2023 Finals Series

[Maltopia]

Created this thread as there wasn’t an obvious better place to chat about the finals series as a whole.

Just read on the AFL site that JPK is the Premiership Cup Ambassador - which means he presents the trophy to the us on GF day? :D

So who are people thinking will win it all?

For me, I am thinking Pies, Brisbane and Melbourne (even with Melksham injured) are the most likely.

We were only a few tight games outside of the top four, but we had so many last quarter fade-outs (and ‘lucky wins’ against North and Adelaide) that I am not confident we can win four away games in a row (even two is going to be tough).

That said, I have tipped us this weekend.

[barry]

Bedford (giants) will miss 1st final as his appeal failed for a pretty normal sheppard.
Sets a dangerous precedent for rest of finals. Be careful swans.

[Maltopia]

Bedford (giants) will miss 1st final as his appeal failed for a pretty normal sheppard.
Sets a dangerous precedent for rest of finals. Be careful swans.

Well we can predict an out then for our second final if we beat Carlton:

Out: Wicks (suspended) 😂

[i'm-uninformed2]

That’s an awesome reward for JPK. There’s a fundamental element of AFL that hopefully never changes and that’s winning the contested ball, and no one has done it better. He’s one of the most ‘unheralded’ great midfielders the game has had.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Well we can predict an out then for our second final if we beat Carlton:

Out: Wicks (suspended) [emoji23]

[emoji23]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mel_C]

Bedford (giants) will miss 1st final as his appeal failed for a pretty normal sheppard.
Sets a dangerous precedent for rest of finals. Be careful swans.
Whately and Buckley were discussing the Bedford incident this morning, and they couldn't believe he was suspended. Whately AGAIN expressed his dissatisfaction with both Rampe and McCartin getting off for their bumps. He brought up the fact that the opposition players had concussion and a fractured cheek bone, whereas in Bedford's case the opponent had no injury. He said if Bedford was a more high profile player, there would be more publicity.

Whately is so frustrating, only concentrating on the injury and not whether the incident is a football act.

[Blood Fever]

Look up know all in the dictionary and you'll see a picture of Gerard.

[barry]

The Bedford case is the most bizarre one for a while. Every footy person says it's not worth a week, especially a final. Appeal gets delayed 6 days because AFL council were on holidays (a week before finals!), and now it's been appealed again. Not sure on what grounds, but maybe 'the vibe'.

Could you imagine someone like Patrick Cripps being stuffed around like this.?

[crackedactor 01]

Whately and Buckley were discussing the Bedford incident this morning, and they couldn't believe he was suspended. Whately AGAIN expressed his dissatisfaction with both Rampe and McCartin getting off for their bumps. He brought up the fact that the opposition players had concussion and a fractured cheek bone, whereas in Bedford's case the opponent had no injury. He said if Bedford was a more high profile player, there would be more publicity.

Whately is so frustrating, only concentrating on the injury and not whether the incident is a football act.

The AFL has a distinct dislike for Sydney teams. How do you suspend Bedford and nothing for Jacob Weitering who attempted to gouge out the eyes of Toby Greene?

[The Big Cat]

Whately and Buckley were discussing the Bedford incident this morning, and they couldn't believe he was suspended. Whately AGAIN expressed his dissatisfaction with both Rampe and McCartin getting off for their bumps. He brought up the fact that the opposition players had concussion and a fractured cheek bone, whereas in Bedford's case the opponent had no injury. He said if Bedford was a more high profile player, there would be more publicity.

Whately is so frustrating, only concentrating on the injury and not whether the incident is a football act.

At time Whately said the tribunal got it right in clearing Tom.

[stellation]

I'm fully supportive of trying to protect the long term health of players, even if that means we're going to see some wild decisions around suspensions (I feel like that's been the case for quite a while, anyway).

That said, the Bedford suspension is ridiculous (and I have to be honest- particularly in the light of our own Dane and Tom getting off, I thought theirs were worse).

[wolftone57]

Bedford (giants) will miss 1st final as his appeal failed for a pretty normal sheppard.
Sets a dangerous precedent for rest of finals. Be careful swans.Yeah a dreadful decision. I think a home town decision.

