AFL - Round 10 discussion - (and lives scores)

[Bully]

Port reality check 101.

How did this same side with the first 5.

Lucky to beat a div 7 side ATM.

as I stated or posted, the first 5 games should have been won as they were average to poor teams, with GWS,GC and melb in those, plus a showdown which is really anyones game in any year, but I was shouted down and told port would play in the finals and be basically a top 2 side.........hmmmm

our first 5 should of been won? a showdown which is anyones game? and no mention of at the time a flag favourite west coast? So in other words what your saying is 3 of our first 5 where a definite win and 1 was a 50/50 and the other one was lucky.

At the end of the day all we can do is improve on last year. I don't expect them to make finals this year, we still have a lot of learning and growing to do. I'd also like to see the quote where you where shouted down that port would play finals and finish top 2.

Yeah I will go through pages of posts to quote numerous posts , I was shouted down and told to bugger off nearly and go follow real football .I don't have time like yourself to scroll through previous pages. But I guess I worded it wrong as I sad basically not properly.wow what would be your reply if they didn't win those games I mentioned

Yes the showdown is anyone's game in any season as one team had not dominated it year in year out

[Mr66]

Can the Shyte Kilda football club do everybody a favour and just die.
And hurry up!

[Ruben Carter]

Port reality check 101.

How did this same side with the first 5.

Lucky to beat a div 7 side ATM.

as I stated or posted, the first 5 games should have been won as they were average to poor teams, with GWS,GC and melb in those, plus a showdown which is really anyones game in any year, but I was shouted down and told port would play in the finals and be basically a top 2 side.........hmmmm

our first 5 should of been won? a showdown which is anyones game? and no mention of at the time a flag favourite west coast? So in other words what your saying is 3 of our first 5 where a definite win and 1 was a 50/50 and the other one was lucky.

At the end of the day all we can do is improve on last year. I don't expect them to make finals this year, we still have a lot of learning and growing to do. I'd also like to see the quote where you where shouted down that port would play finals and finish top 2.

Yeah I will go through pages of posts to quote numerous posts , I was shouted down and told to bugger off nearly and go follow real football .I don't have time like yourself to scroll through previous pages. But I guess I worded it wrong as I sad basically not properly.wow what would be your reply if they didn't win those games I mentioned

Yes the showdown is anyone's game in any season as one team had not dominated it year in year out

How convenient... The fact is, no posters mentioned Port being top 2 or even top 4, I can't recall anyone even suggesting top 8 was a certainty.

[Bully]

I'm sure when port actually win another game your views will change.

But good for you champ

[RustyCage]

I'm sure when port actually win another game your views will change.

But good for you champ

his view will change to what you said happened but never actually did?

[Bully]

as I said, was basically told they would, not the words of a top 2 team, yet was told along the lines of "we will play finals and be a top 4, maybe 2 team"

[Johno6]

What's everyone's opinion on the danger field goal that was sent for a review and given a point.

When I saw it live I thought it hit post and was surprised it was given a goal
And on review to me confirmed it hit post

Wanna know what other people thought after reading about it in paper.

[the joker]

Only thing I though about it was that when it's inconclusive it goes back to original decision, it was called a goal. And was inconclusive so why was it a point

[howzat]

Only thing I though about it was that when it's inconclusive it goes back to original decision, it was called a goal. And was inconclusive so why was it a point

Because it hit the post how danger hit it from there anyway i dont know...

[kickinit]

Only thing I though about it was that when it's inconclusive it goes back to original decision, it was called a goal. And was inconclusive so why was it a point

it went to a point as the goal umpire wasn't 100% sure it was a goal, but the boundary umpire said he was 100% sure it hit the post, so because one has said he was 100% sure it went with that. What get's me was the goal umpire who wasn't 100% sure called it a goal, if he wasn't sure he should of asked for the review not call it a goal.

[helicopterking]

What's everyone's opinion on the danger field goal that was sent for a review and given a point.

When I saw it live I thought it hit post and was surprised it was given a goal
And on review to me confirmed it hit post

Wanna know what other people thought after reading about it in paper.

In Plain view it hit the post, correct decision made. The review thing isn't working, hopefully it keeps the AFL busy enough trying to change that, instead if making up more crazy rules to accommodate 1 freak incident.

[JK]

Only thing I though about it was that when it's inconclusive it goes back to original decision, it was called a goal. And was inconclusive so why was it a point

it went to a point as the goal umpire wasn't 100% sure it was a goal, but the boundary umpire said he was 100% sure it hit the post, so because one has said he was 100% sure it went with that. What get's me was the goal umpire who wasn't 100% sure called it a goal, if he wasn't sure he should of asked for the review not call it a goal.

I think if the goal ump calls for a review he still has to have an idea of what happened (in case the footage is inconclusive). Good to see the right decision made, but geez it felt like forever before they got the situation sorted.
Definitely took a bit out of the game from a viewing perspective.

[Johno6]

there was another decision over the weekend where the ump the goal ump and boundry ump discussed it for about 5 minutes before going to the review before it was decided it was out on the full.

if theres doubt go straight to the review don't discuss it over dinner first.

[FlyingHigh]

Ron Barrassi has been calling for two goal umpires for years, maybe even the last 20.
Didn't used to think much of the idea, but now I think it is well worth a trial, and better than the video review.

Don't agree with Sanderson or Leigh Matthews to make it immaterial if does or doesn't hit the post.

[kickinit]

Only thing I though about it was that when it's inconclusive it goes back to original decision, it was called a goal. And was inconclusive so why was it a point

it went to a point as the goal umpire wasn't 100% sure it was a goal, but the boundary umpire said he was 100% sure it hit the post, so because one has said he was 100% sure it went with that. What get's me was the goal umpire who wasn't 100% sure called it a goal, if he wasn't sure he should of asked for the review not call it a goal.

I think if the goal ump calls for a review he still has to have an idea of what happened (in case the footage is inconclusive). Good to see the right decision made, but geez it felt like forever before they got the situation sorted.
Definitely took a bit out of the game from a viewing perspective.

the goal umpire didn't call for the review it was the boundary umpire that stepped in and said he had the decision wrong. The goal umpire was just going to call for a goal and not a review.

[Rik E Boy]

Piss off the review system. Still got the mistakes but now we've got the delay to boot. Watching Brisbane v Collingwood and the Pies are up by plenty and an already boring game is being held up while the geniear5es decide whether this one was a point or a throw in.

regards,

REB

[JK]

it went to a point as the goal umpire wasn't 100% sure it was a goal, but the boundary umpire said he was 100% sure it hit the post, so because one has said he was 100% sure it went with that. What get's me was the goal umpire who wasn't 100% sure called it a goal, if he wasn't sure he should of asked for the review not call it a goal.

I think if the goal ump calls for a review he still has to have an idea of what happened (in case the footage is inconclusive). Good to see the right decision made, but geez it felt like forever before they got the situation sorted.
Definitely took a bit out of the game from a viewing perspective.

the goal umpire didn't call for the review it was the boundary umpire that stepped in and said he had the decision wrong. The goal umpire was just going to call for a goal and not a review.

Mate, I was responding to your comment lol. The Hamster needs resuscitating I think.

[Spargo]

Anyone else give the Tiges a good chance tonight?

[LMA]

If the Monday night game is all about TV ratings for the AFL as some posters on here suggest then how come it's not on FTA tonight ?

[LMA]

as I said, was basically told they would, not the words of a top 2 team, yet was told along the lines of "we will play finals and be a top 4, maybe 2 team"

Do you comment on any other side apart from Port ? Port supporters do not even warrant this muppet a response in future, nothing but a troll in need of a new hobby.