SA Footy

Spargo wrote:This all started when we let them vote & drink in pubs...

Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such and such.
~ Homer Simpson

Jim05 wrote:

MW wrote:Why wouldn't they be in there anyway Jim? Strange comment.

Just seems the AFL love pushing the PC barrows. Every commentary team and football show has a token female now.
Mind you they aren’t alone, C9 has followed suit with its Ashes coverage. Still not as bad as Todd Woodbridge though I suppose [emoji3]

Oddly enough with the cricket it's the male commentator that give me the shits the most.

MW wrote:

Trader wrote:I obviously haven't seen enough Geelong games this year, but is there seriously a cats player rocking that haircut?

In the girls team

I thought it was Miers

MW wrote:

Trader wrote:I obviously haven't seen enough Geelong games this year, but is there seriously a cats player rocking that haircut?

In the girls team

The mens team is represented in the far background. If you look closely you'll see a duck

LMA wrote:

MW wrote:

Trader wrote:I obviously haven't seen enough Geelong games this year, but is there seriously a cats player rocking that haircut?

In the girls team

The mens team is represented in the far background. If you look closely you'll see a duck

Thought that was Joel Selwood

Booney wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

MW wrote:Why wouldn't they be in there anyway Jim? Strange comment.

Just seems the AFL love pushing the PC barrows. Every commentary team and football show has a token female now.
Mind you they aren’t alone, C9 has followed suit with its Ashes coverage. Still not as bad as Todd Woodbridge though I suppose [emoji3]

Yep, it's bullshit, they only represent 50% of the population and what could they know about footy/cricket?

Back to the kitchen I say!

Why don't they do the womens minis at the height of the AFLW season? During the mens we'll do male minis, simple, no need to get all PC on us. God the womens could do with some more positive publicity during their season, its certainly not the football providing it
On a side note I thought the Carlton one was Dennis Arnfield

daysofourlives wrote:

Booney wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

MW wrote:Why wouldn't they be in there anyway Jim? Strange comment.

Just seems the AFL love pushing the PC barrows. Every commentary team and football show has a token female now.
Mind you they aren’t alone, C9 has followed suit with its Ashes coverage. Still not as bad as Todd Woodbridge though I suppose [emoji3]

Yep, it's bullshit, they only represent 50% of the population and what could they know about footy/cricket?

Back to the kitchen I say!

Why don't they do the womens minis at the height of the AFLW season? During the mens we'll do male minis, simple, no need to get all PC on us. God the womens could do with some more positive publicity during their season, its certainly not the football providing it
On a side note I thought the Carlton one was Dennis Arnfield

How is it PC??? They play footy too... Who cares when the ad is shown.... Truly baffling how this is an issue to some people

So cocaine is considered a performance enhancing... Cousins career makes a whole lot more sense now



BREAKING NEWS

Brayden Crossley is facing a drug ban after returning a positive match day test for cocaine.

Cocaine detected on match day is considered performance enhancing and carries a maximum four-year ban.

The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority are conducting an investigation.

He is waiting for the return of a B sample after a urine test before the May 25 NEAFL game against the Swans detected traces of a cocaine metabolite — a banned substance under the World Anti-Doping Authority code.

It is understood he intends to vigorously defend himself and will deny knowingly ingesting a banned substance.

He has been absent from the club on a provisional ban since the 29th of June when he was informed of his positive test.

Gold Coast issued a statement in response to questions from The Courier-Mail that said: “We have been notified that Brayden Crossley has received notification of an adverse analytical finding from a recent test by under the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code,” the club said.

“The club supports the role of and will fully co-operate during this process.

“We are continuing to provide Brayden with wellbeing support and want to stress that it would be inappropriate to pre-empt the outcome of the matter at this time.

“Brayden has sought independent legal advice to assist him going forward.

“The club’s public commentary on this issue is governed by strict protocols, and as such under the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code we are unable to provide any further commentary whilst the process unfolds.’’

- Andrew Hamilton, The Courier-Mail

This is an opinion piece but I like that they've gone through every team and assessed 'keep', 'trade' , 'delist', 'retire' for each of the out of contract players for each of the teams. I can't disagree on Carlton's.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-tr ... befd5d2ebf

gadj1976 wrote:This is an opinion piece but I like that they've gone through every team and assessed 'keep', 'trade' , 'delist', 'retire' for each of the out of contract players for each of the teams. I can't disagree on Carlton's.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-tr ... befd5d2ebf

Not real ruthless, I'd be swinging the axe on a few more names on those lists.