Sent from my CPH2471 using Tapatalk

[liz]

That said, the Bedford suspension is ridiculous (and I have to be honest- particularly in the light of our own Dane and Tom getting off, I thought theirs were worse).

I don't think the three are comparable. The Swans were able to persuade the tribunal that Dane and Tom didn't initiate a bump on their opponents, but that they were accidental collisions between two players positioning themselves (in the Rampe case) or contesting a bouncing ball (in the McCartin case). There are plenty of instances during games where contact is made, a player comes off the worse for wear, but no-one thinks there should be a suspension. Just from our own games, a player recently ran headfirst into Wicks's shoulder/back/arm as Wicks was marking the ball. Heeney has "taken out" a couple with his backside as he has been crouched down picking up the ball.

Unfortunately for Bedford, it seems he did initiate the contact with Fisher and the AFL sees any action like that as a "bump". And it probably was more of a bump than some other actions that had been penalised - like Campbell's collision with Whitfield (?) that he received a week for (and which the Swans came close to contesting but in the end decided not to). The only vision I've seen of the incident is a 23 second clip from a single angle. It doesn't seem like the contact was excessive, but it rarely is nowadays. It's impossible to tell from that clip whether Fisher was telling the truth or not about whether the contact was essentially to his body or there was a high component.

[wolftone57]

Whately and Buckley were discussing the Bedford incident this morning, and they couldn't believe he was suspended. Whately AGAIN expressed his dissatisfaction with both Rampe and McCartin getting off for their bumps. He brought up the fact that the opposition players had concussion and a fractured cheek bone, whereas in Bedford's case the opponent had no injury. He said if Bedford was a more high profile player, there would be more publicity.

Whately is so frustrating, only concentrating on the injury and not whether the incident is a football act.Yes. Whately was ok with the behind several behind the play incidents which Robbo was scathing about. Whately said the player was not injured. One of those incidents did not get cited and it was one of our players, Ollie I think, on the receiving end. He has no idea what is a footy action and what isn't and only concentrates on injury which is stupid.

Not only that, Fisher had to leave ggd field and even though he came back in was stunned. I think Bedford's was a footy action as much as Rampe & McCartin's actions were. Gerard Whately is tunnel visioned. He always has been. Hd also does not like the Swans and was always saying how much help we have received. If hd can snipe the Swans he will


Sent from my CPH2471 using Tapatalk

[stevoswan]

Bedford free to play after appeals hearing. Good on him.

www.afl.com.au/news/1025251/greater-western-sydney-forward-toby-bedford-learns-his-fate-after-two-hour-appeals-hearing

[stellation]

I don't think the three are comparable. The Swans were able to persuade the tribunal that Dane and Tom didn't initiate a bump on their opponents, but that they were accidental collisions between two players positioning themselves (in the Rampe case) or contesting a bouncing ball (in the McCartin case). There are plenty of instances during games where contact is made, a player comes off the worse for wear, but no-one thinks there should be a suspension. Just from our own games, a player recently ran headfirst into Wicks's shoulder/back/arm as Wicks was marking the ball. Heeney has "taken out" a couple with his backside as he has been crouched down picking up the ball.

Unfortunately for Bedford, it seems he did initiate the contact with Fisher and the AFL sees any action like that as a "bump". And it probably was more of a bump than some other actions that had been penalised - like Campbell's collision with Whitfield (?) that he received a week for (and which the Swans came close to contesting but in the end decided not to). The only vision I've seen of the incident is a 23 second clip from a single angle. It doesn't seem like the contact was excessive, but it rarely is nowadays. It's impossible to tell from that clip whether Fisher was telling the truth or not about whether the contact was essentially to his body or there was a high component.
I agree with your logic that they're not comparable, despite clearly deciding to compare them. :) I just thought the other 2 looked worse, if that makes sense, and there wasn't a lot in the Bedford one where I could really ascertain why it would be assessed more harshly (even agreeing with your read of it!).

- - - Updated - - -


Bedford free to play after appeals hearing. Good on him.

