What unpopular AFL opinions do you have? (Part 1 - cont in Part 2)

[Joao]

Unpopular opinion: the whinging about AFLW is getting really tiresome.

You don't have to watch it, I don't watch it either but i aint gonna go cry about it.

I agree in general but it is the fact that the coverage pervades the media that used to be 100% mens. If I turn on the radio or TV to listen/watch to something AFL I don't want to here about the AFLW but they let it seep into the mens coverage so people actually watch it. If they just kept it all separate I wouldn't care in the slightest.

I have no interest in bagging umpires or blaming losses on them.

Umpiring is never the reason a team loses. Umpires are humans and make mistakes just like everyone else they get carried away by the occasion. Players make more mistakes than the umpires the win or lose u the game

I go a step further and say people that blame umpires are sooks and generally don't understand the game as well as others or are just too one eyed to view a game impartially, rendering their opinion meaningless.

Agree.

If you need convincing ask yourself how it is that after EVERY game ever (well 99.9%) that BOTH sets of fans apparently got reamed?

You'd have to be a moron or severely emotionally invested to ignore the facts that your team was simply not good enough the VERY vast majority of the time.

Matt suckling is actually an ordinary kick of the football

He misses way more targets than an elite kicker should.

TBF I am bitter since I naturally had the same kicking action (right footed) and got told not to do it like that by a gumby coach. I can kick further (like 15m more), flatter and more accurately that way. Good thing I had almost no other discernible talent so it was not really wasted.

 

[Luv_our_club]

If a player intentionally puts his fingers in your mouth then you should be entitled to bite them with appropriate/moderate force.

 

[I Lost My Keays]

And he looks like a thumb.

I reckon Ellen DeGeneras's daughter

 

[yyou]

Even the worst team of AFL players would destroy a local footy team. Even a team of 18 of them would destroy a local side of 22.

The fullback could play midfield and get 40 touches.

True, but there are individual players with more talent, who even have shown more at times than AFL players & potential draftees.

 

[Scotland]

I agree in general but it is the fact that the coverage pervades the media that used to be 100% mens. If I turn on the radio or TV to listen/watch to something AFL I don't want to here about the AFLW but they let it seep into the mens coverage so people actually watch it. If they just kept it all separate I wouldn't care in the slightest.

This is an excellent way of putting it.

 

[jatz14]

This is an excellent way of putting it.

It's the same complaint people that don't like footy make about AFL coverage, and gets the same response. Tough t***ies.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Scotland]

It's the same complaint people that don't like footy make about AFL coverage, and gets the same response. Tough t***ies.

Except that it isn't.

I don't give a s**t about rugby league, so I don't watch NRL games or NRL360 or anything else on Fox League.

If I tune into AFL360 and they start dedicating a section of the program to talking about NRL I'll be annoyed.

 

[jatz14]

Except that it isn't.

I don't give a s**t about rugby league, so I don't watch NRL games or NRL360 or anything else on Fox League.

If I tune into AFL360 and they start dedicating a section of the program to talking about NRL I'll be annoyed.

I assure you it is. Why is there so much ******* footy on the news? Why is it wall to wall footy on the weekend, why dont they put real programs on? Why cant I listen to the radio without having to hear about someones groin?

 

[Scotland]

Sport is on the news because it is popular. Footy makes up the bulk of the sport because it's popular.

How is that the same as 'I am specifically watching a TV show about the AFL and they insist on talking about the AFLW'?

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Sport is on the news because it is popular. Footy makes up the bulk of the sport because it's popular.

How is that the same as 'I am specifically watching a TV show about the AFL and they insist on talking about the AFLW'?

Except AFLW is connected to the AFL.

How do you feel when they mention the VFL or TAC cup?
How do you feel when they talk about off-field activies of players or clubs? And sometimes even about retired players?
What about talking about potential trades/free agents a good year or two before it happens?

I think the problem is that we don't have enough quality journalism or analaysis that focuses solely on AFL gameplay. There needs to be more spaces with a focus solely on that, in which case AFLW should not be discussed - but the same applies to all the "scandals" that dominate footy journalism currently.

 

[Scotland]

The VFL is the reserves comp for 10 AFL sides. The TAC Cup is where over half the AFL players are drafted from.

The AFLW has very little to do with the AFL and gets a lot more airtime than both.

 

[Aussie_boy]

Even the worst team of AFL players would destroy a local footy team. Even a team of 18 of them would destroy a local side of 22.

The fullback could play midfield and get 40 touches.

For sure but this comes down to development. Throw any reasonable under 18 footballer into an AFL environment and they're going to improve dramatically, those not drafted are left behind and rarely get the opportunity to catch up.

 

[gungho]

Was having this debate with my mate recently: Do you reckon a standard country footy men's league team would beat the AFLW premiership team?
I have a feeling they would quite comfortably.

