Remove this Banner Ad

Mega Thread Port Forum General AFL Thread Part 30

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

He is a prize w***er. I have seen some of the shit he sprouts on the main board. I think he might be unhinged to be honest.

He is so obsessed with Port, he's totally irrational. Think he posts on Twitter too. Same wacky stuff.
 
As of the start of round 17 on Thursday evening, players who are cited for careless umpire contact four or more times in a two-year period will likely be referred directly to the Tribunal.

Gold Coast's Matt Rowell (four), St Kilda's Jack Macrae (four) and Carlton's Adam Cerra (three) are among the current players who have been cited three or more times for careless umpire contact in the past two years.

This feels silly - the super inside midfielders are the ones with the most offenses, I wonder why that is...
 
Yesterday On the Couch they presented their Premiership Window graphics. I think they stole it from Champion Data. Something like 18 of the last 20 or 21 premiers sit in this top 6 offence and best 6 defence teams during each season.


This is where teams sat when the byes started in Rd 12

1751390529801.png


After the byes finished Rd 16

1751390570520.png


This is how it looks against the top 9 sides. This proves what I have written in here about the crows and hawks that they are flat track bullies against the bottom sides. Are decent defensively against the other top 8 sides but can't score against them.

We are shithouse against the top 9 as we have been beaten up against most of them. Brisbane this weekend, history probably repeats.

Rd 1 Coll 45 v 136
Rd 8 WB 41 v 131
Rd 9 Adel 84 v 89
Rd 10 Gee 39 v 115
Rd11 Freo 51 v 100

Rd 5 Haw 121 v 91
Rd 13 GWS 66 v 50
============
Totals 447 v 712 = 62.78%

We play Brisbane at the Gabba on the weekend, Hawthorn Rd 19 in Tassie, Rd 20 the crows their home showdown, Rd 21 Geelong at Kardinia Park, Rd 22 Freo at AO, Rd 24 Gold Coast at AO.




1751391525397.png
 
Last edited:
Yesterday On the Couch they presented their Premiership Window graphics. I think they stole it from Champion Data. Something like 18 of the last 20 or 21 premiers sit in this top 6 offence and best 6 defence teams during each season.


This is where teams sat when the byes started in Rd 12

View attachment 2357106


After the byes finished Rd 16

View attachment 2357107


This is how it looks against the top 9 sides. This proves what I have written in here about the crows and hawks that they are flat track bullies against the bottom sides. Are decent defensively against the other top 8 sides but can't score against them.

We are shithouse against the top 9 as we have been beaten up against most of them. Brisbane this weekend, history probably repeats.

Rd 1 Coll 45 v 136
Rd 8 WB 41 v 131
Rd 9 Adel 84 v 89
Rd 10 Gee 39 v 115
Rd11 Freo 51 v 100

Rd 5 Haw 121 v 91
Rd 13 GWS 66 v 50
============
Totals 447 v 712 = 62.78%

We play Brisbane at the Gabba on the weekend, Hawthorn Rd 19 in Tassie, Rd 20 the crows their home showdown, Rd 21 Geelong at Kardinia Park, Rd 22 Freo at AO, Rd 24 Gold Coast at AO.




View attachment 2357117
I think we can see now why Ken Hinkley is considered a supercoach by commentators

Awkward Mean Girls GIF
 
This just reinforces my belief this league is a joke. This is not in the top 100 for things that need to be looked at, and bringing in changes mid-season always reeks of amateurism.
This actually is an important thing for them to clean up. These fines are constantly happening because midfielders are trying to use the umpires as a screen to get space from their opponent. And that needs to stop.
 
This actually is an important thing for them to clean up. These fines are constantly happening because midfielders are trying to use the umpires as a screen to get space from their opponent. And that needs to stop.
Fair enough, but there are more important things to address including:

  • Insufficient intent (scrap it - make it last touch between the arcs)
  • Holding the ball (less grey please)
  • Ruck nominations (scrap them)
  • The 50m penalty for non-physical indiscretions (scrap it and make it 25m)
  • 'Touched' (scrap it)
  • Four on-field umpires (go back to three)
  • Ball hitting the goal post (if it goes through the goals it is a goal, if it comes back into play it is a behind)
  • Ball hitting the behind post (if it goes across the line on the inside of the behind post it is a behind, if it comes back into play or goes out of play on the outside of the behind post it is a boundary throw in)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Fair enough, but there are more important things to address including:
  • Insufficient intent (scrap it - make it last touch between the arcs)
Shit rule. With both the SANFL and the AFLW interpretations. Perfect example of what is wrong with them occured in our AFLW Elimination final. One of the Richmond players was running towards the boundary line to try and gather the ball. With her momentum heading straight towards the line, she attempted to keep the ball in play by handballing over her shoulder. Except the handball didn't stay in play, it went out and we got a free kick.

She would've been better off just gathering the ball and running over the boundary line for a throw in. Completely against the intention of the rule and punishes a player for trying to keep the ball in play.

