Crows Chat That 'Doesnt Deserve Its Own Thread' Thread part 2

[spenze]

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/thousands-of-regional-south-australians-set-to-lose-access-to-channel-7-and-freetoair-footy-on-tv/news-story/6f59441cb437e28fd2c477c62eecca06

Thousands of regional South Australians set to lose access to Channel 7 and free-to-air footy on TV​

Thousands of regional supporters are set to lose access to Channel 7 and free-to-air football on TV, with some unable to watch AFL at all. Now, fans are pleading for the league to step in.

The president of Riverland Crows Supporter Group says a looming decision that will result in thousands of footy fans losing access to matches on free-to-air TV is a “kick in the guts” to regional supporters.
As it stands residents in the south-east of the state, Mount Gambier and the Riverland/Mallee area - as well as Griffith in NSW - will no longer have access to Channel 7 channels on their TVs from July 1 after negotiations between the network and WIN broke down.

Independent Legislative Council member Sarah Game has written to AFL boss Andrew Dillon requesting for the league to step in and act as a “circuit-breaker”.

Seven has said residents will still be able to watch AFL and other free to air sport such as cricket, LIV Golf and the Supercars on their streaming platform 7Plus.

Most folk have smart TVs now so it probably won't affect many people though I reckon it may be the elderly who may not be able to access

 

[footy4ever]

Well for some reason I had a look at 'The Round Ahead' with Chad Windgard and someone someone on the AFL website, and scrolled to the Crows Richmond 'segment'.

So first up they tell us how shit the Crows have been at the MCG since early 2000 or something,- tick, then they throw up an image of the Crows stance with scarecrows in Crows jumpers, then spend the entire...entire segment, talking about Richmond.

And I wonder why I give AFL media a HUGE ****ING miss 99% of the time.

 

[PeterSalt]

Another piece in The Advertiser today about Bungi

There's nothing really new in the article, beyond Sanders and Harper still being in contact with him and a desire to get him back and more involved at the club.

“I just feel so bad for the footy club and sad that Andrew is estranged at the moment,” Sanders told this masthead.​

​

“It’s my hope and the hope of many others that we can fix that.​

​

“Those endeavours will be ongoing.​

​

“I’m sure the club would welcome him back enthusiastically to be where he should be.”​

​

​

"Today, he is still very close with the Crows head of women’s football Phil Harper, holds strong relationships with some former teammates and is much loved by AFLW players who played under him.​

​

While his relationship with the club is considered to be a work in progress, he remains involved in football."​

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/five-years-after-criticising-the-crows-culture-andrew-mcleod-remains-estranged-from-the-club/news-story/54ff6cf2c3256deb155b5b58bcc48ff5?amp

 

[kirky]

How come there is a great discussion regarding the SCG from Friday’s night game but nothing was said about the state of the ground following the Swans vs Adelaide game 4 weeks ago? Or did it get mentioned and I missed it.

 

[PeterSalt]

How come there is a great discussion regarding the SCG from Friday’s night game but nothing was said about the state of the ground following the Swans vs Adelaide game 4 weeks ago? Or did it get mentioned and I missed it.

Apparently it was first flagged after the Sydney vs Port game. About a week after the concert that apparently caused the damage and about 5-6 weeks before we played Sydney there

No idea if there was concern raised after our game

 

[jenny61_99]

This made me chuckle today…

 

[kirky]

This made me chuckle today…View attachment 2356877

Run Forest Run!

 

[Cleric]

I thought I would share this as I was quite interested to hear it.

I was talking to a guy who used to be on a coaching panel at an SA AFL club, and I was ranting about how Murphy got into the AFL team when there was a spot open, rather than one of the three players who should have come in, Draper, Nank or Edwards.
What he said made my jaw hit the ground. He said he believes that Murph came in over those two as he was easier to send back to the SANFL. If they promoted Draper for instance, and he had a blinder in the two games he came in for, then it makes it difficult for them to remove him. It puts their selection committee under pressure to keep him in, as they displays they are the future.
Murphy on the other hand can be dropped even if he had a decent game, as he is viewed by most people as not in the long term plans.
I asked him if there would be any truth that this would play a role in their decision making, and he said absolutely, 100% issues like that are part of the deliberations.

