If you’re talking about the Adelaide vs Carlton game at Waverly, that’s what my brother and I were discussing! … we were at that game! … big moment for SA! … I feel so sad…

This is sort of my point MF, has the asthetic of the game changed? And if so, for the better? Was the simpler game plan vs the multi-faceted game of today better or worse?

I’m kinda at the point where I don’t care about players running a half marathon or racking up 40+ possessions if it’s at the cost of fluid passing and ball movement.

slightly off topic, I was talking to my brother the other day (an Essendon fan) and I can’t remember how we got onto it, but we were discussing the 93 Grand Final between the Dons and the Blues… if you get a chance, have a look at the sides that lined up, there were some outstanding names that took to the field! I found the game on youtube and gave it a watch, and in light of this future of footy question, I was wondering has the game changed a lot in the 25 years since then?

I think that in the next 5-10 years there will be little change to how the comp is run and the game will look exactly the same as it is now, aside from the tinkering they do. I feel that with the recent addition of the 2 expansion clubs, the AFL will need to rationalise. I think the AFL needs to make it so these areas they have expanded into, they create a want to have footy played there. At the moment it feels like their approach is: there’s a growing population in area X and we don’t want NRL/soccer to get a foothold.

Beyond that, it’s hard to say, I’m certain there wont be as many Vic clubs. I doubt much international expansion as it’s seen as a novelty overseas more than anything else.

Yeah… but… I don’t think he can challenge for PM until he changes his surname to Pain… and perhaps change his middle name to a skull & crossbones emoji.

What’s the quality of the commentary like this year? Given the fallout over the course of the year I was wondering if they’d tone down the laddish behaviour.

Thanks MF, that makes a lot of sense. I didn’t get that was how the club academies worked and that mechanism for them to match an offer. So if a rival club offers Mosquito a deal and the Hawks can’t/wont match it, he’ll go there. It’s a great way for clubs to develop talent through their academies while still allowing other clubs access. I guess this is where Hawthorn’s strategy of using up picks on trading players might hurt them, they may develop some good kids but keep them selves out of utilising them? But I’m sure they know what they’re doing.

Thanks for taking the time to respond, and for clarifying that for me!

I can feel it in my waters… Roughy will call his retirement midway through the season, the side will lift and the Hawks will squeak through to win the GF for him… my waters are a little polluted though!

Just on Roughy and your ELO model, do you account for captaincy? And if so, does the role affect players? I know in ’17 the captaincy was thought to have been been too much for him to manage and his game was a bit off, although he was coming back from something pretty major. Just be interested to know.

you get the feeling this will be the same pattern that happens year after year for the next couple of seasons – let a promising player or two go to manage their salary cap as great emerging talent come through. You feel like in ten years there’ll be a lot of conversations along the lines of ‘how did the Giants let X go?!?!’

On a side matter, I wonder if anyone can help me understand something? I see in the Age, Hawthorn have nominated a promising kid, Irving Mosquito, ahead of the draft. Hawks first pick isn’t until the fifties, so what’s to stop another club coming along before then? And if it’s a matter of simply putting dibs on someone, what stops the Hawks from, say, instead nominating a player that is a top 3 pick? Apologies if this is a dumb/simple question, I’m so backwards when it comes to the draft.

It is amazing how it’s changed and how sophisticated it’s become. I remember in the early days of the Footy Show where Eddie used to go on about hard-ball-gets, and Sam having no idea what was going on… he still doesn’t to be fair.

I think this might be an interesting read. A while ago I read a book/article about sports betting, but particularly concerned with the premier league and European club soccer and betting exchanges. What I found interesting, especially as someone who doesn’t bet, is how you can piece this together and then look for value bets. While I didn’t really put it into practice, it did change the way I watch the game and also to try and see where games were won and lost.

I know this is about footy books, but a sports book I can recommend is Norman Mailer’s The Fight, about the rumble in the jungle… it’s such a beautify written book, perfect for summer.

this is a good point, the stats in isolation maybe dont tell you a whole lot, but it’s when you put them in relation to another stat to give you a ratio is when it can tell you something. It might be that shared experience to winning percentage in games where you are behind by x points could tell you something?

For my two-cents… I loathe the title of this book, what a terribly forced portmanteau

I understand it’s the responsibility of the players’ union to act in the interest of their members, but I thought their calls to have the suspension overturned a bit much. Probably nothing more than a bit of grandstanding and get their name in the press. Which seems to be one of the points of this article; there needs to be a proper solution on what happens between now and when their suspension is up.

I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say that they should never play for their country again. This tough love approach rarely works – there’s still match fixing going on despite the harsh penalties handed out. I think your comments highlight what the author is saying about the purgatory following the punishment. Don’t forget; to err is human, to forgive divine.

I do however agree with you about bringing them back in ahead of the ban period, as was alluded to following the report, and I’m not too sure they would want to either, well maybe not Warner?

What many will say is that Arsenal SHOULD be putting away these sides, but what has impressed me about the recent wins, compared to the last couple of seasons under Wenger, the Gunners would have likely drawn or lost some of those that they should have won. This is a team that has a bit more fight in them now and could be developing that ruthless edge. I think this might come down to the improved fitness of the squad, apparently Emery is really big on this and is making sure they are match fit.

I think the Arsenal board should have been more ready to move on when Leicester won the league. That was a perfect storm situation; United and Chelsea were in disarray with their management changes and it was Pelegrini’s last season with City, and this was Arsenal’s chance to take it yet they couldn’t clinch the deal.