Greater Western Sydney forward Toby Bedford learns his fate after two-hour Appeals hearing (www.afl.com.au/news/1025251/greater-western-sydney-forward-toby-bedford-learns-his-fate-after-two-hour-appeals-hearing)

Sanity prevails! It is crazy that they've had to wait this long to get him cleared, I don't see any real reason why this couldn't have been resolved and out of the way a week ago.

[barry]

Can't wait for tonight's game. A demons win will shut all those arrogant pies up.
Pies game looks good in H&A last year, but came back to earth in the finals. (I meant even we beat them !).

[Thunder Shaker]

Bedford free to play after appeals hearing. Good on him.

Greater Western Sydney forward Toby Bedford learns his fate after two-hour Appeals hearing (www.afl.com.au/news/1025251/greater-western-sydney-forward-toby-bedford-learns-his-fate-after-two-hour-appeals-hearing)
It says a lot about the Tribunal's handling of this incident when we're applauding that a Giant got off on appeal.

It's also ridiculous that an incident that occurred 11 days ago has to wait until the day of the first final before completing the Tribunal process. How can Bedford prepare adequately?

The AFL should review its Tribunal to make sure incidents are handled in a more timely manner.

[Mel_C]

I'm at the MCG. It was pouring before but the rain has eased. My brother just showed me a tweet that there is lightning expected during the game, so the game will be stopped for up to 20 minutes if there is.

The Collingwood army was so loud when the team went through the banner.

I don't know who I want to win. I wish I already knew the result of our match.

[dejavoodoo44]

I'm at the MCG. It was pouring before but the rain has eased. My brother just showed me a tweet that there is lightning expected during the game, so the game will be stopped for up to 20 minutes if there is.

The Collingwood army was so loud when the team went through the banner.

I don't know who I want to win. I wish I already knew the result of our match.
I suspect that the Collingwood army will convince you to go for Melbourne.

[longmile]

Amazed that the commentators are defending Maynard who has done plenty of dog acts in his career. Imagine if a Swans players did that - they'd be crucifying them

[barry]

Bradshaw gone for 2+ weeks (concussion). Maynard gone for 3+ weeks for head high contact.
Big for future finals

[Mel_C]

Wow that doesn't look good for Brayshaw. From where I'm sitting I haven't seen him move. Medical staff from both teams are assisting.

Melee has started in Melbourne forward line!

[Mel_C]

I suspect that the Collingwood army will convince you to go for Melbourne.
You are correct!

[longmile]

Then Maynard tries to headbutt Viney - scumbag

[barry]

Add 2 to Maynard for a headbut!

[Jimitron5000]

The commentators really are coming to Maynard's defence here.
Regardless of what the tribunal says about it, Collingwood's lawyers will get him off, citing Rampe and McCartin incidents.

[longmile]

The commentators really are coming to Maynard's defence here.


Am I going crazy?! He just cleaned someone up and then tried to headbutt another player? And they're supporting him?

[Thunder Shaker]

A summary of the teams' head to head finals records:

Collingwood v Melbourne: Melbourne has played Collingwood in a final 22 times, which is the most finals Melbourne has played against any other team. Melbourne's record against Collingwood is quite good: 22 finals for 16 wins, 5 losses and 1 draw. Melbourne's 16 wins is their biggest number of wins against another side in finals by a large margin, with their next best 8 wins and 1 draw against Essendon. Melbourne's win percentage of 75% is bettered only by their records against North Melbourne (4-1), Fitzroy (2-0) and St Kilda (3-0). From the Collingwood perspective, Collingwood's finals record against Melbourne has the lowest win percentage (25%) of all teams that Collingwood has played in a final. These finals include the 1926, 1939, 1955, 1956, 1958, 1960 and 1964 Grand Finals.

Carlton v Sydney: Carlton has played South Melbourne/Sydney in finals 11 times for 5 wins and 6 losses. This is a fairly middling win percentage for both sides. These 11 finals include the 1907, 1909, 1914 and 1945 Grand Finals.