  • Holding the ball (less grey please)
The only grey areas in the rule are: whether or not a player had prior opporuntity. And the interpretation of how long they have to attempt to dispose of the ball.
The rest of it is just people being ignorant of the actual rule, not grey areas.
  • Ruck nominations (scrap them)
Players wanted this. You can't block a ruckman from competing in the contest, so it lets players know who the rucks are. We've even had cases this year where Ollie Wines got a free a goaled because he was blocked from the ruck contest.

The only actual problem is waiting for the ruckmen to run in from a long way away. Not the nominations.

  • The 50m penalty for non-physical indiscretions (scrap it and make it 25m)
A player running through the protected area to block a potential pass is just as much of a problem for delaying the game as preventing them from getting up. And a 25m penalty really just isn't enough of a punishment to stop it. You're just telling teams that its ok for them to delay the restart in the opposition's just so they can set up their defensive zone.
  • 'Touched' (scrap it)
So a player taking a bomb from 60m out, not getting the distance but the spoil goes through the goals should get 6 points?
 
Fair enough, but there are more important things to address including:

  • Insufficient intent (scrap it - make it last touch between the arcs)
  • Holding the ball (less grey please)
  • Ruck nominations (scrap them)
  • The 50m penalty for non-physical indiscretions (scrap it and make it 25m)
  • 'Touched' (scrap it)
  • Four on-field umpires (go back to three)
  • Ball hitting the goal post (if it goes through the goals it is a goal, if it comes back into play it is a behind)
  • Ball hitting the behind post (if it goes across the line on the inside of the behind post it is a behind, if it comes back into play or goes out of play on the outside of the behind post it is a boundary throw in)
Point 1 - better to have last touch across the entire field.
2-yep agree
3- agree scrap the nomination. If 2 players from one club go up that’s their problem.
4- don’t mind it how it is but get the calls right
5-yep agree, 3 umpires
6-leave it as is. We have the biggest goals in the world, if they can’t score one as is too bad.
7- as above
 
Point 1 - better to have last touch across the entire field.
2-yep agree
3- agree scrap the nomination. If 2 players from one club go up that’s their problem.
4- don’t mind it how it is but get the calls right
5-yep agree, 3 umpires
6-leave it as is. We have the biggest goals in the world, if they can’t score one as is too bad.
7- as above
My reasoning for the goal decisions to be simplified is to remove the need for 99% of goal reviews (which they can get wrong - see Josh Jenkins and Ben Keays)
 
Shit rule. With both the SANFL and the AFLW interpretations. Perfect example of what is wrong with them occured in our AFLW Elimination final. One of the Richmond players was running towards the boundary line to try and gather the ball. With her momentum heading straight towards the line, she attempted to keep the ball in play by handballing over her shoulder. Except the handball didn't stay in play, it went out and we got a free kick.

She would've been better off just gathering the ball and running over the boundary line for a throw in. Completely against the intention of the rule and punishes a player for trying to keep the ball in play.


The only grey areas in the rule are: whether or not a player had prior opporuntity. And the interpretation of how long they have to attempt to dispose of the ball.
The rest of it is just people being ignorant of the actual rule, not grey areas.

Players wanted this. You can't block a ruckman from competing in the contest, so it lets players know who the rucks are. We've even had cases this year where Ollie Wines got a free a goaled because he was blocked from the ruck contest.

The only actual problem is waiting for the ruckmen to run in from a long way away. Not the nominations.


A player running through the protected area to block a potential pass is just as much of a problem for delaying the game as preventing them from getting up. And a 25m penalty really just isn't enough of a punishment to stop it. You're just telling teams that its ok for them to delay the restart in the opposition's just so they can set up their defensive zone.

So a player taking a bomb from 60m out, not getting the distance but the spoil goes through the goals should get 6 points?

Too much to reply to here. I don't agree with much of it, but do agree the grey in respect to HTB centres around prior opportunity - I would be inclined to trial the game with prior opportunity removed. If you have possession and get tackled and fail to dispose of the ball correctly it should be HTB.
 
Essendon must have heard of the Hamstring Annihilator Machine and thought We gotta get ourselves some of those

 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

They really need to cut out the stopping of games for players with corkies and sore shoulders.

It will be exploited soon. Guarantee it.

It's turning into soccer where they drop and lay on the ground given the slightest contact and the ref is forced to stop play

Everyone knows it's a tactic there so why not exploit it here

It's ugly I agree but if that's how the AFL want to roll
 
Interesting piece (I thought) in today's Guardian dealing with the Carlton Football Club. It's not hidden behind a paywall so free to read. Here's the first couple of paragraphs to give you a taste of what it's about:

'If you start listening to the fans,” Wayne Bennett once said, “it won’t be long before you’re sitting next to them.” Indeed, if you’re running a high-profile sporting organisation, it usually pays to block out the noise. If Brendon Gale had heeded the advice of Richmond Twitter following their three elimination final losses, the club would be in ashes. There’s no way Chris Scott would be coaching Geelong today if the club had acted on the criticism of him following the 2019 and 2021 preliminary finals.'

'But there’s a fine line between not listening to the fans and playing them for mugs. So much of the messaging coming out of Carlton right now makes a mockery of what the supporters can clearly see and what the club continues to mask with corporate claptrap.'


Reckon most of us can find something that resonates with our own views on our own club and the 'corporate claptrap' that gets dealt up to supporters. Or not.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top