Roar Pro
Joined December 2016
2.3k
Views
2
Published
70
Comments
It loves to happen.
Published
Comments
Like any human pursuit worth blood, sweat and tears, sport has always been the whole world writ small. We find in it all the…
Most who love Aussie rules do not like the level of congestion in the current game. Some years back the AFL started tweaking interpretations…
Yep, don’t want the umps to over-compensate. I think their freneticism also led to tackling infringements against them. However, I thought, and this is not on reviewing all of their games so it’s an impression, that they got away with incorrect disposal and holding the ball more than I liked. Looking forward to Boyd going on from where he left off in the GF, and the Bont, of course.
These Dogs are top-four bound: No Hawthorn haze for the reigning premiers
Ryan, your description of the Dog’s manic-panic tactic is right on. It also meant a good deal of opposition mistakes and umpire bewilderment that led to the free imbalance. It was so fast that it was difficult to follow and consider at the same time. It will be interesting to see whether oppositions come up with any counters. If they do, the Dogs will have to readjust their game, and that will take some time. That might see them miss the four, and question them being in the eight.
These Dogs are top-four bound: No Hawthorn haze for the reigning premiers
Funny how this supposedly top heavy forward line is the best in the AFL! We should shrink Eddie down a bit so that he kicks more than 75 this season. The Gov should stop being so mobile, doesn’t he realise he’s top heavy, and likewise for Tom Lynch, because he shouldn’t have provided the most goal assists in the AFL.
The mids are the issue and they’re on the improve. Let’s see how weak they are this year. Lasy year they were round 23 out of the double chance with the mids they had.
Definitely, contenders with a number of others.
Are the Crows genuine contenders?
Good to see the Blues have turned the corner, if only for Macca’s sake. No tall forward targets in sight, unless Levi has been visited by the Footy Angel. So, hard to see enough scores to make an impact. 18th is a sad and probably too pessimistic prediction. Bottom four.
Cornwill's season previews: Carlton Blues
Advertising is proven to affect people. Children are people. Children are affected.
Betting odds are expressed in terms of dollars and cents. Dollars and cents are very attractive to children. Betting odds are attractive to children.
Harmful things should not be advertised to children. Betting is harmful to many people and will be too many children if they take it up.
The writer’s suggestion that odds be expressed as neutral mathematical relationships is a step in the right direction.
Somehow, don’t think the gambling industry would bother in that case.
AFL and gambling? Don't bet on it
Sammy, as a Crow fan myself, I know of all those midfield positives. And then some. However, we can’t bank on them. 2018 will tell the midfield tale, but, in a strong team, and “team first”, 2017 mids just need to improve enough, and Adelaide should be top 4.
2017 ladder predictions: Twelfth through tenth
Cat, I wonder about the Cats this year. A lot depends on Danger not falling off last year’s pace. I reckon he lifted them considerably above where they would otherwise have been. We’ll see.
Sammy, yeah, Kennedy was a bull in the final against the Crows, and they had no answer in their mids to him. Thompson was slow most of the second half of the season, and his days are numbered. B Crouch is injured again, and he needs a full season off the back of a full preseason to get where he and the Crows want him to get. The coaches need to get creative to help their mids, and they have signalled that might come from a diversity of players taking part in the midfield.
2017 ladder predictions: Twelfth through tenth
Crows 7? They were one godawful loss in the last round away from the double chance. They are on the improve. Their coach has a season under his belt. Danger’s long gone. The mids are the question mark but they’ll be better than last year. Top 4 at least. One thing that might stop it is there might be only 1 game between top and 8.
Dogs unlikely to go top. The others will have done their homework, and the umpires will, I hope, pay frees where they’re due. The ferocity of the Dogs, which was a huge part of their superiority, relied to a significant degree on the umps not blowing the whistle and slowing the game down.
2017 ladder predictions: Twelfth through tenth
With two teams in the town for media fodder you better talk them up, get people excited, and keep them with you. You can always spend the rest of the season spending the aint Port awful chips, what’s happened to them?
Port Adelaide, 2017: The final act of Kochie and Ken's Bogus Journey
Word has it that Menzel’s fitness will not be a factor in him missing an AFL career of note. Tom Lynch reckons his attitude is good too, but a team mate wouldn’t say otherwise in an interview. We will see when he gets a game in the preseason comp. if he does come good, the Crows can afford to go all out with Cameron in and around the mids. He’s very fast, creative and his attack on ball and player belies his size.
