The media really needs to step up with an article that runs the numbers and compares legacy benefits in a far more clear and explicit way.
The “it’s going to save a lot of money” argument is getting far more traction than it deserves.
The LNP are pathetic too. Step up and show some vision and...
Honestly, they should just shitcan the whole Olympics. It just doesn’t pass the legacy sniff-test if we go ahead with this bizarre, indefensible proposal.
Correct but that is just to get the Gabba up to bare minimum code for 2032, it will remain an ongoing liability afterwards. A money pit that will forever be a relic.
Of course, from Miles’s perspective, that’s a future government’s problem to solve.
How is QSAC a legacy project when all the added seating is immediately dismantled afterwards?
As for Miles describing the Gabba as “beloved” while announcing his plan to basically put a new lick of paint on it… pure gaslighting.
This guy is really going to piss away billions of our dollars on...
Speaking as a Labor voter who despises the way the Courier Mail is a propaganda wing for the LNP… I don’t see how Miles’s bizarre proposal can be seen as anything other than a cynical and spiteful act of economic and political vandalism by a government who is about to be electorally shown the...
I think starting next year with two Ashcrofts, a Doedee and a Coleman is essentially a mini-rebuild on what we have here. I think we can go again next year, but this year has a smell about it.
Anything less than a grand final this year, and Fages is gone IMO. Because it will show...
- Fages has taken us as far as he can, and it's time to move on.
- Or the list isn't good enough, and Fages clearly isn't going to be the guy to stick around for a mini or full rebuild.
Problem with eliminating time on is that a team with a lead can absolutely shut the game down and chew up the clock by throwing numbers around the ball to force stoppage after stoppage.
If you were to trim time, you'd have to take it from the regular time, not time-on.
I wonder if there could be an interpretation where a player picking the ball up is given like 1 second to immediately handball before no-prior kicks in? i.e. if you immediately go into a handball motion you get benefit of the doubt, anything else (including a failed attempted kick) should be...
Maybe, and that would be a good development. It still feels to feels to me though that the percentage play in a "no prior" world is a standoff of "who is going to pick the ball up and risk getting pinged" chicken.
Maybe I am cynical but history has left me with the impression that coaches...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.