Oppo Camp General AFL and other clubs discussion thread. **Opposition fans not welcome** Part 6

Remove this Banner Ad

Strapping Young Lad

previously grumbleguts
Apr 19, 2006
68,326
130,368
Your local Satanist Cabal
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Spurs, Socceroos
Last edited by a moderator:

Flamin Joe

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 22, 2007
5,008
5,846
Brisbane
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Glenelg, Norwood
We have a large fanbase in WA, so it would be great if we can reward these fans by them being able to go to say 6 or more games to watch the Hawks live
If you want to reward an interstate fanbase then playing more games at the Gabba would be a good start. Since the game in 2008 we've seen just another 3 games up here, a casualty of the Lions being poor for so long and the Tasmanian deal. The 1-2 games in WA every year is a luxury compared to the sh*t we've been served over the years so it would be great for the club to push for some games up here.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

MasterSamurai

Premiership Player
Mar 21, 2017
3,446
6,592
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
BayernMunchen
İt'll be interesting to see if this season is even gonna get completed. Aus is going through what we went through here in Europe about 2-3 months ago, every sport at every level was shut down in that period. Get ready for a stressed out , shut out life for the next 6 weeks my fellow Australians, it's uncanny how this ' virus ' seems to travel from continent to continent at the same effect wıth governments acting out similar restrictions as one and another. AFL headquarters would be shaking nervously before a call from the health authorities to stop the games from going ahead anytime now.
 

Simon_Nesbit

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 26, 2001
11,034
6,431
Tasmania
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Dwayne Russell on SEN brought up the ridiculous amount of throws nowadays

Many people sent in SMS complaining

Finally someone has brought it u, let’s see if anything happens
All part of the grand plan - AFL won't act until Hawthorn are seen to take advantage.

Clarkson put the word out with Breust and Mitchell coming back in, knowing they are two of the best exponents.

First problem - the media got confused, and the umpires attacked the wrong rule!

Second problem, Breust got injured and Mitchell's been a bit off his game - hard to throw it when you are either tackled to ground or getting cheapies in space!

Now it's caught the media eye, Hawthorn can be made the scapegoat, the media can criticize Clarkson and Hocking can make a heroic gesture to bring down the cheating Hawks by having throws penalised constantly....

(which then suits our gamestyle better than most)
 

eldorado

Previously eldorado
Oct 18, 2003
13,220
29,608
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Athletic Bilbao
So can anyone work out what Greg is actually proposing here?

I don't think he has an actual proposal, just a vague "It's the vibe" kind of thing...

I think I know what he's dwelling on; it's something I see as something fundamentally illogical about the current rule.

The aim of the rule, I think, is to keep the ball moving and in play. Fair enough.

The guy who wins the ball needs to do everything in his power to keep the ball moving, and if he doesn't, he is punished. fair

The tackler is rewarded, however, NOT for the actual tackle, but FOR DOING EVERYTHING IN HIS POWER TO NOT LET THE BALL OUT.

And, if he successfully hangs on to the bloke on the ground, scoops the ball back in underneath him...he will get REWARDED with a free. And his team mates, who didn't even make the tackle, will be rewarded if they also jump in and lock it in

So, to use behaviourism language, locking the ball in is positively reinforced for one team, but punished for the other, purely depending on who won the original ball, and who made the tackle.

The only solution to this weird paradox, I think, is to separate the actions of the tackler.

The tackle being one action, which is rewarded, and the locking the ball in after the tackle, which is not

a possible solution...Firstly, don't allow a second or third player from the tackling team to get involved

More radically (and I think this will be too drastic a change for the game's culture), the following option...Once, the tackle is made, the umpire calls TACKLE, and the tackler must release, and the player with the ball must immediately (within 0.5-1 second) release the ball legally. If he doesn't, he is penalised. But at least he has the chance to do it without 2 or 3 opposition players doing everything in their power to stop doing what the law intends.