St Kilda v GWS Giants: These two teams have never met before in a final. 2023 is the first season where both teams have made the finals in the same year.

Brisbane Lions v Port Adelaide: Brisbane has played Port Adelaide in three finals for 2 wins and 1 loss. These finals include the 2004 Grand Final, Brisbane's only loss in a final to Port Adelaide. Brisbane's 2 other finals against Port were both at the Gabba, which they won.

[dejavoodoo44]

Would anyone be too unhappy, if this descended into an aggro bloodbath, with a large number of suspensions for both sides?

[barry]

I'm very the AFL are glad they let Bedford off. Been about 4 similar bumps already.

[dejavoodoo44]

Having just seen the Van Rooyen whack on McStay, he could easily cop a week or two.

[longmile]

Mitchell's flop was embarrassing, especially in such a physical game. Definitely looks better in other colours.

[stevoswan]

Maynard has to go...but I suspect he will get off. There's no doubt he jumped to smother and then couldn't stop himself but then he has turned to deliberately shoulder Brayshaw in the head. He didn't have to and it was an extremely dangerous decision as we see by the result. He will of course argue he was bracing for impact and the tribunal will of course agree and let him off. If they have the balls to correctly suspend him, Pies will appeal and he likely will then get off.

[barry]

Maynard has to go...but I suspect he will get off. There's no doubt he jumped to smother and then couldn't stop himself but then he has turned to deliberately shoulder Brayshaw in the head. He didn't have to and it was an extremely dangerous decision as we see by the result. He will of course argue he was bracing for impact and the tribunal will of course agree and let him off. If they have the balls to correctly suspend him, Pies will appeal and he likely will then get off.
The turn the shoulder mid flight is there killer. Compared to Bedford, who turned the back at impact. Maynard has to go.

[longmile]

The turn the shoulder mid flight is there killer. Compared to Bedford, who turned the back at impact. Maynard has to go.

Commentators havent even mention him turning his shoulder

[Captain]

Amazed that the commentators are defending Maynard who has done plenty of dog acts in his career. Imagine if a Swans players did that - they'd be crucifying them

Disagree. He shouldn’t get suspended for that. Pure accident.

[KSAS]

If I'm not mistaken, this would be Tom Mitchell's first final since the 2016 GF. Long time between drinks.

[stevoswan]

Commentators havent even mention him turning his shoulder

Exactly but they have mentioned his 'right to brace for impact'. Pathetic.

- - - Updated - - -


Disagree. He shouldn’t get suspended for that. Pure accident.

Pure accident? Sorry, don't agree....he had the chance to not use his shoulder. That he elected to do so is NO accident.

[Sandridge]

Dees were able to stem the tide in the second quarter and make a little headway but still have the job ahead. Close enough if good enough, though.
C'mon Dees!!

[dejavoodoo44]

Bit annoyed that Fritsch can't kick straight this week.

[Sandridge]

Bit annoyed that Fritsch can't kick straight this week.

Annoying isn't it?

Hate to compliment Collingwood but the pressure their defenders apply is just enormous.

And when the Dees finally get a goal, Collingwood answer straight away.

[Mel_C]

Bit annoyed that Fritsch can't kick straight this week.
I was thinking the same thing. He couldn't miss against us, especially in the last quarter.

[Jimitron5000]

Bayley Fritsch. Come on. What was that??? And where was that last week???

[longmile]

Tale of two Fritchz

Melbourne's on fault for losing today. Much like some of our games in the midpoint of this year

[Thunder Shaker]

Bad kicking is bad football. Fritsch's kick couldn't have been worse if he was a pirate and using a wooden leg to kick for goal.

[Industrial Fan]

That was a shocking kick for goal. A point from any of the three OOB in the last qtr would have changed the dynamic and ramped up the pressure.

Shame to see Collingwood go through. And Ginnivan is still a cheating rat.

[barry]

Good result for the other teams really. Melbourne were clearly better over the night, but didn't win. Big outs for both in the later rounds.
I think Bradshaw will miss more than 2 with his history.

[MattW]

Melbourne the better team. For Collingwood, that is the make good for last year's prelim.