Alarm bells should be ringing at AFL house, for North to kick a record low score in this day and age and on the same night for Essendon to kick one for 98% of the game says scoring is still an issue.
Is it time for a drastic change in the way the premiership table works. Get rid of percentage and only count points for could be a good start. Don't give the under the roof excuse there is no real difference in scoring there as evidenced by Essendon last night. I just see that as no different to who you play twice instead of once which is more lopsided than where you play.
Look whats happened to the scoring of North, Carlton and St Kilda when there was no pressure on the interim coach. We have to change the way the game is coached, that will bring about far more watchable footy than most rule changes ever will. Mind you I still think prior opportunity should be gotten rid of, its either kick, handball or holding the ball, lets make it easy for the dummies in green

Agree with the prior opprtunity. The stronger players will still get their disposal off and the smarter players will know when to take possession or when to knock it on. Bring in the last possesion out of bounds rule also. Right there eliminates 2 contentious interpretations.

daysofourlives wrote:Alarm bells should be ringing at AFL house, for North to kick a record low score in this day and age and on the same night for Essendon to kick one for 98% of the game says scoring is still an issue.
Is it time for a drastic change in the way the premiership table works. Get rid of percentage and only count points for could be a good start. Don't give the under the roof excuse there is no real difference in scoring there as evidenced by Essendon last night. I just see that as no different to who you play twice instead of once which is more lopsided than where you play.
Look whats happened to the scoring of North, Carlton and St Kilda when there was no pressure on the interim coach. We have to change the way the game is coached, that will bring about far more watchable footy than most rule changes ever will. Mind you I still think prior opportunity should be gotten rid of, its either kick, handball or holding the ball, lets make it easy for the dummies in green

You really think that will change the way coaches coach? Zero chance.

I think we're over-coaching players. I've said before that we need to limit the time the guys are at the club and the amount of support coaches that are at clubs. There is tooooo much analysis going on. Let the boys play!

daysofourlives wrote:Alarm bells should be ringing at AFL house, for North to kick a record low score in this day and age and on the same night for Essendon to kick one for 98% of the game says scoring is still an issue.
Is it time for a drastic change in the way the premiership table works. Get rid of percentage and only count points for could be a good start. Don't give the under the roof excuse there is no real difference in scoring there as evidenced by Essendon last night. I just see that as no different to who you play twice instead of once which is more lopsided than where you play.
Look whats happened to the scoring of North, Carlton and St Kilda when there was no pressure on the interim coach. We have to change the way the game is coached, that will bring about far more watchable footy than most rule changes ever will. Mind you I still think prior opportunity should be gotten rid of, its either kick, handball or holding the ball, lets make it easy for the dummies in green

Something as simple as bonus points is all that's needed to increase scoring. It has worked a treat in rugby union.

The best part about bonus points for scoring is that a team losing is more likely to have a crack rather than go into damage limitation.

Without putting to much thought into it but something below, personally I would go with goals being the benchmark as that's what the game is about, alternatively you could go with total points not just goals but either way it would still work. Keep it simple.

1- bonus points for 10 goals
2- bonus points for 15 goals
4- bonus points for 20 goals

This would ensure there is a secondary interest of all games having something to play for until the death despite the margin between the sides.

It wont take away from the fabric of the game by introducing ridiculous on field rules that coaches end up finding a way around.

All the rules in the world won’t stop results like Saturday night. Sometimes you are just thrashed and players check out.

Jim05 wrote:All the rules in the world won’t stop results like Saturday night. Sometimes you are just thrashed and players check out.

Absolutely, but hopefully it would stop the 12 goals to 6 bore fests.

whufc wrote:

Jim05 wrote:All the rules in the world won’t stop results like Saturday night. Sometimes you are just thrashed and players check out.

Absolutely, but hopefully it would stop the 12 goals to 6 bore fests.

No it won't.

stan wrote:

whufc wrote:

Jim05 wrote:All the rules in the world won’t stop results like Saturday night. Sometimes you are just thrashed and players check out.

Absolutely, but hopefully it would stop the 12 goals to 6 bore fests.

No it won't.

Coaches are always one step ahead of the buffoons running the AFL.
A coach is more interested in keeping his job by winning games than playing attractive football

Jim05 wrote:

stan wrote:

whufc wrote:

Jim05 wrote:All the rules in the world won’t stop results like Saturday night. Sometimes you are just thrashed and players check out.

Absolutely, but hopefully it would stop the 12 goals to 6 bore fests.

No it won't.

Coaches are always one step ahead of the buffoons running the AFL.
A coach is more interested in keeping his job by winning games than playing attractive football

I've always said I'd rather be boring as batsh*t and win than play exciting and lose!!!

woodublieve12 wrote:
I've always said I'd rather be boring as batsh*t and win than play exciting and lose!!!

Morning Horse.