 

[Cleric]

This made me chuckle today…View attachment 2356877

Little Jenny for sure. If you know you know.

 

[George CantStandYa]

I thought I would share this as I was quite interested to hear it.

I was talking to a guy who used to be on a coaching panel at an SA AFL club, and I was ranting about how Murphy got into the AFL team when there was a spot open, rather than one of the three players who should have come in, Draper, Nank or Edwards.
What he said made my jaw hit the ground. He said he believes that Murph came in over those two as he was easier to send back to the SANFL. If they promoted Draper for instance, and he had a blinder in the two games he came in for, then it makes it difficult for them to remove him. It puts their selection committee under pressure to keep him in, as they displays they are the future.
Murphy on the other hand can be dropped even if he had a decent game, as he is viewed by most people as not in the long term plans.
I asked him if there would be any truth that this would play a role in their decision making, and he said absolutely, 100% issues like that are part of the deliberations.

That makes sense

 

[GreyCrow]

I thought I would share this as I was quite interested to hear it.

I was talking to a guy who used to be on a coaching panel at an SA AFL club, and I was ranting about how Murphy got into the AFL team when there was a spot open, rather than one of the three players who should have come in, Draper, Nank or Edwards.
What he said made my jaw hit the ground. He said he believes that Murph came in over those two as he was easier to send back to the SANFL. If they promoted Draper for instance, and he had a blinder in the two games he came in for, then it makes it difficult for them to remove him. It puts their selection committee under pressure to keep him in, as they displays they are the future.
Murphy on the other hand can be dropped even if he had a decent game, as he is viewed by most people as not in the long term plans.
I asked him if there would be any truth that this would play a role in their decision making, and he said absolutely, 100% issues like that are part of the deliberations.

I appreciate you believe this as you were given the information in good faith and have passed it on

But it makes no sense

What is the concern over a debutante playing well?

 

[Cleric]

I appreciate you believe this as you were given the information in good faith and have passed it on

But it makes no sense

What is the concern over a debutante playing well?

His point was that bringing in Murph makes it easier to then drop him down when Peating comes back.
So, if Murph plays a good game, everyone knows he isn't the future and is just a depth player.
One of the kids like Draper if he comes in and plays a blinder, then the narrative will be that he is the future and can't be dropped.
It makes removing the player who came in easier if its a Murph vs a Draper, Edwards etc.
That was his reasoning. I hadn't thought of it that way before, so I was as miffed as you.

As he isnt at the Crows he cant say that was what the decision was done for, but he put it there that that is the type of thing they do when looking at who to bring in.

And I guess, was anyone upset or questioning the decision to drop Murphy back to the SANFL? No, everyone was happy with it and its a no brainer.
If Draper came in, got 28, kicked 2 goals and was 2nd in the coaches votes two weeks in a row, and they decided to drop him back, there would absolutely be people complaining and questioning the decision.

 

[Samcro24]

His point was that bringing in Murph makes it easier to then drop him down when Peating comes back.
So, if Murph plays a good game, everyone knows he isn't the future and is just a depth player.
One of the kids like Draper if he comes in and plays a blinder, then the narrative will be that he is the future and can't be dropped.
It makes removing the player who came in easier if its a Murph vs a Draper, Edwards etc.
That was his reasoning. I hadn't thought of it that way before, so I was as miffed as you.

As he isnt at the Crows he cant say that was what the decision was done for, but he put it there that that is the type of thing they do when looking at who to bring in.

And I guess, was anyone upset or questioning the decision to drop Murphy back to the SANFL? No, everyone was happy with it and its a no brainer.
If Draper came in, got 28, kicked 2 goals and was 2nd in the coaches votes two weeks in a row, and they decided to drop him back, there would absolutely be people complaining and questioning the decision.