- - - Updated - - -


That was a shocking kick for goal. A point from any of the three OOB in the last qtr would have changed the dynamic and ramped up the pressure.

Shame to see Collingwood go through. And Ginnivan is still a cheating rat.

It should have been a 50m penalty to compound that ducking htb free late.

- - - Updated - - -

I think Petracca is my favourite non Swan. Deserved to be on the winning team. Best on. 44 players out there and he willed the game to turn.

[Blood Fever]

True about Petracca. Gawn was massive as well.

[Mel_C]

Melbourne had their chances they just couldn't kick straight. How many times did they kick out on the full?

I didn't think it was possible that Collingwood supporters could get more feral, but they were!

[crackedactor 01]

Melbourne looked the better team and dominated patches of the game. Some terrible kicking and missed opportunities really hurt them. But I know in the 3rd quarter a fortnight ago we absolutely dominated them. Which proves to me the Swans are capable of going all the way but can they bring it all together with straight kicking and 4 quarter concentration.

[dejavoodoo44]

Melbourne the better team. For Collingwood, that is the make good for last year's prelim.

- - - Updated - - -



It should have been a 50m penalty to compound that ducking htb free late.

- - - Updated - - -

I think Petracca is my favourite non Swan. Deserved to be on the winning team. Best on. 44 players out there and he willed the game to turn.

Yes, Petracca was huge in the second half, with Oliver and Gawn not far behind.

Also agree that should have been fifty, but they rarely pay those. Which is probably what irritates me the most, about the encroaching in the protected area fifties that they do pay. In that, the interference that they allegedly cause, is almost always very inconsequential. Whereas players can often play hide the football, or wrestle the person trying to take their kick, for around five or ten seconds, without being marched fifty metres. Even though it obviously interferes with the free movement of the play.

[liz]

Melbourne were probably the better team but their forward line weaknesses were on show.

Van Rooyen looks out for a week to me, but I don't think Maynard will be cited by the MRP. Maynard's initial action was wholly reasonable. His protection of himself just at the point of contact was reflexive. Given we had the tribunal accept our McCartin argument, I don't think we can begrude another player's act being deemed to be just a football accident.

[Thunder Shaker]

Our final against Carlton should have been moved to the SCG, as compensation for our qualifying final against Carlton in 1986 that should have been a home final for us but was played in Melbourne. Carlton won by 16 points.

We were also denied home finals against Fitzroy in the 1986 Semi Final and the 1987 Semi Final against Melbourne. Fitzroy are no longer in the AFL, but if we win this week our semi final against Melbourne should also be played in Sydney. Then the books on home finals would be balanced.

[Markwebbos]

Our final against Carlton should have been moved to the SCG, as compensation for our qualifying final against Carlton in 1986 that should have been a home final for us but was played in Melbourne. Carlton won by 16 points.

We were also denied home finals against Fitzroy in the 1986 Semi Final and the 1987 Semi Final against Melbourne. Fitzroy are no longer in the AFL, but if we win this week our semi final against Melbourne should also be played in Sydney. Then the books on home finals would be balanced.

I think it might be time to let those go!

[barry]

Maynard jumped high ( to spoil) but he knew the only place he was going to land was on Bradshaw ( intent to hurt). So it's not accidental.
If this was allowed it would happen every game.

Mason cox taking out petracca's legs was pretty dangerous. Is that reportable?

- - - Updated - - -


Our final against Carlton should have been moved to the SCG, as compensation for our qualifying final against Carlton in 1986 that should have been a home final for us but was played in Melbourne. Carlton won by 16 points.

We were also denied home finals against Fitzroy in the 1986 Semi Final and the 1987 Semi Final against Melbourne. Fitzroy are no longer in the AFL, but if we win this week our semi final against Melbourne should also be played in Sydney. Then the books on home finals would be balanced.

I like the thinking. We would be owed a few

[i'm-uninformed2]

I tend to agree with Liz based on the available footage re Maynard, which is my one caveat for now.

