2017 Non Crows AFL Discussion Thread

[Bicks]

Quit before being cut - semantics & completely irrelevant to my point the AFLPA have a welfare role to players exiting the game.

He'll be getting "welfare" where he's going....and plenty of it.

Freo throw him a lifeline after spending 6 years in prison for aggravated burglary and a host of other crimes and he goes off on a rant at the club and then takes it to personal level with their best player when everything is of his own doing......The guy is a dropkick.

 

[mistylake]

I'll second that motion.
Why is it sooo obvious to most of us.
Yet dumb rule after another comes our way.

Number 1 with a bullet

 

[mistylake]

To be fair, he could be a recycling nut and just lost it at the guy for smashing the bottle instead of putting it in for 10 cents

That was probably it.

 

[mistylake]

Ex-Carlton coach makes off the cuff remark about the Crows "stitching up" one of their players = full AFL investigation.

Recently retired Fremantle players makes accusation about massive drug problem at the club. Expect this to be swept aside.

Quite possible there is a difference in credibility between a legend and a disgruntled *head.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Quite possible there is a difference in credibility between a legend and a disgruntled ****head.

Except it was Malthouse jumping at shadows and Yarran more likely telling the truth.

 

[Bicks]

Except it was Malthouse jumping at shadows and Yarran more likely telling the truth.

From what I've read of Shane Yarran that would be a first for him...

 

[footy4ever]

So this Yarran thing. Is it really Yarran's doing? Does anyone know if the account is really his?

 

[Rotayjay]

Love the seamless transition to 2017's first thread, since 2016 Part 2 was nearing the 10,000 post limit

 

[Deaneus!]

I agree with the bits about Fremantle being a joke of a club...

I wonder if the players mentioned - Doig medalist for instance, whoever that is - will sue for defamation

 

[hey shorty]

So this Yarran thing. Is it really Yarran's doing? Does anyone know if the account is really his?

That was my first thought. If he really is that dumb though......

 

[dogs105]

So this Yarran thing. Is it really Yarran's doing? Does anyone know if the account is really his?

Apparently account confirmed, but that doesn't mean he actually posted it.

 

[Runnin Blue]

I'm confused by the "virgin dog" bit. Is he implying that Nathan Fyfe is a virgin? Fyfe isn't another "Jesus is our saviour" player, is he?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Anyone looking forward to Heretier Lumumba's documentary?

 

[pjcrows]

Anyone looking forward to Heretier Lumumba's documentary?

"The greatest documentary ever made" - Heretier Lumumba

 

[Deaneus!]

Anyone looking forward to Heretier Lumumba's documentary?

I was going to say, he's not is he, but I guess it makes perfect sense.

I wonder what it will be called...

My Struggle.

Gun Player

 

[Scorpus]

Anyone looking forward to Heretier Lumumba's documentary?

I'm waiting for his autobiography tentatively titled "Literal God, the Lumumba Story"

 

[dogs105]

Finding Lumumba

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I'm waiting for his autobiography tentatively titled "Literal God, the Lumumba Story"

Lumumba says on his website he has spent several years working on a little-known documentary about his life as a “premier athlete, admired leader, and emerging voice of conscious living”.

I'm starting to wonder whether his whole schtick is an elaborate troll, like a Sacha Baron Cohen character.

 

[DD#23]

I'll second that motion.
Why is it sooo obvious to most of us.
Yet dumb rule after another comes our way.

you can't defend not paying holding the ball in the goal square in to decide a match if the rules are black and white.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Anyone looking forward to Heretier Lumumba's documentary?

I think it will be ok. He is a very smart outspoken figure.

 

[MRB37]

Anyone looking forward to Heretier Lumumba's documentary?

Don't think I'll be able to fit my head up my own ass enough to see it.

 

[ad victoriam]

Anyone find the article today about the 3rd man up rule change
I found it explained why a change was needed, but I believe the reporter miss the point.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...c/news-story/7413c6c81421b710d92346c28e011141

its paywalled but the interesting part is the explanation in why it was a good tactic
"The third man up rule change has destroyed a great tactic"
"IN 2015, at the five minute mark of the round 11 AFL clash between Port Adelaide and Geelong at the Adelaide Oval, Geelong executed a most sublime tactical manoeuvre.
As the opposing ruckmen, Rhys Stanley and Matthew Lobbe, jostled for a boundary throw-in in the Cats’ forward pocket, Geelong’s, tall, extremely fit midfielder, Mark Blicavs, surreptitiously positioned himself.
Stanley impeded Lobbe’s run-up, which allowed Blicavs, to contest the throw-in as the ‘third man up’.
Blicavs duly tapped the ball back over his head to the now unmarked Stanley who simply spun around on his right foot and slotted the goal. A memorable football moment.
Geelong beat Port easily that night and Blicavs continued over the next two seasons to employ the ‘third man up’ tactic."

The point he missed is that a Ruckman can impede the opposition ruck to allow the 3rd man up a free go. But they are not allowed to impede the 3rd man up

The more I read about this rule change the more I wished they went with Jacobs view. But the rule needed to be changed.

 

[Scorpus]

I was under the impression that the two main rucks cannot block each other. But I'm not fully sure, because ruck rules are super confusing and the umpires seem to find frees for bullshit

 

[Archie87]

I was under the impression that the two main rucks cannot block each other. But I'm not fully sure, because ruck rules are super confusing and the umpires seem to find frees for bullshit

It seemed to be previously that you can block in the ruck as long as you don't act like that's what you want to do. Umpires essentially just make it up as they go along according to the quality of acting by the player. The above sums up why the blocking rule is itself complete BS. Give me any contest anywhere on the ground and I'll find a player being blocked there somewhere worthy of a free kick according to the letter of the law yet it is only plucked out on the odd, random occasion.

 

[RePete]

Man I just read that the AFL will be removing its free match replays next year, going for paid mediums instead. That's a bit shitty imo. I mean, the quality and video player of their smart-replay was garbage anyway (nice how it could take you straight to goals, points, frees etc, however). If they are going to add it to their live pass I would love if they did full-HD match replays. Heck straight-HD live streams would be nice as well. Probably going to need a live pass this year anyway, probably still like 5-7 home games delayed by 30-90 minutes right? I mean....you gotta show the news and then Discover SA then out of the blue before we wanna watch the footy right?