![jerk off tv land GIF by [HASH=785530]#Impastor[/HASH]](/forum/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia3.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F3o7TKra9XDoRiC6dQ4%2F200.gif&hash=4617d2afbb143f04afc99ecc343b351d "jerk off tv land GIF by [HASH=785530]#Impastor[/HASH]")
Great night
No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXIX
- Thread starter Groupie_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Great night
- Oct 27, 2014
- 16,926
- 118,106
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Wankley won't be talking down the Catters
Karp3_dm
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 29, 2018
- 12,178
- 48,532
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Last time Cats conceded 164+ was vs Hawthorn in '84
smasha
It's Time!
Farking media.
"That was just a mulligan"
Yeah,righto.
"That was just a mulligan"
Yeah,righto.
Dimma giving us one last gift before we go back to hating him.
Just about my favourite football moment ever........
happy to sail off the cliff if we take the smug ****ing cats down with us
- Apr 13, 2011
- 6,632
- 20,897
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Is Dimma timing a run again?
The comp is pretty shit this year, swans good, everyone else flaky... They could do some damage.
The comp is pretty shit this year, swans good, everyone else flaky... They could do some damage.
- Apr 13, 2011
- 6,632
- 20,897
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Oh and eat a huge phat cocka doodle do "catters"
We've got the competition right where we want them
- Jun 13, 2018
- 13,738
- 37,573
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Inter Milan, Real Madrid
$4 million for the scoreboard.
Whateley will need the money for Chris and the boys' corrective surgery.
Hobbling for weeks after being reamed by the Dimma & the Suns.
Whateley will need the money for Chris and the boys' corrective surgery.
Hobbling for weeks after being reamed by the Dimma & the Suns.
Last edited:
There shit can only win in Darwin and gc
- Jan 7, 2010
- 12,127
- 35,625
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Strikers
Free kicks were once again a discussion point for the Cats, particularly after Suns had 17 to their three at half time.
However, despite a long discussion about the state of umpiring after the Port Adelaide game last week, he said he was not coming down hard on umpires.
“I wasn’t strong on decisions last game, I’ve been encouraged by the AFL to talk about some of the issues in the game,” he said.
“It’s not about umpires and decisions, it’s quite clear it’s a hard game to umpire and lots of mistakes will be made, that’s the same for players, that’s the nature of our game.
“But there’s stuff about how the laws are interpreted and the way the game is played and how we want to coach our players that are worthy of discussion and debate.
However, despite a long discussion about the state of umpiring after the Port Adelaide game last week, he said he was not coming down hard on umpires.
“I wasn’t strong on decisions last game, I’ve been encouraged by the AFL to talk about some of the issues in the game,” he said.
“It’s not about umpires and decisions, it’s quite clear it’s a hard game to umpire and lots of mistakes will be made, that’s the same for players, that’s the nature of our game.
“But there’s stuff about how the laws are interpreted and the way the game is played and how we want to coach our players that are worthy of discussion and debate.
- Aug 13, 2017
- 5,343
- 18,789
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Wtf is he even talking about, ? Seriously he actually thinks that he is smarter than everyone
Else , the campaigners talking in riddles.
_RT_
Community Leader
- Sep 17, 2006
- 45,533
- 85,831
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Furies Premiers 2010
- Moderator
- #5,245
Waiting for the media to start publishing their articles about how Geelong need to start looking at trading away players and invest in the draft as they begin their rebuild. Also waiting for them to question their lack of leadership from their senior players and whether the likes of Dangerfield and Hawkins are limping to the end of their careers, while chasing meaningless kicks. Also questions about their lack of effort and intensity after allowing the Suns to kick 26 goals and have over 70 inside 50s.
- Aug 18, 2009
- 1,869
- 5,130
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Carlton rising
Essendon rising
Collingwood risen
I’m ok with GCS pinching the next few flags to block their windows
Essendon rising
Collingwood risen
I’m ok with GCS pinching the next few flags to block their windows
smasha
It's Time!
CFL headline a very subdued Cats fall to Suns.
Not "Cats get smashed by a hot Suns" they reserve for Richmond.
Not "Cats get smashed by a hot Suns" they reserve for Richmond.
Tiger_Of_Old
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
OMG!
May 16, 2024 — 12.02pm
Save
Share
Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size
71
View all comments
Listen to this article
5 min
In 2019, the AFL’s newly formed competition committee, led by then league football boss Steve Hocking, introduced nine rule and interpretation changes.