In the case of McCartin and Rampe, extra angles and vision helped clear them. The only issue I can see for Maynard is if there is an extra angle showing he does more than brace and actively drops a bit of his shoulder. In which case, it becomes careless, which with the high contact and severe impact, automatically becomes three weeks.

[ugg]

If I'm not mistaken, this would be Tom Mitchell's first final since the 2016 GF. Long time between drinks.

He has played finals for Hawthorn

[KSAS]

Thanks Ugg, i stand corrected. I'd forgotten Hawthorn finished 4th in 2018 but then went out in straight sets. I'll now re-phrase stating last night was Tom Mitchell's first final win since 2016! :wink:

[Roadrunner]

I think it might be time to let those go!

Maybe a bit silly on my part, but if (I should say when!) we beat the Carpetbaggers tonight, we will play the Dees again and I feel we can beat them at the G. Even though we had them on toast in the 3rd quarter at home, we ended up losing the game. Of course, at the SCG we have the crowd but psychologically they would have an advantage. Anyway, one step at a time!😊

[neilfws]

Trademark big last quarter from Melbourne, but not enough to make up for woeful kicking and poor efficiency inside 50. The latter stat, admittedly against a very good defence. I thought two or three of their players were well off their best and also lacked a bit of physicality at times.

The Maynard one is interesting, I think there's a high chance it will be deemed accidental. Brayshaw an unfortunate loss, he seems quite a key structural component for the Demons.

Pies have that "something to prove" look about them which I think will be quite hard to stop and they'd have to be flag favourites. It's going to be interesting to watch the tactics of their opposition teams.

[Scottee]

Maynard jumped high ( to spoil) but he knew the only place he was going to land was on Bradshaw ( intent to hurt). So it's not accidental.
If this was allowed it would happen every game.

Mason cox taking out petracca's legs was pretty dangerous. Is that reportable?

- - - Updated - - -



I like the thinking. We would be owed a fewIt was a disguised shirt front. Cannot be allowed to stand. If I wanted to take out a player , that would be the best way to do it.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Thunder Shaker]

I think it might be time to let those go!
It was not a serious post, but has at its core a kernel of truth: the League has been biased against non-Victorian teams ever since they decided to admit non-Victorian teams by relocation or the granting of licences for new teams. Other examples of bias are free kicks (see other thread) and requiring the Swans to pay licence fees despite being a foundation club. The only foundation club that has been treated worse was Fitzroy.

At least the League got rid of the ridiculous requirement to play at least one final in Melbourne each week without regard for the competing teams.

[stevoswan]

Van Rooyen looks out for a week to me, but I don't think Maynard will be cited by the MRP. Maynard's initial action was wholly reasonable. His protection of himself just at the point of contact was reflexive. Given we had the tribunal accept our McCartin argument, I don't think we can begrude another player's act being deemed to be just a football accident.

I don't agree. He didn't even have to protect himself against an open fronted player but he chose to turn his body and bump Brayshaws head with his shoulder. An extremely dangerous act.....but I suspect the MRP will see it your way and he won't be cited....and they will be wrong.....but the MRP can't be upsetting those Collingwood supporters can they.....what with the Magpies being this years Victorian 'fairytale'.

[lwjoyner]

surely wrong of c7 to do interview with culprit to allow him to defend himself

[KSAS]

FWIW I think Maynard will be sent to the tribunal as a test case due to the severity of the outcome, but will get off. Reckon it will be too difficult to prove that he decided in mid air to shirt front Brayshaw, from what started as a legit spoiling attempt. Both players were moving at pace head on. I can see why some see it as charge, with Maynard turning his body slightly mid air.

Goodwin is in no doubt that it was a shirt front with his comment "Maynard jumped & hit Brayshaw whilst off the ground"

A reporter then asked Goodwin to compare Maynard's hit with Van Rooyen's elbow to McStay's head. Goodwin replied "the difference is McStay stayed on the ground"

[liz]

FWIW I think Maynard will be sent to the tribunal as a test case due to the severity of the outcome, but will get off. Reckon it will be too difficult to prove that he decided in mid air to shirt front Brayshaw, from what started as a legit spoiling attempt. Both players were moving at pace head on. I can see why some see it as charge, with Maynard turning his body slightly mid air.

