Oppo Camp General AFL Discussion - Opposition posters welcome

Remove this Banner Ad

Michaels said:
yeah thats a fair call. he has dug himself a hole!
Click to expand...
Dug himself a hole because he stopped using it.
Dug himself a hole because as soon as the tribunal over rules his verdicts he seems less likely to lay the same charge the following occasion.

The AFL have dug themselves a hole by adding in all these clauses that give them outs by adding in low impact medium impact high impact and severe impact. How the hell does Christian decide which players were hit harder than others. Oh that's right if a player goes to ground they were hit hard, but with low impact if they get back up again, but if they don't go to ground, then there is nothing wrong. If they do go to ground it then becomes how long they stay down. If they are down for 15 seconds then it's graded at low and so on.

They just need to simplify it and make it easy for the MRO, media and the public to follow.

Hit someone high and they don't go to ground you get a fine
Hit someone high and they end up staggered but able to play on you get a week
Hit someone high and they end up out of the game but can play the following you get week 2 weeks
Hit someone high and they end up out of the game and can't play the following week you get 3 weeks.
Hit someone high and they cop and injury that rules them out for multiple games then you get an extra week on top of what they miss.
Doubt any footy fans would argue these penalties and the tribunal still gives clubs the opportunity to plead their case to get the penalty downgraded.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Michaels said:
How long until this rule is changed back?



Carlton player starts ahead of the Pies player while running forward for the initial 50m, does a head check, slows down to let the Pies player in front, then speeds up again claiming his run is blocked and gets an additional 50m!

This rule is an absolute joke.

Players are going to keep exploiting it now on the back of this video I reckon.
Click to expand...

If Tom Phillips ran to the side and out of the zone like hes supposed to then the Blue guy cant exploit the rule.
 
Michaels said:
I'm not sure that they realise how much more respect people would have for them if they come out and said 'look we got the Rampe one wrong. it's a rule in the game that has hardly ever come up and in the heat of the moment we failed to apply the rule. We will go back and provide more training in these areas for our umpires'

I know it doesn't change the result and maybe it would open up a can of worms from an Essendon perspective, but at least come out and own up to a mistake.


And your first line is absolutley on point about driving people away from the game.

we spoke about this last night off air but I used to watch as many games of football each weekend as possible, no matter the team.

But now I'm really selective on what games i'll watch and often I wont even watch a game from start to finish (unless it's richmond). It's just not the same anymore.

I feel like I don't know the rules to the game anymore, which is frustrating.
Click to expand...

What can of worms would it open up do you reckon they would challenge the result in court? Mind you it is the druggies and they might, but the AFL would gain a lot more kudos if they actually admitted a mistake, they reckon crowds are up , scoring is up, tv audiences are up how truthful are they?
 
Wooden Robot said:
I wonder how much the AFL - and clubs even - engage with the fans? Like focus groups, or something similar. Get Gill and co to sit around with 50-100 average fans over a few pies and Cokes and just gauge the average punter's thoughts, Albeit, they are only interested in the corporates.
I'd be interested to know how our club does likewise. I mean I fill out the members' survey at the end of each year and have at times been scathing of our direction, management, engagement etc. Never once has anyone from the club followed up, so it makes me wonder is the feedback being taken on board. Work has a similar survey each year and I'm sure they don't consult with me as they don't like constructive criticism.
But I guess that's just it - the game is not for the average punter anymore. It's for TV and corporates.
Click to expand...

Mate today he called supporters from the the voices from the weeds, the guy is an arrogant pig
 
A bit of a rehash of something i posted in a discussion the Rampe non free kick o the MB.


We have:
Rules that require the umpires to form a view on the player's intention in a split second (like the Rampe incident).
A tribunal system overseen by two arguably less than club-independant people.
Rules changes made every year with the barest trialling and no understanding of the long term impacts on the game made by a committee that again could be accused of club biases and not independent.
No consistency week by week for what seem remarably similar events at the tribunal along with perceived player favouratisms and biases (not helped by point 2 above).
Frequent "rule of the week" interpretations.
Part timers as umpires.
Generally the afl ( and at least one club president) that have no understanding of the concept that a perception of bias is as serious an issue as an actual bias.

And worst of all an administration that is incapable of admitting when it has made a mistake.

It all adds up to the AFL not providing a professional level of sports officiation. Notice that I mean officiated in a wider sense, as opposed to umpired. The umpires are not the biggest problem here.

Its either that, or its a completely deliberate and contrived manipulation to create engagement through outrage.
 
_RT_ said:
Dug himself a hole because he stopped using it.
Dug himself a hole because as soon as the tribunal over rules his verdicts he seems less likely to lay the same charge the following occasion.

The AFL have dug themselves a hole by adding in all these clauses that give them outs by adding in low impact medium impact high impact and severe impact. How the hell does Christian decide which players were hit harder than others. Oh that's right if a player goes to ground they were hit hard, but with low impact if they get back up again, but if they don't go to ground, then there is nothing wrong. If they do go to ground it then becomes how long they stay down. If they are down for 15 seconds then it's graded at low and so on.