Kerridge didn’t get more game time at the Crows partly because one Patrick Dangerfield together with Sloane and Thompson took priority. Always liked him. Big tank, strong, and thoughtful.
Troy Menzel: Crows career at the cross roads
Yep, I knew what you were applying arms length to, and I was saying players and coaches are not arms length too. If footy coaches etc are trusted to run and select their teams ,why not do the same with the arms length umpire organisation you recommend? We fans and others will let them know how they’re performing. Such a body would/should consult widely.
Swans queried AFL grand final umpiring
Like the arms length idea, but what’s to stop players and coaches giving the best points to the umpires that tend to favour them. The other team might balance it up, but it’s hardly arms length in the way you suggest for the AFL.
Like you, I hate badly umpired games. They do not satisfy anyone except the one-eyed, and leave a bad taste. Too many of them and you lose faith in the game. Fairness is incredibly important in sport. Not enough is written or said about it.
Swans queried AFL grand final umpiring
And pay them more than $80K if they’re top drawer, ie, an AFL umpire. A badly umpired game is almost no game at all, so they’re worth it. And like with the players, without them there is no game.
Swans queried AFL grand final umpiring
You might be right. In this case it was my impression rather than an analysis. There were crunch moments when Boyd and the Bont did special things to change the momentum. But that does not make them the better team, and I was non-plussed by a number of decisions and non-decisions that went the Dogs way.
Swans queried AFL grand final umpiring
Yes, the better team won, but a number of frees went missing.
Swans queried AFL grand final umpiring
Umpiring has always been controversial, and it probably should be in a vital sport. However, professionals should umpire professionals, especially in such a fast complex game. Or, add an extra ump. The standard of umpiring is high given the circumstances, but it needs to be better for the good of the game.
Of course, the cry will be ‘no depth’, but that is in the current arrangement. Professionalize training, status and wages and the depth will take care of itself.
As to guys on huge sums in their workplaces: they would have to choose what to do. Is that unreasonable in life? How many players at the lower levels, including AFL players, choose the game before other things? Some also choose their careers or study over their sport.
The elephant in the room in this discussion is the AFL’s rule/interpretation policy.
Swans queried AFL grand final umpiring
With lower than 16 the current grounds would dwarf the teams, let alone the human individual. I remember as a kid trying to play with small numbers at the local oval. We had to play half the field like you do in basketball. So, smaller teams would have to lead to smaller grounds, smaller crowds can fit in, and you don’t get 100,000 at the G any more. (Come to think of it we still need to get back to that.)
Zones and 16-a-side: It's time the AFL congestion-busted its Laws of the Game Committee
Very impressed with Pickett last year. Can and will only get better. Really wants to play.
Carlton's best 22 for 2017
With 16 I’d still flood the backline. With lower numbers the grounds start to be too big, so the grounds would be smaller. That means smaller crowds can be accommodated. And so on. 16 would be the lowest limit I think, but it wouldn’t stop me flooding the backs. And I don’t want footy that is all ball movement and running. I want some grunt, and bodies on bodies.
Zones and 16-a-side: It's time the AFL congestion-busted its Laws of the Game Committee
I reckon it’s Maccacode. Macca is developing a list of comments to fit all occasions. He’ll distribute the list, and instead of writing each comment, he will give the number. We look it up and Macca’s your uncle! Unfortunately, the numbers leaked before the distribution. :))
Zones and 16-a-side: It's time the AFL congestion-busted its Laws of the Game Committee
Where are all Macca’s single digits coming from :))
Zones and 16-a-side: It's time the AFL congestion-busted its Laws of the Game Committee
Macca, don’t your stats show much higher scores 2001-2010? The top scores have come down too?
Zones and 16-a-side: It's time the AFL congestion-busted its Laws of the Game Committee
It also makes the game fairer, and we all hate it when a free is not given, or wrongly given. Worse if it leads to congestion. The ball up is an understandable safety switch for the ump, but it can also be a cop out.
Zones and 16-a-side: It's time the AFL congestion-busted its Laws of the Game Committee
I love the centre bounce too. Even so, the spectacle has decreased over the years as rucks dispensed with long runs into the leap, the collision of the big men. We no longer see the checkside ruckman who runs in from the same direction as his opponent.
The clincher for me, though, is the thought that some of umpirings best may not be contributing at the highest level because they can’t maintain the bounce. We are at a point where umpiring is part of the next development of the game – professionalism and better adjudication.
So, farewell, bounce. It was great while you lasted.
Bye-bye to the bounce? Who cares?