-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Steve Hocking
- Thread starter Tigers of Old
- Start date
I feel a lot of the media are controlled to an extent by the AFL, so they won’t call him out. Sadly.
Right after they do some analysis and discussion around Mick Warner's book maybe? Other than Footyology, I'm not sure any other media has given the book much airtime.
Don't need the book, always thought this was the case.
I remember at one of the draft nights Miller used to host, he said that he'd received calls from the AFL telling him that if he pursued a trade for Chris Judd any further (we were into him) they'd be forced to bring in free agency as a response.
Basically, Judd didn't want to come to us, but if we made a deal with wet toast, they'd (the AFL) arrange it so he had a way to leave the club. From memory they blamed the AFLPA as the reason they'd have to bring in free agency.
They've long been corrupt. Always thought it. But none of them will ever openly speak about anything that would damage the brand.
The other rule change that has affected us is the kick ins after a behind. They have pushed the man on the mark back 5 metres making it 15metres from the goal ‘square’. To some extent it takes out small quick guys out of the equation and nullifies our aggressive defensive inside 50 dominance. How have our small forwards been going this year in keeping the ball inside 50?
ps. Is the man on the mark (in relation to the goal square kick ins) allowed to move on the mark?
I have also heard the umpires say “clear the area” moving players beyond the 15metres from the goal square and out of the pockets. Is this a rule too or are they using poetic licence to make the game more watchable?
ps. Is the man on the mark (in relation to the goal square kick ins) allowed to move on the mark?
I have also heard the umpires say “clear the area” moving players beyond the 15metres from the goal square and out of the pockets. Is this a rule too or are they using poetic licence to make the game more watchable?
Just need to look at the penalties dished out to the Swans when they recruited Buddy, when the AFL wanted him to go to GWS. The fact more isn't made of the AFL's reaction is bizarre. Not just the media, but the other clubs as well. Instant, on the spot trade sanctions against a club that did absolutely nothing wrong.
check the Warner thread, link to footyology podcast where they interview him. He definitely has uncovered a lot of dodgy stuff. Good discussion of the transition from the VFL/AFL commission days to the AFL Board which has effectively become a rubber stamp for the executive.
Sydney used their COLA allowance which was meant to be evenly distributed across the whole playing list to recruit Buddy. Subsequently it was removed. Fair enough it was BS from the start.
Didn’t they do something similar when we went after Lockett?
It’s ok for them to make up stuff about the Clubs , however when it may cost them their jobs , they see nothing .
Sadly our great game is going to change and not for the better , the more attack on the ball we take out , the worse and less unique it becomes , it’s going to take some great football brains to keep it loveable , SHocking is not one and his favouritism and incompetence is the AFLs biggest problem and embarrassment.
Exactly. AFL website states the other teams worked collaboratively to move games. Games without crowds suck for everyone - players, fans, couch surfers.
But the Geelong game stated that only the HOME team was consulted and as usual they sooked as hard as they could.
I hate Geelong. Thanks to SHocking they get preferential treatment.
Yes they did. He was all but signed with us and the AFL stepped in. I also recall us securing a major sponsorship with SKODA (?) but the AFL stepped in and sent that sponsorship to the giants. To be fair it was before shocking’s rule.
Has any other senior administrator at the AFL demonstrated this sort of favourable treatment to their former club?
The worst thing about sHocking is Australian football lovers are talking about their hatred & pure distain for a pissant league administrator, not their passion for the sport itself. This is your appointment Gil. Congratulations.
Just my opinion, but I reckon most AFL supporters share my opinion on this. I'll be interested to know if anyone thinks the game is better now than 12 months ago or 5 years ago? I think that the excitement, skills and standard hasn't changed much over the last 5 years and definitely hasn't changed from this year to last.
So what was the point of changing the rules?
So basically what it has been for the previous 120+ years the league has been in existence then?
If that is the case why was it an issue from last year?
As far as I can tell players on the mark can still wave their arms about, jump up and down on the spot, move from side to side like Harris Andrews did against us etc.
Yeah. I mean in the first few games there did seem to be an effect and the media went nuts over how good it was, how scoring was up etc.
As usual coaches adapted quickly and scoring is back to where it was or worse.