Some of the biggest figures in football tried to turn back the clock by putting players in three zones at centre bounces to achieve a significant change in the look of the game.
![Carlton captain [PLAYERCARD]Patrick Cripps[/PLAYERCARD] had a word with the umpire earlier this season.]( "Carlton captain [PLAYERCARD]Patrick Cripps[/PLAYERCARD] had a word with the umpire earlier this season.")
Carlton captain Patrick Cripps had a word with the umpire earlier this season.CREDIT:AFL PHOTOS
The six-six-six model, as it is now known, forced players into dedicated starting positions, if only for a few seconds after the centre bounce.
Also, players were no longer required to kick to themselves to play on from the goal square during kick-ins. The man on the mark had to stay 10 metres back from the goal square; now it’s 15 metres.
Hocking’s think tank had a clear objective. To counter defensive coaches playing “not to lose”, the competition committee wanted an aggressive style of play with free-flowing football, and ease and speed of ball movement. It wanted more one-on-one contests.
In 2021, Hocking doubled down on this approach with the “stand” rule. The player on the mark could not move laterally, becoming a statue as soon as an umpire called “stand”. Any move before “play on” leads to a 50-metre penalty.
The aim was to speed up ball movement and generate easier scoring chances.
However, these rule changes have failed. Completely.
Not only has there been no significant lift in scoring from centre bounces or kick-ins, but umpiring is more complex and players are more challenged in what should be a simple game.
Most concerning is the reaction of the coaches. If it’s easier for the opposition to score, coaches think more defensively.
The six-six-six rule limits any coach’s ability to make strategic moves during games. It has stymied the advancement of coaching techniques to make the game better.
The AFL will say the rule changes are an overwhelming success. The statistics tell a different story.
In five seasons from 2014-18, teams scored an average of 10.2 points each game from centre bounces. Since 2019 (excluding the COVID-19-affected 2020 season), scoring from centre bounces has increased by only 0.5 points, reaching 10.7 points each game.
Before the rule change, teams scored from a centre bounce about 23 per cent. Today, it is 24 per cent.
The six-six-six rule has killed innovation and unique set-ups at centre bounces.
Tactics such as varying the wingmen’s starting positioning, the use of high forwards on the defensive side of the centre square line, deploying spare defenders to protect a lead or having attacking forwards surge through the centre square – as the late Phil Walsh, a brilliant coach at Adelaide, regularly did with Eddie Betts – are now lost to the game.
Even the ploy of a red-hot forward clearing out the forward 50 to create space for potential mismatches is gone.
All this sacrificed for just an average 0.5-point increase in scoring.
Meanwhile, the umpires are repeatedly stopping play to warn teams for breaching starting position protocols. It is a mess.
St Kilda coach Ross Lyon expressed his frustration after losing to Hawthorn at the weekend, citing restrictions on the use of the runner. He said it hindered his ability to make crucial game-day moves.
Lyon should instead take issue with those who changed the rule book to stifle the strategic creativity and effectiveness of the league’s best game-day coaches.
The new kick-in rule is a resounding failure. From 2014-18, teams scored an average of 3.9 points from kick-ins each game. Since 2019, this figure has fallen to 3.3 points. Furthermore, the percentage of kick-ins resulting in an inside-50 entry improved by just 1 percentage point from 20 to 21 per cent.
The kick-in to inside-50 conversion rate is up from 19 to 22 per cent from the AFL’s decision to push the man on the mark back an additional five metres in 2021. Despite this change, scoring is now marginally below pre-rule change levels.
All this rule has changed is the eagerness of players stepping out of the goal square during kick-ins, to secure cheap, junk possessions and distort the game’s statistical records.
The stand rule continues to be an embarrassment for the game, failing to generate any increase in scoring. The cry of “stand” from the umpires is annoying in the broadcast microphones.
The AFL’s implementation of the six-six-six rule and other recent changes have failed to deliver on the promises of enhanced scoring and improving the game’s look. Instead, we have confusion, less creativity from coaches and no meaningful benefit.
The AFL should revisit these rule changes. It should encourage coaching innovation and creativity and making the job of the umpire easier.
Change is not always good.