Anyways, just my little rant on a law which is so obviously counterproductive (i.e. actively REWARDING behaviour which leads to something they say they want to stop)
 

Adelaide Hawk

Hall of Famer
Sep 21, 2002
48,936
40,404
Adelaide
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Norwood
So on that basis, if everyone has been throwing it more, lets just make the throw legal and be done with it. No disputes about illegal disposal and prior opportunity. Simple, a throw is fine and every one will adapt.
That's pretty much been the case for many years. According to the strict wording of the rules, a handball is effected by punching the ball from a stationary hand. I haven't seen that for at least 30 years, just as I haven't seen a legal ruck contest (apart from centre bounces) for about 40 years. Holding the ball isn't umpired by the wording of the rules. Nowhere does it talk about the ball being forced out in the tackle. If you grab a player and he drops the ball, for whatever reason, it's holding the ball.

It's like in the Road Traffic Act. Did you know it's illegal to walk along the footpath in the opposite direction to the flow of traffic? Or jaywalking for example. It's illegal, but nobody ever gets done for it, so why do these draconian rules still exist?

I guess my point is, why do we have rules that are just ignored? There would be many rules in the book that are no longer relevant to the contemporary game. Maybe the time has come to just throw the rule book in the bin and develop a set of rules to accommodate the direction we'd like the game to go.
 

Gralin

Super Moderator
Apr 8, 2010
39,679
58,550
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Buffalo Bills
I don't think he has an actual proposal, just a vague "It's the vibe" kind of thing...

I think I know what he's dwelling on; it's something I see as something fundamentally illogical about the current rule.

The aim of the rule, I think, is to keep the ball moving and in play. Fair enough.

The guy who wins the ball needs to do everything in his power to keep the ball moving, and if he doesn't, he is punished. fair

The tackler is rewarded, however, NOT for the actual tackle, but FOR DOING EVERYTHING IN HIS POWER TO NOT LET THE BALL OUT.

And, if he successfully hangs on to the bloke on the ground, scoops the ball back in underneath him...he will get REWARDED with a free. And his team mates, who didn't even make the tackle, will be rewarded if they also jump in and lock it in

So, to use behaviourism language, locking the ball in is positively reinforced for one team, but punished for the other, purely depending on who won the original ball, and who made the tackle.

The only solution to this weird paradox, I think, is to separate the actions of the tackler.

The tackle being one action, which is rewarded, and the locking the ball in after the tackle, which is not

a possible solution...Firstly, don't allow a second or third player from the tackling team to get involved

More radically (and I think this will be too drastic a change for the game's culture), the following option...Once, the tackle is made, the umpire calls TACKLE, and the tackler must release, and the player with the ball must immediately (within 0.5-1 second) release the ball legally. If he doesn't, he is penalised. But at least he has the chance to do it without 2 or 3 opposition players doing everything in their power to stop doing what the law intends.

Anyways, just my little rant on a law which is so obviously counterproductive (i.e. actively REWARDING behaviour which leads to something they say they want to stop)
I agree that how they try to fix the issues is wrong.

It goes back to changes they refuse to walk back as much as anything for me.

As well as changing the "interpretation" all the time and asking the umpires to adjudicate intent instead of outcome.
 

Crankyhawk

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2007
17,051
11,815
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
All part of the grand plan - AFL won't act until Hawthorn are seen to take advantage.

Clarkson put the word out with Breust and Mitchell coming back in, knowing they are two of the best exponents.

First problem - the media got confused, and the umpires attacked the wrong rule!

Second problem, Breust got injured and Mitchell's been a bit off his game - hard to throw it when you are either tackled to ground or getting cheapies in space!

Now it's caught the media eye, Hawthorn can be made the scapegoat, the media can criticize Clarkson and Hocking can make a heroic gesture to bring down the cheating Hawks by having throws penalised constantly....

