Biased/incompetent media coverage

[Obeanie1]

Oh definitely, but I was more reffering to the AFL website itself. As the AFL expands it's media pressence, there just becomes a larger and larger incentive for their own staff, to argue in favour of dubious MRO charges that will probably lead to challenges, just for the entertainment/news coverage.

Tribunal day is becoming a media event. That's a concern. Can't be far away from live streamed video.

AS Simo said natural justice isn't a concern of the AFL.

We all know its about tv ratings and bad news and controversy sells ratings.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

AS Simo said natural justice isn't a concern of the AFL.

We all know its about tv ratings and bad news and controversy sells ratings.

Yeah and in this case, I think the AFL had a few too many incentives. Both because WC were playing GWS and also because I think this was aimed at NN and his aggressive tackling, not so much the broader competition. Otherwise it would have been highlighted before, and the bump wouldn't be being more losely regulated.

If Fyfe gets suspended though, the coaches will have a fit. Players are being incentivised to bump, so uneven application of the new rules, would just throw huge confusion and accusations of the MRO/AFL not knowing what they are doing, into the mix.

 

[Truckosaurus]

If Fyfe gets suspended though, the coaches will have a fit. Players are being incentivised to bump, so uneven application of the new rules, would just throw huge confusion and accusations of the MRO/AFL not knowing what they are doing, into the mix.

Fyfe won't be suspended while his form is good enough for a Brownlow. The AFL are desperate to avoid another Chris Grant situation (and ensuing scrutiny) and 2014 was far too close for comfort.

 

[Keys]

If Fyfe gets suspended that'd be just as bad a decision as Naitanui being rubbed out

I hate that players are coming under scrutiny and in some cases suspended for what are essentially accidents with no malice involved.

 

[MIKE85]

It just isn't right that action isn't what's penalised, it's outcomes based. The outcome shouldn't really matter, because so much luck can go into every potential incident. It's like saying to the cops, yeah I was speeding and driving dangerously, but nothing happened, no one got hurt so I should be let off.

 

[15yearmember]

It just isn't right that action isn't what's penalised, it's outcomes based. The outcome shouldn't really matter, because so much luck can go into every potential incident. It's like saying to the cops, yeah I was speeding and driving dangerously, but nothing happened, no one got hurt so I should be let off.

Yes & No. The reality is that there is a penalty for speeding or dangerous driving but the magnitude of the penalty does increase significantly if you kill or injure someone while speeding or driving dangerously.

So the consequences are always an issue in the severity of the penalty.

 

[amazingjoshy]

It just isn't right that action isn't what's penalised, it's outcomes based. The outcome shouldn't really matter, because so much luck can go into every potential incident. It's like saying to the cops, yeah I was speeding and driving dangerously, but nothing happened, no one got hurt so I should be let off.

I agree, but can understand the thinking if they want to make it wholly outcomes based. If they simply said any head injury/concussion is penalized, then fine.

But thats not what they do, they pick and choose. Cotchin last year, Burton this year. "Accidental"... but NNs tackle somehow wasn't.

 

[Kickitlong!]

Yes & No. The reality is that there is a penalty for speeding or dangerous driving but the magnitude of the penalty does increase significantly if you kill or injure someone while speeding or driving dangerously.

So the consequences are always an issue in the severity of the penalty.

Absolutely but you shouldn’t be punished if you are doing the speed limit and doing nothing illegal and someone walks out in front of you at the last minute and you hit them. It’s an accident, you shouldn’t be penalised because you “elected” to drive that day.

 

[FKASC]

Yes & No. The reality is that there is a penalty for speeding or dangerous driving but the magnitude of the penalty does increase significantly if you kill or injure someone while speeding or driving dangerously.

So the consequences are always an issue in the severity of the penalty.

That’s because killing someone is a separate offence. I don’t think it’s a valid analogy.

It would be more like the difference between punching someone and they are not seriously hurt vs the same punch where they fall over and crack their head open on the pavement.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

If Fyfe gets suspended that'd be just as bad a decision as Naitanui being rubbed out

I hate that players are coming under scrutiny and in some cases suspended for what are essentially accidents with no malice involved.

Agree entirely, but it would also be exceptionally funny.

