think you know this.

Second of all, if players aren't quite sure how to measure 15m, fine, bounce it every 14m. Or every 12m perhaps to be safe. It's no different to how our guys last year adapted to the umpires cracking down on short kicks in the back half, by kicking 20m darts instead of 16m.

Being able to bounce the oval ball is one of the defining features of our game. One that is marvelled at, almost in sheer disbelief, by onlookers all over the world. Why on earth would you not want to see players be required to do this?

I strongly suggest you go and read Time And Space. There is a whole section devoted to the bounce and how/why it evolved. The fact we allow players to run 20m, often 25m (heck we've even seen 30 let go in recent times), without bouncing, makes an absolute mockery of the rule.

Personally, other than goal reviews, I think the umpires should be left to umpire the game.

 

[SonofSuperboot]

Nah this has to happen. And also 15m for a bounce. Not to mention actually measuring 50m penalties properly. Get the tech right and get it done.

apologies for going on about in a pre-season thread, grasshopper. It is something I feel strongly about and a chance to argue about it has helped me articulate why. Just my opinion, other's can make up their own minds

 

[Grasshopper17]

Some valid points raised here. Section 5 it probably was me who said a couple of years ago that the tech already existed. It did; but to Tom14's point it looked like it was implemented poorly. Either only parts of the chip-in-ball system were rolled out, or there were bugs in the final release. Both of which indicates a rushed job, and potentially a lack of thorough testing before going live.

Ultimately there's not much doubt that this technology is well and truly on its way, and we best be prepared for its introduction. Whether they have another go at chip-in-ball or this new system they are talking about with the network of cameras, I guess time will tell.

And when they do roll it out, there will be teething issues, like any new system. Hopefully the AFL is agile enough to be able to troubleshoot on the run, where they were exposed as being hopelessly inept when they ran into problems during that AFLW season a couple of years ago.

Longer term, I imagine there will come a time where no decisions at all are made by a human umpire. But that time is probably still a way off and I'll be surprised if I'm around to see it.

 

[irel]

I was a bit surprised when the Lions let academy Tyan prindable slip through to the blues to then nab this big WA unit at what was it, pick 40 or something? But I should know better than to doubt Dom and Stephen Conole. They've made some great picks over the years and this fella looks like he could be the business

Koby Evans was the beneficiary of us not matching a Prindable bid at 32 by Collingwood. .
Pick 38 – Koby Evans
Pick 43 – Cody Curtin

 

[Section 5]

I don't think the game is this Wednesday

But please feel free to give us a report if you head out there!

I was all ready to go on Wednesday so will have to wait till Wednesday 18th

Mr Ripper do you have training times for this week.
I might go weather permitting.

 

[Mr Ripper]

I was all ready to go on Wednesday so will have to wait till Wednesday 18th

Mr Ripper do you have training times for this week.
I might go weather permitting.

8am tomorrow and Friday

 

[Grasshopper17]

8am tomorrow and Friday

Ah, so no arvo intra-club game this week?

Was thinking with the Carlton game next Wednesday we might look to squeeze one in on Thursday arvo, for 6 day breaks either side.

 

[p4p1]

Great. Fantastic, in fact. If a player has broken the rules they should be penalised.



First of all your basketball comment is a gross exaggeration. And I think you know this.

Second of all, if players aren't quite sure how to measure 15m, fine, bounce it every 14m. Or every 12m perhaps to be safe. It's no different to how our guys last year adapted to the umpires cracking down on short kicks in the back half, by kicking 20m darts instead of 16m.

Being able to bounce the oval ball is one of the defining features of our game. One that is marvelled at, almost in sheer disbelief, by onlookers all over the world. Why on earth would you not want to see players be required to do this?

I strongly suggest you go and read Time And Space. There is a whole section devoted to the bounce and how/why it evolved. The fact we allow players to run 20m, often 25m (heck we've even seen 30 let go in recent times), without bouncing, makes an absolute mockery of the rule.

Gaelic players have to bounce every 4 steps then kick it to themselves after the next 4 steps. It doesn't take away from the game at all.
Maybe the rule should be written as 10 steps or something like that rather than a 15m rule, which is harder to adjudicate.