What I will say is that Arsene did leave the club in a good position, list-wise. Offloading certain ‘dead wood’ players like Walcot and Oxlade-Chamberline (who I was actually a fan of) for a combined £60m, and the Sanchez swap with Mhikatarian looks to have benefited Arsenal more than United so far. Plus, you don’t have to think back that far to when they didn’t sell-off players like Arshavin who weren’t even in the match day squad at £90k/week. Now, not all this is down to Arsene, but he had enough of a say in these matters. The Ramsey situation and him lifting his game following threats of not extending his contract, where they did the exact same with Wiltshire so he knows not to call their bluff.

So I agree, Arsene’s exit has been validated and I can even go as far as to say that the replacement extends that. They are probably a good centre back/DMF off of having a side that can challenge, but they can stay in the top 4 like this.

Slightly off topic, and while I have been impressed with Emery, I have been VERY impressed with Sari – the turn around at Chelsea without significant player additions is quite a thing. But he’s just going about it very quietly

I’m not much of a fan of the Brownlow… none of us are happy with the state of umpiring so why leave the MVP award to them? On top of that, the rules and penalising has become so complicated and random, who is to say what is ‘fair’? 3-points is also not enough for the 50-odd people playing each game, there should be 10 point scoring positions. Plus I hate that they sold naming rights to the red carpet… is everything for sale at the AFL?

For me, the club award is what matters; the coaches have a plan for their players, and they can tell who is meeting/exceeding those expectations.

I thought Hawthorn did well to stay with the Tiges for the bulk of the game, it was really at the back end of the 3rd quarter that took the game away from us and we just couldn’t overcome that margin… that’s a positive for me. However when you consider Richmond had 30 scoring shots to 19, and Hawthorn failed to kick 10 goals, we really weren’t in that game. Again, Richmond showed how good they are just getting the ball forward, as they have done all year.

Just on this, I think what Tom Elliott was saying is that the AFL should be about organising a footy competition and not try and force their brand of social awareness on people. And personally, that’s a sentiment that I agree with too, because all too often with the AFL they seem duplicitous in their actions with an ulterior motive to whatever boosts their revenues or increases viewers, or whatever doesn’t affect the ‘brand’.

I hope it doesn’t come across that I’m against multiculturalism and a cosmopolitan Australia, as the son of an immigrant, I am certainly all for greater diversity, but speeches of the likes made by Anning, WITH PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY, have no place in a modern Australia. What annoyed me most about his speech is afterwards when he said he had no idea it was used in that sense which means one of two things; he knew it and is lying, or he’s thick as a post, as there is no way that a person of his age cannot have come across this term… in either scenario, he is not fit to represent anyone in Australia.

And Josh, just on your analogy with Nicky Winmar, I think the stark difference here is that what Nicky did was purely from the heart and not something staged by the AFL – and it is for that very fact that it is still an image that sticks with people.

I’m with you on this, like I said in a previous comment, he couldn’t really straighten up at all, and 99/100 he’d kick that… I guess it’s magnified because it was the last scoring opportunity of the game and if he slots it they win? Had it have been in the middle of the 3rd quarter say, it’d get very little attention.

but then why aren’t there more Port players in there? Port would have been the side expected to win, weren’t they?

How is it that the Saints have only one player in that side, and the Blues only have 2 despite being against the GWS with not enough players on the ground? Swans and the Hawks win, but have 3 in the side?

It’s unfortunate that the Gaff/Brayshaw incident has commanded all the commentary following a brilliant round of footy (well Friday and Saturday at least).

Do St Kilda’s loss need to be assessed more? They were 5 goals up and then conceded 10-11 goals to a side that has been poor all season in the 3rd and 4th quarters. In fact, to be blown away by this year’s Bulldogs is a pretty sad indictment. Having said that, it seems that the Dogs quite possibly had their game of the season?

Just on the Richmond vs Geelong game, that was a cracker and I was glad I got to watch it. I thought Scott’s comments at the end about them being beatable were a fair response but he seems to have copped some heat for it, I don’t know why. Just on the Ablett goal at the end, I think 99/100 he kicks that, it was just a bad kick is all. The Tom Hawking handpass to Ablett was beautiful too… I could watch that kind of footy all day.

this is ultimately what got me, his reaction was so over the top, even if he was aiming to hit him in the chest. Whether he had been tagged all game or there was that bit of niggle just prior to the incident, this is the way a guy with nigh in 200-games under his belt reacts to an 18-year old first year player, while they are 50 points in front

it was clearly for illustrative purposes and I think you can see that too… but overall you’re right, Grace did a great job for his client there, he asked for 3 and he got 8

very well said, when the Brayshaw incident happened WCE were about 50-odd points ahead… I know they’ve had their injury concerns but Lyon isn’t proving to be the guy to take them forward

No, what I mean is, how is Grace doing his client a favour… the people of the tribunal that make the decision could look at this and say that Grace hasn’t taken this seriously enough?

You have not much of an idea on how negotiations happen do you… let’s say i have something to sell and I’ve listed at a going market price… you come along and say you’re interested but at a price more than 50% below… I’m never going to entertain that because we’d end up meeting half way which represents only 75% of what the market is paying… so I’d tell you to stop wasting my time and get on your bike.

Ha! Good point… but I did see someone comment elsewhere that the Carlton fans would be thankful that this is getting the media attention