 

[15yearmember]

That’s because killing someone is a separate offence. I don’t think it’s a valid analogy.

It would be more like the difference between punching someone and they are not seriously hurt vs the same punch where they fall over and crack their head open on the pavement.

There is an offence called dangerous driving causing death. You have to first be involved in dangerous driving.

If you cause death accidentally and without any fault on your part (such as speeding or dangerous driving) then there is no offence.

 

[15yearmember]

Absolutely but you shouldn’t be punished if you are doing the speed limit and doing nothing illegal and someone walks out in front of you at the last minute and you hit them. It’s an accident, you shouldn’t be penalised because you “elected” to drive that day.

And you aren't. NN was suspended because, in the opinion of Christian and the tribunal he committed a dangerous act. Being an unlawful tackle. If the concussion hadnt occurred he was still on the hook for a fine.

So he was "speeding" and the concussion was merely an aggravating factor in that.

There is no automatic suspension for merely causing a concussion there has to be a breach of the rules first.

 

[avishka5]

LOL they AFL site decide to focus on the giants for the "9 thing we learned" article and they also overlooked JD's Courageous contested mark for aGWS tackle and Fyfe's attempted speccie.

 

[Boohemian]

Are we all ready for this week's commentary to revolve around how shit Essendon and St Kilda are, rather than our unexpected form that sees us two games clear in second spot?

 

[FatPizza]

Are we all ready for this week's commentary to revolve around how shit Essendon and St Kilda are, rather than our unexpected form that sees us two games clear in second spot?

Remember how no one gave a shit for the GF rematch in 2016?

 

[Asapartyhat]

Its interesting that when Adelaide got its stadium up and running the media were all over what a great stadium its is and that everybody whos an afl fan should experiance the amazing increadible adelaide oval.True enough.BUT the Perth stadium gets nothing. except some derogatory snipes.Amazing..
The best stdium experiance is the Perth stadium by the way nothing against other places but it is.

 

[Max zero]

Are we all ready for this week's commentary to revolve around how shit Essendon and St Kilda are, rather than our unexpected form that sees us two games clear in second spot?

Yep.

No articles or commentary.

Let us fly under the radar for once. Why are people so desperate for attention to be focused on us? Let them jack off over the Tigers all they want.

 

[Bob Fossil]

Its interesting that when Adelaide got its stadium up and running the media were all over what a great stadium its is and that everybody whos an afl fan should experiance the amazing increadible adelaide oval.True enough.BUT the Perth stadium gets nothing. except some derogatory snipes.Amazing..
The best stdium experiance is the Perth stadium by the way nothing against other places but it is.

Hi Corbin.

 

[Smeg Head]

Its interesting that when Adelaide got its stadium up and running the media were all over what a great stadium its is and that everybody whos an afl fan should experiance the amazing increadible adelaide oval.True enough.BUT the Perth stadium gets nothing. except some derogatory snipes.Amazing..
The best stdium experiance is the Perth stadium by the way nothing against other places but it is.

It has gotten talked up an awful lot in any of the broadcasts from games there.

 

[Asapartyhat]

It has gotten talked up an awful lot in any of the broadcasts from games there.

Well thats good then.Im at the games and dont watch the purples much on tv .I was meaning the east coast tv programs that we get the privalidge of getting here .They only mention the stadium when they complain .

 

[Asapartyhat]

Hi Corbin.

Corbin.?
Love Corbin .Hes the best. As an old timer you might remember the time Corbin was praising Josh Kennedy for his 60 goals in 15 games at an average of almost 3.5 a game .Hes very popular in the old peopes homes .

 

[AP24]

This is a good gripe to have, but why has West Coast's seven-game winning streak been referred to as the club's "longest in-season streak since 1996"? We started 2005 8-0 if I recall...

 

[avishka5]

AAA only covered us for 30 seconds and that was purely because they covered the tigers game before us.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Fox Sports going with the old "draft an article and plug the details in later' approach, and then not going back to plug in the details.

 

[Max zero]

Fox Sports going with the old "draft an article and plug the details in later' approach, and then not going back to plug in the details.

View attachment 497155

CTRL - C
CTRL - V

"Articles done boss!"