You’d just drop smith in that scenario surely

 

[GreyCrow]

His point was that bringing in Murph makes it easier to then drop him down when Peating comes back.
So, if Murph plays a good game, everyone knows he isn't the future and is just a depth player.
One of the kids like Draper if he comes in and plays a blinder, then the narrative will be that he is the future and can't be dropped.
It makes removing the player who came in easier if its a Murph vs a Draper, Edwards etc.
That was his reasoning. I hadn't thought of it that way before, so I was as miffed as you.

As he isnt at the Crows he cant say that was what the decision was done for, but he put it there that that is the type of thing they do when looking at who to bring in.

And I guess, was anyone upset or questioning the decision to drop Murphy back to the SANFL? No, everyone was happy with it and its a no brainer.
If Draper came in, got 28, kicked 2 goals and was 2nd in the coaches votes two weeks in a row, and they decided to drop him back, there would absolutely be people complaining and questioning the decision.

Thank you

I still find it odd that the club would think that way. Just find someone else to move on if he does well.

 

[spenze]

Such bollocks

If a junior got a game because a senior who was performing got suspended and performed well, it wouldd be the best of both worlds.

The junior would understand why he was dropped, it was a senior, performing player and the club and junior would know the junior was up to AFL.

You spout such shit

 

[spenze]

But no, lets put the shit guy in who has never performed because the guys in the magoos would understand it was just one game and why would they want a seniors game...if it was just one game.

Jeez Cleric , are you playing defence for Nicks?

 

[Cleric]

But no, lets put the shit guy in who has never performed because the guys in the magoos would understand it was just one game and why would they want a seniors game...if it was just one game.

Jeez Cleric , are you playing defence for Nicks?

Why would I play defence for Nicks? I think his handling of Draper has been shit.

 

[Cleric]

Such bollocks

If a junior got a game because a senior who was performing got suspended and performed well, it wouldd be the best of both worlds.

The junior would understand why he was dropped, it was a senior, performing player and the club and junior would know the junior was up to AFL.

You spout such shit

I sprout shit? If you read what I said, it was someone else who put that to me.
But do carry on.

 

[chazwazza]

I was listening to SEN yesterday morning and GlassJaw Cornes had his recent poke at Adelaide’s forward line, this time singling out Fogarty so I had a look at the top 50 goal kickers.
Adelaide have the equal most top 50 goal kickers this year with 5, (equal with Geelong).
7th Thilthorpe with 33
12th Fogarty 29
Equal 24th Keays and Rachele with 25
27th Walker with 22
When you look at the top 30 Adelaide have 5, Geelong 1.

 

[Cromulant]

I was listening to SEN yesterday morning and GlassJaw Cornes had his recent poke at Adelaide’s forward line, this time singling out Fogarty so I had a look at the top 50 goal kickers.
Adelaide have the equal most top 50 goal kickers this year with 5, (equal with Geelong).
7th Thilthorpe with 33
12th Fogarty 29
Equal 24th Keays and Rachele with 25
27th Walker with 22
When you look at the top 30 Adelaide have 5, Geelong 1.

He flips between "its a failure if they dont make a prelim" and "who have they beaten, their forwardline is no good"

Hes paid a lot of money to be a thin skinned confrontational tool

 

[George CantStandYa]

You’d just drop smith in that scenario surely

We are talking about Nicks who wants a certain level of experience in the team

 

[chazwazza]

He flips between "its a failure if they dont make a prelim" and "who have they beaten, their forwardline is no good"

Hes paid a lot of money to be a thin skinned confrontational tool

That morning I woke up to some indulgent Four Corners skit he did bagging Damian Barrett for having a glass jaw or being thin skinned. The show ended with his jab at Fogarty

 

[Peter Doherty]

I dont understand why people even listen to SEN.

 

[chazwazza]

I dont understand why people even listen to SEN.

Depends what shows and segments you listen to, some are good, apart from ABC Grandstand it’s the only footy media I consume.

 

[MRB37]

Thank you

I still find it odd that the club would think that way. Just find someone else to move on if he does well.

I could see it. They want an easy, non confrontational decision and removing a guy who may not have done anything wrong, but just got squeezed out by the numbers is a tough one to have.