Goodwin is in no doubt that it was a shirt front with his comment "Maynard jumped & hit Brayshaw whilst off the ground"

A reporter then asked Goodwin to compare Maynard's hit with Van Rooyen's elbow to McStay's head. Goodwin replied "the difference is McStay stayed on the ground"

I had to read that last sentence twice because, in this context, there are two different meanings of "stayed on the ground". I initially thought you meant that Van Rooyen stayed on the ground (as he elbowed McStay) in contrast to Maynard, who launched himself into the air. But then I realised the distinction is that McStay stayed out on the ground.

That Brayshaw was out of the game (and out of next week, at the very least) while McStay kept on playing will manifest in different penalties IF Maynard is deemed to have a case to answer. It's hard to see Van Rooyen getting more than a week, but if Maynard is found guilty of a reportable offence, it's likely he'll get three (at least). But Maynard is only responsible for the severity of the consequences if he is found to have committed a reportable offence. Just as McCartin wasn't deemed accountable for McAdam's fractured cheekbone.

(Wow, what a lot of Macs!)

[Blood Fever]

Van Rooyen deliberately elbowed McStay on the jaw and stunned him. Got to get one week. Maynard case is difficult but could be categorized as careless or reckless. If so, he could easily be rubbed out for rest of year. Can't ignore the serious upshot of what happened.

[Hotpotato]

Maynard : two weeks .

[cherub]

Does anyone else think Fritsch might have had a jab to his sore ankle which affected his kicking? Or the injury to his ankle/foot is still affecting him. I am reminded of Teddy’s glorious shank in the 2012 grand final, which was so obviously a miskick , but deemed deliberate (before “insufficient intent” was a thing).

[liz]

Maynard : two weeks .

Is that a prediction, or have you read the outcome of the MRO's assessment? I struggle with two weeks. If he is guilty of a charge, surely the impact is severe, which would lead to a three week minimum. Sicily received a three week ban for a tackle gone wrong (but not really that wrong). So I'm expecting either zero or 3+.

[barry]

Does anyone else think Fritsch might have had a jab to his sore ankle which affected his kicking? Or the injury to his ankle/foot is still affecting him. I am reminded of Teddy’s glorious shank in the 2012 grand final, which was so obviously a miskick , but deemed deliberate (before “insufficient intent” was a thing).
Yes. Was thinking the same thing. Demons getting injuries at wrong time.

[Hotpotato]

Is that a prediction, or have you read the outcome of the MRO's assessment? I struggle with two weeks. If he is guilty of a charge, surely the impact is severe, which would lead to a three week minimum. Sicily received a three week ban for a tackle gone wrong (but not really that wrong). So I'm expecting either zero or 3+.

Apols: should have added ‘prediction’.
Can’t see how he’s not suspended.

[stevoswan]

Maynard sent straight to the tribunal. That's a start....

[longmile]

I'll admit I was caught up in the heat of the game and my hatred for the Pies and was calling for Maynards head, but a lot of people seem to think it was accidental. On replay it looks like to my eyes that he deliberately turns his shoulder into Brayshaw? Am I going crazy? Is my bias corrupting my vision?

[rb4x]

A very poor attempt at a spoil. Nowhere near the ball. Definitely reckless with a severe outcome. From a lawyers point of view fantastic as they rub their hands together in anticipation of fat fees regardless of the outcome which will be decided on the AFL/VFL roulette wheel.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Does anyone else think Fritsch might have had a jab to his sore ankle which affected his kicking? Or the injury to his ankle/foot is still affecting him. I am reminded of Teddy’s glorious shank in the 2012 grand final, which was so obviously a miskick , but deemed deliberate (before “insufficient intent” was a thing).

A classic Matt Stevic decision, that one. Not only shanked, but landed 25m inside the boundary line and took a massive off-break.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sandridge]

A very poor attempt at a spoil. Nowhere near the ball. Definitely reckless with a severe outcome. From a lawyers point of view fantastic as they rub their hands together in anticipation of fat fees regardless of the outcome which will be decided on the AFL/VFL roulette wheel.