The stats that show why the AFL should undo Hocking’s rule changes
Kane Cornes
AFL columnistMay 16, 2024 — 12.02pm
Save
Share
Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size
71
View all comments
Listen to this article
5 min
In 2019, the AFL’s newly formed competition committee, led by then league football boss Steve Hocking, introduced nine rule and interpretation changes.
Some of the biggest figures in football tried to turn back the clock by putting players in three zones at centre bounces to achieve a significant change in the look of the game.
Carlton captain Patrick Cripps had a word with the umpire earlier this season.CREDIT:AFL PHOTOS
The six-six-six model, as it is now known, forced players into dedicated starting positions, if only for a few seconds after the centre bounce.
Also, players were no longer required to kick to themselves to play on from the goal square during kick-ins. The man on the mark had to stay 10 metres back from the goal square; now it’s 15 metres.
Hocking’s think tank had a clear objective. To counter defensive coaches playing “not to lose”, the competition committee wanted an aggressive style of play with free-flowing football, and ease and speed of ball movement. It wanted more one-on-one contests.
In 2021, Hocking doubled down on this approach with the “stand” rule. The player on the mark could not move laterally, becoming a statue as soon as an umpire called “stand”. Any move before “play on” leads to a 50-metre penalty.
The aim was to speed up ball movement and generate easier scoring chances.
However, these rule changes have failed. Completely.
Not only has there been no significant lift in scoring from centre bounces or kick-ins, but umpiring is more complex and players are more challenged in what should be a simple game.
Most concerning is the reaction of the coaches. If it’s easier for the opposition to score, coaches think more defensively.
The six-six-six rule limits any coach’s ability to make strategic moves during games. It has stymied the advancement of coaching techniques to make the game better.
The AFL will say the rule changes are an overwhelming success. The statistics tell a different story.
In five seasons from 2014-18, teams scored an average of 10.2 points each game from centre bounces. Since 2019 (excluding the COVID-19-affected 2020 season), scoring from centre bounces has increased by only 0.5 points, reaching 10.7 points each game.
Before the rule change, teams scored from a centre bounce about 23 per cent. Today, it is 24 per cent.
The six-six-six rule has killed innovation and unique set-ups at centre bounces.
Tactics such as varying the wingmen’s starting positioning, the use of high forwards on the defensive side of the centre square line, deploying spare defenders to protect a lead or having attacking forwards surge through the centre square – as the late Phil Walsh, a brilliant coach at Adelaide, regularly did with Eddie Betts – are now lost to the game.
Even the ploy of a red-hot forward clearing out the forward 50 to create space for potential mismatches is gone.
All this sacrificed for just an average 0.5-point increase in scoring.
Meanwhile, the umpires are repeatedly stopping play to warn teams for breaching starting position protocols. It is a mess.
St Kilda coach Ross Lyon expressed his frustration after losing to Hawthorn at the weekend, citing restrictions on the use of the runner. He said it hindered his ability to make crucial game-day moves.
Lyon should instead take issue with those who changed the rule book to stifle the strategic creativity and effectiveness of the league’s best game-day coaches.
The new kick-in rule is a resounding failure. From 2014-18, teams scored an average of 3.9 points from kick-ins each game. Since 2019, this figure has fallen to 3.3 points. Furthermore, the percentage of kick-ins resulting in an inside-50 entry improved by just 1 percentage point from 20 to 21 per cent.
The kick-in to inside-50 conversion rate is up from 19 to 22 per cent from the AFL’s decision to push the man on the mark back an additional five metres in 2021. Despite this change, scoring is now marginally below pre-rule change levels.
All this rule has changed is the eagerness of players stepping out of the goal square during kick-ins, to secure cheap, junk possessions and distort the game’s statistical records.
The stand rule continues to be an embarrassment for the game, failing to generate any increase in scoring. The cry of “stand” from the umpires is annoying in the broadcast microphones.
And how farcical was it to have Brisbane Lions forward Charlie Cameron told to stand on the mark when he was in agony with an ankle injury earlier this season?The AFL’s implementation of the six-six-six rule and other recent changes have failed to deliver on the promises of enhanced scoring and improving the game’s look. Instead, we have confusion, less creativity from coaches and no meaningful benefit.
The AFL should revisit these rule changes. It should encourage coaching innovation and creativity and making the job of the umpire easier.
Change is not always good.
even a broken clock they sayOMG!
