Is it time for the Hawks to ditch gaming?

[Off The Couch]

Don't forget a coach who abuses umpires at children's football games.

You have all the makings of a wholesome family sitcom here; something like the Cosby Show.

Melbourne can throw the stones
Eagles not so much

 

[Hawkk]

God you hawk fans suffer from little man syndrome! They are talking about poke ownership and the tassie Hawks being a family club

Why did your club engage in the greatest systematic doping scandal in world sporting history

I dont suppose it was created out of petty jealousy of the Family Club?

 

[QuietB]

Don't forget a coach who abuses umpires at children's football games.

You have all the makings of a wholesome family sitcom here; something like the Cosby Show.

Shouldn't you be at booooooing practice or something?

 

[Brishawk]

players could certainly improve the odds by spending a bit more time forward, getting cheap possessions behind the ball etc. but that's still very far from a guarentee. certainly not safe enough for international syndicates to place millions of dollars on

If you know player A, a favourite for first goal, is not going to kick the first goal you can set your bets to win in a much higher number or outcomes. There have been several investigations into first goal scorer related leaks and/or betting.

 

[JoondalupJ]

umpires can only influence the game IF it's close and contested and the situation presents itself. i'd like to see the umpire get paid to rig the GF and actually pull of a win for west coast somehow.

It could happen. We could disagree for ever, the point is it could happen , it may be a silly argument, but you tell me any week you've watched your club and not been frustrated at some of the frees. For and against!!??

That's what I mean , a person who is compromised or crooked could easily interpret what he likes, to bend a game one way , and all it takes is a couple of frees in the right place.

That's what AFL is geared for with its grey rules and individual umpire interpretation style , brought in by the AFL, for political correctness to a degree, it is not only a bad bad look for the game , it has the underbelly of some rot setting into it, in the future.

I say the whole umpiring group should be over taken by athletic running women umpires, I trust them to not be taken in by the self importance of umpires at AFL level like some do. It is not a game about Razor Ray, or about in the past bloody Goldspink , its about football.

Women tend to not be so up themselves about how important they are , like some of our current prima donnas.

Women go about their business honestly. And so do our boys now! But its the near future with the rules the way they are that is concerning , after probably the worst year of umpiring standard I have ever seen.

If you don't think the rot could set in this way , I think its a dangerous future , where nobody believes it , but some mongrels with form are working it out right now.

Bring the rules back into understandable black and white. Where an incidental touch on the cheek is an incidental touch on the cheek , not a SHOT AT GOAL, or where a push (PUSH) in the back is actually a push in the back not a contested mark, some defenders may as well watch these days! You know where I'm coming from.

The AFL really has botched up the rule s interpretations , any one can rule anything in two or three different ways that's the point!

 

[madmug]

It could happen. We could disagree for ever, the point is it could happen , it may be a silly argument, but you tell me any week you've watched your club and not been frustrated at some of the frees. For and against!!??

That's what I mean , a person who is compromised or crooked could easily interpret what he likes, to bend a game one way , and all it takes is a couple of frees in the right place.

That's what AFL is geared for with its grey rules and individual umpire interpretation style , brought in by the AFL, for political correctness to a degree, it is not only a bad bad look for the game , it has the underbelly of some rot setting into it, in the future.

I say the whole umpiring group should be over taken by athletic running women umpires, I trust them to not be taken in by the self importance of umpires at AFL level like some do. It is not a game about Razor Ray, or about in the past bloody Goldspink , its about football.

Women tend to not be so up themselves about how important they are , like some of our current prima donnas.

Women go about their business honestly. And so do our boys now! But its the near future with the rules the way they are that is concerning , after probably the worst year of umpiring standard I have ever seen.

If you don't think the rot could set in this way , I think its a dangerous future , where nobody believes it , but some mongrels with form are working it out right now.

Bring the rules back into understandable black and white. Where an incidental touch on the cheek is an incidental touch on the cheek , not a SHOT AT GOAL, or where a push (PUSH) in the back is actually a push in the back not a contested mark, some defenders may as well watch these days! You know where I'm coming from.

The AFL really has botched up the rule s interpretations , any one can rule anything in two or three different ways that's the point!

Just avoiding the conspiracy theory thing, I think the AFL could sort a lot of this out quite easily. Make free kicks payable only if it affects the play, or it is deliberate/forceful & thus can be paid up field.

Tickey touches that are minimal & incidental & dont affect the play or player should be ignored. For example, the arm that brushes the side of the face, or the grab of the jumper. If they are minimal & affect nothing, why pay a free?

Umpires are human. They miss things. But if they miss an obvious one & then pay tickey incidental, minor, ones, that upsets everyone. Including the players no doubt.

The other thing about arrogance needs to be reigned in. The umpires should be taught that the game is between 2 teams. They should be taught to be respectful & professional arbiters of the game & not showmen. They will be praised for their good professional work, not for being a tin whistle bully or the star of the show.

I know nothing is perfect, but I think most games where the umpiring is minimal, are the best to watch.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Just avoiding the conspiracy theory thing, I think the AFL could sort a lot of this out quite easily. Make free kicks payable only if it affects the play, or it is deliberate/forceful & thus can be paid up field.

Tickey touches that are minimal & incidental & dont affect the play or player should be ignored. For example, the arm that brushes the side of the face, or the grab of the jumper. If they are minimal & affect nothing, why pay a free?

Umpires are human. They miss things. But if they miss an obvious one & then pay tickey incidental, minor, ones, that upsets everyone. Including the players no doubt.

The other thing about arrogance needs to be reigned in. The umpires should be taught that the game is between 2 teams. They should be taught to be respectful & professional arbiters of the game & not showmen. They will be praised for their good professional work, not for being a tin whistle bully or the star of the show.

I know nothing is perfect, but I think most games where the umpiring is minimal, are the best to watch.

Correct and a better way of looking at it than my rants. I have probably given the impression of some great conspiracy , and I may sound a bit over the top. But gambling can get hold of some sports and absolutely destroy them. If there is a way to get to an official.

My main beef has been about bringing into view the way the game has been warped by rule changes and different ways of looking at the game.

So I guess bringing in a few observations of the GREY RULE SYNDROME, maybe others might take up the call on the AFL to have a serious look at giving us a little bit of he game back.

And just maybe not making it that easy to cheat. Good post. Thanks.

 

[Kram]

Good doco on the ABC last night about these horrid things.

 

[Chief]

Too many tricks?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-22/poker-machines-could-breach-consumer-law-lawyers-say/6875204

 

[Troubadour]

Too many tricks?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-22/poker-machines-could-breach-consumer-law-lawyers-say/6875204

Was just about to post that. Will be fascinating to see outcome.

Poker machines in Tasmania also in the news as Federal Group (owns the casinos and quite a bit of other property) looks to have its monopoly ownership of all pokies in the state extended - this killed off MONA adding a mini-casino
http://www.examiner.com.au/story/3439418/no-urgency-on-pokie-deal/

 

[Off The Couch]

Too many tricks?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-22/poker-machines-could-breach-consumer-law-lawyers-say/6875204

About time - hopefully something comes of it. Could send some clubs to the wall Chief - any thoughts on how the blues would fare if afl clubs had to get rid of the pokies.



"Putting our supporters at the centre of everything we do"

 

[Chief]

Possibly screwed but all boats would drop with the tide.

 

[AM]

So long as Bruce Mathieson is the power broker at the Blues they will never forego the pokies. Much more likely to increase their gaming activities.