if it is what i think it is it sounds zooper cryptic.John F Kennedy's assassination, the moon landing, Gough Whitlam's dismissal.
Events that we (of a certain vintage) remember where we were when we heard the news.
Moments that are remembered on their anniversary.
And yet yesterday one the truly great days in AFL history passed virtually without mention.
A day that brought our game to the masses like never before.
and Rowbum McInerney and Blakey still weigh the same that they did in their draft year??Can the AFL not just hire a couple of temps & get the player profiles updated in the Teams websites. McInerney is apparently still eyeing senior level opportunity for 2020
This has been happening for years Jason Saddington never grew from 14and Rowbum McInerney and Blakey still weigh the same that they did in their draft year??
Just because Im a weirdo, i wrote down weights and heights in 2019.. wanted to see how much the kids grew.. None of them have changed since?
Yep, and all the morons on social media were up in arms that the Sydney clubs were being favoured. Apparently finally having the access that Victorian clubs do is favouritism.10 umps are moving to Sydney temporarily to help both sides with the new rules , for once good move by the AFL
Carlton supporters thinking Papley was in the bag...Congrats to the Lions on re-signing McCLuggage.
I always hate it when a player of high calibre goes to a northern state and immediately the comments of 'see you in a few years' start. Its really disrespectful.
So suck it up buttercups, he's staying for a few more years yet.
I don't particularly like the rule, but in that clip it appeared the player on the mark moved before the player in possession played on, so the correct decision for me.How are we all feeling about the new stand on your mark rule after watching this so called 'officially correct' interpretation?
I agree with this, the rule could be OKISH, as long as played on is called quickley.I don't particularly like the rule, but in that clip it appeared the player on the mark moved before the player in possession played on, so the correct decision for me.
However I recently saw a clip where the player in possession clearly played on and the ump rather than call 'play on' actually penalised the guy on the mark who moved to cover the kicker.*
It's the second instance that I think will cause the most angst.
*I realise the player on the mark isn't supposed to move until the ump calls 'play on', but with this new rule I think it is incumbent to call 'play on' as soon as the player with the ball moves off his line.