No Oppo Supporters 2022 General AFL Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hird should never coach or be involved at AFL level ever again
agree.. but in Hirds defence, there were people above Hird and equal to him that the Afl made sure got off. The afl used Hird as their scape goat.
Regardless, as you say, Hird should not be involved with footy at any level ever again.

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/power,-politics,-and-the-afl’s-‘boys’-club’/13802630
 
The prior opportunity question is a tough one... maybe we should do away with it. Because we're seeing a lot of occasions where a player will handball to a team mate who practically has a tackler right on him before he receives the ball, but it doesn't matter because it'll be a ball up cause he didn't have prior. Looks a little ridiculous.

I like the idea of maybe a 1-2 count, and if you haven't disposed of it you're pinged. And if you don't get a correct disposal off (ie not just dropping the ball) then the tackler should be rewarded as well.

Would be a lot simpler to adjudicate, the tackler would once again be rewarded, incorrect disposal would once again be penalised and we wouldn't see silly in close handball to a team mate who immediately gets wrapped up - players would be looking for other options and getting it on the boot rather than locking it in for a ball up.

The only part I'm unclear about the benefit, is when we have the rolling maul close to goal, I just wonder what the impact would be there, a defender would be more likely to kick or punch / paddle the ball on. But it just seems like in congested situations, particularly in front of goal, the rule change could potentially turn ugly. And teams would either be gifted goals, or players would be reluctant to take possession in those situations, which would be a terrible look with the ball bobbling around and players too scared to attach the ball. Just not sure how that aspect would work, but everywhere else around the ground it woukd work.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

They make it so hard for the umpires. An example is the "Knocked out in the tackle" bullshit. Yet another split second call to be made by the umpire.
Either the player had possession of the footy or he did not.
If he did, and it was knocked out, it was an incorrect disposal. Free kick against him.
If he did not have possession, he was held illegally. Free kick against the tackler.
 
If he did, and it was knocked out, it was an incorrect disposal. Free kick against him.
This is the big one for me. HTB is fine, incorrect disposal is the issue
 

IF ...​

Tom Mitchell is being "managed" out of a game of football ...

THEN ...​

let's be adult about this, and call it what it actually it is. He's not feeling great. That's a fact, and the club is happy for people to know that. But he's also not playing all that well, too, under new coach Sam Mitchell. Tom Mitchell is a professional footballer, a Brownlow Medallist, three-time best-and-fairest winner, contracted to play 22 home and away matches a season. And his team has "managed" him out of a round nine match. If he's sick, say he's sick. If it's for form, say it’s for form. If it's for personal reasons, say it’s for personal reasons.

Is Tom injured perhaps.
Surely he is carrying something.
 
Whilst most debate centres on Hird, Mark McVeigh slips under the radar.


Worth a read, as a reminder, IMO.

Just one snippet;
McVeigh admitted to having off-site injections, but said these were to ensure a sterile environment.
He added they were for vitamins B and C.

Now Hird was the guy who brought in Dank and certainly takes far more blame for the program, but the day after the issue broke McVeigh was the attack dog set on Kyle Reimers and Marky boy spun a tale of utter bull.
 
Last edited:
Don't mind this though. One media narrative that's been doing my head in is the "Swans are such a tough, contested side" nonsense, like they're stuck in a time machine from a decade ago. Hopefully the more media personalities start waking up to the fact we're not tough enough, the more the fire might burn in our boys to prove them wrong, cause something's gonna have to spark the change.
My point was more that he has a raft of teams he could pull to bits...especially the flakey Saints...but he’s always knifing the Swans.

I’ll be amazed if he doesn’t pick Essendone this week.
 
Last edited:
Prior opportunity is easy enough. Count 1, 2 or 1, 2, 3, even 1, 2, 3, 4.
If you haven't correctly disposed of the ball by hand or foot you're gone. If the tackler is good enough to trap the ball, you're gone. If you drop the ball, none of this "knocked out" BS, you're gone.
No ball ups. Free kick every time.
Players will try to knock the ball out instead of taking possession in a pack.
Reckon it would work just fine.
I actually think this is the missing link in Aussie rules becoming a very very watchable game.
There is still fake punching of balls when tackled. There is still getting the ball and ducking of heads hoping for frees.
If there was prior opportunity removed from the game, honesty in the contested part of the game would be visible. Everyone could see players actually trying to get rid of the ball if being tackled. Players now know they have time to assess their options and if none they feel the hands on them and start punching the ball, drag the ball in etc. It is not good viewing, it is not what the game wants. The game needs hard open honest contest with clear rules creating contests that don't invite fake plays by players.

Making things simple enables people to behave and understand what to do. I think Kiama Chris has outlined that simple rule change.

No fake. Just honest footy.
 
The prior opportunity question is a tough one... maybe we should do away with it. Because we're seeing a lot of occasions where a player will handball to a team mate who practically has a tackler right on him before he receives the ball, but it doesn't matter because it'll be a ball up cause he didn't have prior. Looks a little ridiculous.

I like the idea of maybe a 1-2 count, and if you haven't disposed of it you're pinged. And if you don't get a correct disposal off (ie not just dropping the ball) then the tackler should be rewarded as well.

Would be a lot simpler to adjudicate, the tackler would once again be rewarded, incorrect disposal would once again be penalised and we wouldn't see silly in close handball to a team mate who immediately gets wrapped up - players would be looking for other options and getting it on the boot rather than locking it in for a ball up.

The only part I'm unclear about the benefit, is when we have the rolling maul close to goal, I just wonder what the impact would be there, a defender would be more likely to kick or punch / paddle the ball on. But it just seems like in congested situations, particularly in front of goal, the rule change could potentially turn ugly. And teams would either be gifted goals, or players would be reluctant to take possession in those situations, which would be a terrible look with the ball bobbling around and players too scared to attach the ball. Just not sure how that aspect would work, but everywhere else around the ground it woukd work.
 

Yikes 71 goal loss.
Don’t like seeing a club in that situation and good on Malthouse.. but there’s too many clubs in that area. A lot of clubs in the north east of vic are struggling for numbers. Even in the ovens and Murray which is the top level league in the area a number of clubs are struggling for players in the reserve grade. Covid hasn’t helped either.
 
How bad were the umpire descent calls in the collingwood / dogs match? Buku got a push in the back and was questioning the no call, and then De Goey was half annoyed with himself that he gave away a push in the back and gets a call against.

It's seriously a s**t rule. Players should get a warning first before they get penalised. How the hell do they expect players to play the game hard, and put everything on the line, and then turn into robots once the whistle is blown, especially when the maggots blowing the whistle make the wrong call half the time.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Two at most.
Nank and George no way AA.
Aliir needs two accountable keys.
Dawson I'll grant. We wanted to keep him.

Would not be so sure about George.

He is one of only 13 players in the competition averaging over 30 disposals this year. Of those 13, he has the highest disposal efficiency (84%), and is third out of that lot for contested possessions. He's also top five in the competition for clearances.

If he does what he's been doing every week (and let's face it, it's Hewett, so he will), he's in the 40-man squad easy. From there it's a matter of how much hype builds around him. Probably not enough, as the selectors are all about flash. But to your "no way", I say "no way".

Also, Aliir was named in the All Australian side last year, so he IS AA standard. That is just a fact.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps, but is it really that different to McGovern getting 4 of them despite being average at defending an opponent?
McGovern is much better 1on1 than Aliir is

And were McGovern's positions FB or CHB? Aliir's should have been one of the BP or the bench
 
Jack Steele out for maybe 3 months with a ruptured AC joint , terrific player
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top