They just need to simplify it and make it easy for the MRO, media and the public to follow.

Hit someone high and they don't go to ground you get a fine
Hit someone high and they end up staggered but able to play on you get a week
Hit someone high and they end up out of the game but can play the following you get week 2 weeks
Hit someone high and they end up out of the game and can't play the following week you get 3 weeks.
Hit someone high and they cop and injury that rules them out for multiple games then you get an extra week on top of what they miss.
Doubt any footy fans would argue these penalties and the tribunal still gives clubs the opportunity to plead their case to get the penalty downgraded.
Click to expand...
Players will be told to exploit it by going to ground after getting high contact and staggering around.
I like the premise of your post, but I don't think it would work.
 
Jack5 said:
A bit of a rehash of something i posted in a discussion the Rampe non free kick o the MB.


We have:
Rules that require the umpires to form a view on the player's intention in a split second (like the Rampe incident).
A tribunal system overseen by two arguably less than club-independant people.
Rules changes made every year with the barest trialling and no understanding of the long term impacts on the game made by a committee that again could be accused of club biases and not independent.
No consistency week by week for what seem remarably similar events at the tribunal along with perceived player favouratisms and biases (not helped by point 2 above).
Frequent "rule of the week" interpretations.
Part timers as umpires.
Generally the afl ( and at least one club president) that have no understanding of the concept that a perception of bias is as serious an issue as an actual bias.

And worst of all an administration that is incapable of admitting when it has made a mistake.

It all adds up to the AFL not providing a professional level of sports officiation. Notice that I mean officiated in a wider sense, as opposed to umpired. The umpires are not the biggest problem here.

Its either that, or its a completely deliberate and contrived manipulation to create engagement through outrage.
Click to expand...

I give a lot of s**t to the umps but thinking about it and reading this I really start to feel bad for them. They probably have the hardest jobs out there and I would imagine how stressful it would be for them with the AFL as amateur as it is.

The league just needs consistency.. With rules, with interpretations, with penalties and at the momment it isn't even close to it.
 
tugga said:
Players will be told to exploit it by going to ground after getting high contact and staggering around.
I like the premise of your post, but I don't think it would work.
Click to expand...
When I say staggered I mean having to undergo a concussion test, someone getting clocked like Shiel did and staying down for 15 seconds or so but with no after effects doesn't warrant a suspension under what I'm proposing. However if a player is forced to effectively miss a quarter then the offending player cops a week. By using the concussion protocol I don't see clubs exploiting it as no side likes to be down a rotation for 20 minutes just to get someone suspended the following week.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

NaturalDisaster said:
I give a lot of **** to the umps but thinking about it and reading this I really start to feel bad for them. They probably have the hardest jobs out there and I would imagine how stressful it would be for them with the AFL as amateur as it is.

The league just needs consistency.. With rules, with interpretations, with penalties and at the momment it isn't even close to it.
Click to expand...

And we'll see that the next time some d*** decides tp climb the post and is penalised a free kick, but not fined!
 
tugga said:
Sorry but I'm not a massive fan of ours.
it's too busy, too many dots and too much white.
I don't dislike it by any means.
Click to expand...
Don’t apologise you’re entitled to your opinion. :)

I personally do like it, however the Carlton one is my favourite and if I were a Carlton supporter I wouldn’t hesitate to buy it.
 
joelsyt said:
Don’t apologise you’re entitled to your opinion. :)

I personally do like it, however the Carlton one is my favourite and if I were a Carlton supporter I wouldn’t hesitate to buy it.
Click to expand...
Still reckon this one was our best ever.

1557913415988.png
 
tugga said:
Sorry but I'm not a massive fan of ours.
it's too busy, too many dots and too much white.
I don't dislike it by any means.
Click to expand...

The random dots all over it ruin ours, they should keep it contained to the sash like the really good ones from the past.

But you can't call ours too busy and also like Carltons.....theirs has s**t everywhere.

The freo one is good though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Groupie_
No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXIX
85 86 87 88 89
Replies
2K
Views
40K
lizard man
lizard man
lumpinee
  • Locked
No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXVIII
400 401 402 403 404
Replies
10K
Views
217K
tropicaltiger
tropicaltiger
prodigy
  • Locked
Player Watch Welcome to Richmond - Mykelti Lefau
Replies
5
Views
399
prodigy
prodigy
Truetiger
Welcome Welcome to Richmond Mykelti Lefau
10 11 12 13 14
Replies
333
Views
12K
Meteoric Rise
Meteoric Rise
T
  • Locked
No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXVII
424 425 426 427 428
Replies
11K
Views
197K
DickieKnee
DickieKnee
beema limapep
😲 Umpire appointments & discussion - Rounds 0, 1,2 and beyond
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
387
Views
9K
beema limapep
beema limapep
prodigy
Player Watch Welcome to Richmond - Jacob Koschitzke
24 25 26 27 28
Replies
695
Views
30K
Ned Ryerson
Ned Ryerson

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top