The stats that show why the AFL should undo Hocking’s rule changes
Kane Cornes
AFL columnist
May 16, 2024 — 12.02pm
Save
Share
Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size
71
View all comments
Listen to this article
5 min
In 2019, the AFL’s newly formed competition committee, led by then league football boss Steve Hocking, introduced nine rule and interpretation changes.
Some of the biggest figures in football tried to turn back the clock by putting players in three zones at centre bounces to achieve a significant change in the look of the game.
Carlton captain Patrick Cripps had a word with the umpire earlier this season.CREDIT:AFL PHOTOS
The six-six-six model, as it is now known, forced players into dedicated starting positions, if only for a few seconds after the centre bounce.
Also, players were no longer required to kick to themselves to play on from the goal square during kick-ins. The man on the mark had to stay 10 metres back from the goal square; now it’s 15 metres.
Hocking’s think tank had a clear objective. To counter defensive coaches playing “not to lose”, the competition committee wanted an aggressive style of play with free-flowing football, and ease and speed of ball movement. It wanted more one-on-one contests.
In 2021, Hocking doubled down on this approach with the “stand” rule. The player on the mark could not move laterally, becoming a statue as soon as an umpire called “stand”. Any move before “play on” leads to a 50-metre penalty.
The aim was to speed up ball movement and generate easier scoring chances.
However, these rule changes have failed. Completely.
Not only has there been no significant lift in scoring from centre bounces or kick-ins, but umpiring is more complex and players are more challenged in what should be a simple game.
Most concerning is the reaction of the coaches. If it’s easier for the opposition to score, coaches think more defensively.
The six-six-six rule limits any coach’s ability to make strategic moves during games. It has stymied the advancement of coaching techniques to make the game better.
The AFL will say the rule changes are an overwhelming success. The statistics tell a different story.
In five seasons from 2014-18, teams scored an average of 10.2 points each game from centre bounces. Since 2019 (excluding the COVID-19-affected 2020 season), scoring from centre bounces has increased by only 0.5 points, reaching 10.7 points each game.
Before the rule change, teams scored from a centre bounce about 23 per cent. Today, it is 24 per cent.
The six-six-six rule has killed innovation and unique set-ups at centre bounces.
Tactics such as varying the wingmen’s starting positioning, the use of high forwards on the defensive side of the centre square line, deploying spare defenders to protect a lead or having attacking forwards surge through the centre square – as the late Phil Walsh, a brilliant coach at Adelaide, regularly did with Eddie Betts – are now lost to the game.
Even the ploy of a red-hot forward clearing out the forward 50 to create space for potential mismatches is gone.
All this sacrificed for just an average 0.5-point increase in scoring.
Meanwhile, the umpires are repeatedly stopping play to warn teams for breaching starting position protocols. It is a mess.
St Kilda coach Ross Lyon expressed his frustration after losing to Hawthorn at the weekend, citing restrictions on the use of the runner. He said it hindered his ability to make crucial game-day moves.
Lyon should instead take issue with those who changed the rule book to stifle the strategic creativity and effectiveness of the league’s best game-day coaches.
The new kick-in rule is a resounding failure. From 2014-18, teams scored an average of 3.9 points from kick-ins each game. Since 2019, this figure has fallen to 3.3 points. Furthermore, the percentage of kick-ins resulting in an inside-50 entry improved by just 1 percentage point from 20 to 21 per cent.
The kick-in to inside-50 conversion rate is up from 19 to 22 per cent from the AFL’s decision to push the man on the mark back an additional five metres in 2021. Despite this change, scoring is now marginally below pre-rule change levels.
All this rule has changed is the eagerness of players stepping out of the goal square during kick-ins, to secure cheap, junk possessions and distort the game’s statistical records.
The stand rule continues to be an embarrassment for the game, failing to generate any increase in scoring. The cry of “stand” from the umpires is annoying in the broadcast microphones.
And how farcical was it to have Brisbane Lions forward Charlie Cameron told to stand on the mark when he was in agony with an ankle injury earlier this season?
The AFL’s implementation of the six-six-six rule and other recent changes have failed to deliver on the promises of enhanced scoring and improving the game’s look. Instead, we have confusion, less creativity from coaches and no meaningful benefit.
The AFL should revisit these rule changes. It should encourage coaching innovation and creativity and making the job of the umpire easier.
Change is not always good.
True but they kicked 7.3 in the last quarter when the game was done and the suns were cruising. How much value do put on junk time goals when the pressure is out of the game.
