Cdog71
Premiership Player
- Sep 21, 2017
- 4,833
- 10,829
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Or end up sore himself like the Sawns gameOld mate Stacky frightens the crap out of me. Love his aggression but I can just see him getting a holiday soon.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Or end up sore himself like the Sawns gameOld mate Stacky frightens the crap out of me. Love his aggression but I can just see him getting a holiday soon.
Dug himself a hole because he stopped using it.yeah thats a fair call. he has dug himself a hole!
Just like when we first got Towna, would struggle to back up games as he kept getting enforced holidays lolOld mate Stacky frightens the crap out of me. Love his aggression but I can just see him getting a holiday soon.
Love to see both these two playing tag team in the firsts!Just like when we first got Towna, would struggle to back up games as he kept getting enforced holidays lol
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.
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.
If he had hit Walters in the head...Old mate Stacky frightens the crap out of me. Love his aggression but I can just see him getting a holiday soon.
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.
Stop using logicIf Tom Phillips ran to the side and out of the zone like hes supposed to then the Blue guy cant exploit the rule.
Players will be told to exploit it by going to ground after getting high contact and staggering around.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
Yeah I saw it on AFL360.
Also very nice.
Don’t apologise you’re entitled to your opinion.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.
Yep, thought the same thing as soon as I saw it. Looks great.
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.
I’ve liked most of the Richmond ones but yes that one was one of the best.
I reckon last years was our best one, nice and simpleSorry 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.