Opinion Non-Crows AFL 10

Remove this Banner Ad

Brisbane were Fitzroy - not entirely new?
No. Originally they were a new club, the Brisbane Bears, joining the VFL in 1987 (at the same time as the West Coast Eagles).

They merged with Fitzroy, forming the Brisbane Lions - who played their first game in 1997.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Higgins suspension is an outright disgrace to AFL and stands to show everything that is wrong with the concussion rules.

To sum up, the AFL industry is panicking over law suits and concussion, Higgins had to be scapegoated for something Aliir did to himself.

OK first of all Higgins isn't totally innocent. Higgins did do everything in his power to bring him to ground. But under the laws you are allowed to tackle players to ground. So at what point does the onus of duty of care transfer from the tackler to the tacklee?

There is no doubt the only reason Aliir went to ground and didn't stand up in the tackle was because he tried to kick the ball to avoid holding the ball which resulted in him losing balance. Which is the entire cause of the outcome. Its the equivalent of players ducking into tackles to try and win head high free kicks.

To me a punishment has to be seen as a deterrent towards similar future acts. Tell me, whats the deterrent here? Are you telling players not to take them to ground anymore? are you telling players to help your opponent stand up in a tackle on the off chance they might try and kick the ball? like what are you telling players here. This is why its pathetic. The tribunal took 3.5 hours to come to a decision. This tells you not a single person in that room felt he should be suspended for it, but they had to be seen to punishing those that result in concussion.

But then we look at Butters. Butters got off for flying into a contest completely reckless. So yeah, the AFL is all over the shop. On one hand you want to be seeing to do stuff but in others, oh its ok, nothing to see here...hey everyone look at the Brownlow medal....so shiny.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Today I learned that zucchini is a fruit.
Seeds on the inside, so yes, it's technically a fruit.

As a useless fact, the tomato (botanically a fruit) has been declared to be legally a vegetable by the US Supreme Court, and watermelon (botanically a fruit) is the State Vegetable of Oklahoma. Only in the USA!
 
Seeds on the inside, so yes, it's technically a fruit.

As a useless fact, the tomato (botanically a fruit) has been declared to be legally a vegetable by the US Supreme Court, and watermelon (botanically a fruit) is the State Vegetable of Oklahoma. Only in the USA!
It was declared a vegetable for the purpose of tax classification, based on the 'ordinary usage ' of fruit vs vegetable vs the 'botanical definition'. Couldn't fly today with these literalist judges!

Also tomato sauce on a pizza counts a serve of vegetables for school lunch purposes.
 
Seeds on the inside, so yes, it's technically a fruit.

As a useless fact, the tomato (botanically a fruit) has been declared to be legally a vegetable by the US Supreme Court, and watermelon (botanically a fruit) is the State Vegetable of Oklahoma. Only in the USA!
Why? Why do we need things legally declared as fruits or vegetables?
 
Seeds on the inside, so yes, it's technically a fruit.

As a useless fact, the tomato (botanically a fruit) has been declared to be legally a vegetable by the US Supreme Court, and watermelon (botanically a fruit) is the State Vegetable of Oklahoma. Only in the USA!
Is that a thing?
Strawberries?
Cucumber?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top