(which then suits our gamestyle better than most)
Until the inconsistent application means we get pineappled and dogs continue to chuck
 

Off The Couch

Premium Gold
Oct 4, 2007
43,655
48,950
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I can’t imagine Hawthorn being left in Perth when it’s South Australian teams and GC being amongst those we still need to play

my interest is in whether eagles get to remain in WA - that’s some advantage they have
 

Crankyhawk

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2007
17,051
11,815
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I can’t imagine Hawthorn being left in Perth when it’s South Australian teams and GC being amongst those we still need to play

my interest is in whether eagles get to remain in WA - that’s some advantage they have
GC should travel, so they may come to Perth to play some sides (have they played Carlton yet?). And are SA hosting games there? If not no reason they also cannot come to Perth.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

wahawk

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 13, 2006
6,339
8,759
sorrento wa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
So with the Tasmanian Government keep its boarders closed for all of August now I'd really like to think that we could play the majority of our games this month at Optus. Its clearly the closest thing we could hope for as a home ground advantage and I know the AFL won't cater for individual clubs let alone us but fingers crossed. The below article Kennett still holds out hope of us playing games in September down in Tassy but goes on further to say that who knows if there will even be AFL come September with how bad things are getting. What's everyones preference on where we should, could and be able to play our next lot of games after Freo and West Coast?

Perth :)
 

wahawk

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 13, 2006
6,339
8,759
sorrento wa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
If you want to reward an interstate fanbase then playing more games at the Gabba would be a good start. Since the game in 2008 we've seen just another 3 games up here, a casualty of the Lions being poor for so long and the Tasmanian deal. The 1-2 games in WA every year is a luxury compared to the sh*t we've been served over the years so it would be great for the club to push for some games up here.
Just to be clear, we only get 1 game per year in WA.
I know & realise qld’ers have missed out altogether
 

OnTheRocks

Premiership Player
Mar 11, 2016
3,865
5,066
AFL Club
Hawthorn
a possible solution...Firstly, don't allow a second or third player from the tackling team to get involved
2 in a takle will inadvertently happen from time to time but there should be no need for a 3rd or more. Free kick should go against team mates of the tackled player that just flop into the tackle in the guise that they are tackling the tacklers or their team mate, wtf for? Get the fk off free kick against this sh*t.
 

A Cut Above

🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 in my lifetime 😁
Aug 27, 2015
26,340
82,634
🅱️🅰️🥇1️⃣3️⃣
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
🇦🇺

Hong Kong Hawk

All Australian
Aug 1, 2015
808
2,254
Hong Kong
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
West Brom

Let there be absolutely ZERO doubt about it - Damien Barrett is a ******* company man. He pretends to be independent by occasionally hitting Head Office with a wet lettuce leaf but never fails to parrot company policy on anything remotely important.
If my reading of the issue is correct, then, Cothin’s wife posted in the public domain what happened (COVID-19 breach). A journalist takes something already put into the public domain by the offender herself, and reposts it into the same public domain. The AFL said they wouldn’t name the offender, who named themselves anyway, so for naming someone who has named themselves a Journalist gets stood down.

Sounds legitimate to me and I can see why Barrett would be supporting this. Gill and his administration are driving the game into the ground which is insignificant compared to this evil that Barrett must help stamp out. But with journalists like him in the world we can rest assured that The tradition of sanitary pad collecting dumpster diving will continue to thrive in media land.
 

smeltitdeltit

Premiership Player
Jul 2, 2012
3,129
4,455
AFL Club
Hawthorn

Let there be absolutely ZERO doubt about it - Damien Barrett is a ******* company man. He pretends to be independent by occasionally hitting Head Office with a wet lettuce leaf but never fails to parrot company policy on anything remotely important.
Wowee.
let’s just confirm here that AFL media’s employeeDamien Barret has just stated categorically that AFL media isn’t independent.
Huge new because they’ve claimed for awhile now that they are. Reminds me a bit of the CCP
Hopefully Barrett only disappears from our news feeds only.
 

Remove this Banner Ad