 

[PhatBoy]

Was having this debate with my mate recently: Do you reckon a standard country footy men's league team would beat the AFLW premiership team?
I have a feeling they would quite comfortably.

They’d get hammered (the women I mean).

If it were, say, soccer, I think a W-League side would smash a strong country men’s soccer team, because soccer is something that has a long history of development and that filters down to all levels so the quality is inherently better.

 

[Scotland]

For sure but this comes down to development. Throw any reasonable under 18 footballer into an AFL environment and they're going to improve dramatically, those not drafted are left behind and rarely get the opportunity to catch up.

Being in the AFL system is about conditioning more than anything. Someone like Liam Ryan is clearly above state league level in talent but he doesn't have years of AFL pre-seasons under his belt like LeCras, Cripps etc.

Chris Masten on the other hand is a bit of a potato at AFL level but could go back to the WAFL and run around like Tom Mitchell racking up as many touches as he wanted. If he dropped back to A-grade or country footy he'd be unstoppable against part timers.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/st...-starring-in-local-footy-finals-ng-b88602063z

Brett Peake hasn't played in the AFL for 5 years, was an ordinary user of the ball when he did and kicked 8 in a game in the South West Footy League.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Was having this debate with my mate recently: Do you reckon a standard country footy men's league team would beat the AFLW premiership team?
I have a feeling they would quite comfortably.

Well yes, because of the differences in physical attributes between the two sexes - and this applies to pretty much all sports. It's not a particularly fair comparison.

A game with touch rules would be fairer, because I reckon the top girls would be fitter and have better skills than plenty of the guys who run around in the country leagues, but still hard to take out the size and power disadvantage.

 

[Scotland]

They’d get hammered (the women I mean).

If it were, say, soccer, I think a W-League side would smash a strong country men’s soccer team, because soccer is something that has a long history of development and that filters down to all levels so the quality is inherently better.

The Matildas lost 7-0 to the Newcastle Jets U/15s not long ago.

I think once you get past the age groups of boys and girls playing together the gap in quality quickly widens.

 

[schmuttt]

Don’t understand the constant bitching about AFLW. I don’t really care for it but no one is forcing you to watch it.

 

[PhatBoy]

The Matildas lost 7-0 to the Newcastle Jets U/15s not long ago.

I think once you get past the age groups of boys and girls playing together the gap in quality quickly widens.

Really? That surprises me.
But I would also expect an A-League junior side to beat a country soccer team too. I’ve covered a fair bit of state league soccer and in my experience it’s pretty s**t

 

[Taylor]

Was having this debate with my mate recently: Do you reckon a standard country footy men's league team would beat the AFLW premiership team?
I have a feeling they would quite comfortably.

I think a year 12 school football team could beat the AFLW flag side.

Considering the national soccer women's team was beaten 7-0 by an under 15s Newcastle squad of boys and that is a much less physical game.

 

[Xtreme]

Was having this debate with my mate recently: Do you reckon a standard country footy men's league team would beat the AFLW premiership team?
I have a feeling they would quite comfortably.

An Auskick side would thrash them!

 

[Scotland]

An Auskick side would thrash them!

LOL, girls play Auskick.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Probably been said a 1000 times on here so not unpopular but get rid of the prior opportunity rule. Can’t stand it, greatest blight on the history of pro sport in the universe

I don't think the rule is the problem, it's the interpretation that's wrong. When you duck, fend, shrug, break a tackle shortly after receiving the ball then prior needs to be removed immediately. Currently players are given too much time to dispose of the ball and too often do it illegally after having sufficient opportunity.

Flip side is a player attempts to gather the ball is plowed into the turf and the ball held to them with no prior. If the umpire spots the player second to the ball holding the ball in then they need to be penalised.

 

[Sir_Loin]

I don't think the rule is the problem, it's the interpretation that's wrong. When you duck, fend, shrug, break a tackle shortly after receiving the ball then prior needs to be removed immediately. Currently players are given too much time to dispose of the ball and too often do it illegally after having sufficient opportunity.

Flip side is a player attempts to gather the ball is plowed into the turf and the ball held to them with no prior. If the umpire spots the player second to the ball holding the ball in then they need to be penalised.

I like the idea that if you take possession of the pill the onus is on you to dispose of it legally. I’d rather see good tackling rewarded and seeing the more skilful players avoid tackling and nailing an effective kick or handball. Would keep the game moving too IMO especially with the advantage rule

 

[Scotland]

If you removed prior then no one would pick the ball up in congestion.

Naitanui tap down to Sheed, immediately tackled and free kick against.

Good tackles used to be pinning one arm so the player retained possession off the ball but couldn't handpass then dried to fashion a kick otherwise they'd just drop the ball. That should be holding the ball.