Am coming around to your way of thinking. When it happened, I thought "complete accident." But the more I think about it, I realise that by running towards Brayshaw like he did and taking the leap that he did, Maynard was always going to land heavily on Brayshaw. That makes it reckless. The fact that Brayshaw may not play again in the finals is bad news for Maynard.

[Blood Fever]

I think the boofhead won't be seen again till 2024

[barry]

Now that the swans are out, it makes sense that we all support our little brother from down the road for the rest of the finals series. Go giants. I'm 0/2 for tipping so far!

[Daisi]

I'm supporting Brisbane- but I think the AFL are wanting a Collingwood/Carlton grand final

I won't be watching much of the series, but will be watching the Brisbane games.

[Mark26]

Now that the swans are out, it makes sense that we all support our little brother from down the road for the rest of the finals series. Go giants. I'm 0/2 for tipping so far!

Yeah nah. GWS are less the little brother and more an abnoxious distant relative who needs to be shown the door.

[Sandridge]

Now that the swans are out, it makes sense that we all support our little brother from down the road for the rest of the finals series. Go giants. I'm 0/2 for tipping so far!


As a Melbourne based Blood, i don't feel that "little brother down the road" thing towards the Giants but I don't mind them either. And i hate St.Kilda!! So go Giants!

[Mel_C]

Yeah nah. GWS are less the little brother and more an abnoxious distant relative who needs to be shown the door.
For this game I'm definitely supporting GWS over St Kilda. I hope the Saints have another 150 years of mediocrity!

[Sandridge]

For this game I'm definitely supporting GWS over St Kilda. I hope the Saints have another 150 years of mediocrity!

With you all the way!! And looking promising at the moment! GO GIANTS!

[Hotpotato]

Giants are my second team. Playing like I wish we did last night. First to the ball , keep it moving.

[stevoswan]

Now that the swans are out, it makes sense that we all support our little brother from down the road for the rest of the finals series. Go giants. I'm 0/2 for tipping so far!

I agree with you Barry....except for the 'little brother' bit. Happy to see the Giants win today....and they are certainly doing the job so far.

[stevoswan]

Seriously obnoxious Channel 7 commentary......virtually barracking for the Saints at the moment. They just can't grasp the concept of this 'national' league can they?

Three late ones to the Saints has this game interestingly poised at 3/4 time.

[MattW]

Following the form lines, and the impression at the time, our win against GWS in round 21 was our best of the year.

Kicking straight helped.

[stellation]

Seriously obnoxious Channel 7 commentary......virtually barracking for the Saints at the moment. They just can't grasp the concept of this 'national' league can they?
It’s been particularly bad in this one, it really does detract from the game.

[stevoswan]

GWS are going to blow this.....momentum with the Saints atm.

[Sandridge]

Giants have a nice lead early in the 4th but haven't put St.Kilda away just yet. C'mon Giants!

[stevoswan]

Giants seem to have steadied.....back out to 31 pts.

[Sandridge]

Seriously obnoxious Channel 7 commentary......virtually barracking for the Saints at the moment. They just can't grasp the concept of this 'national' league can they?

You're being unfair Stevo. It's only been just over 40 years since a non-Victorian team joined the league. You need to give the commentators time to adjust!

[stevoswan]

You're being unfair Stevo. It's only been just over 40 years since a non-Victorian team joined the league. You need to give the commentators time to adjust!

:rofl

Happy to say their bias will go unrewarded.....Giants home!

[Sandridge]

Oh, bad luck Saints! You must be devastated.

Please tell me you're devastated!

[Bloods05]

Oh, bad luck Saints! You must be devastated.

Please tell me you're devastated!
Don't get the hatred.

[Blood Fever]

Don't get the hatred.

Agree. The least obnoxious team and fans.

[i'm-uninformed2]

The commentary did involve Luke Darcy, which explains a lot.

I’m on Brisbane from here, thank you very much.

[aardvark]

Don't get the hatred.

It's a South Melbourne thing. Our enemies from the other side of the lake affectionally known as "The Scum".

[stellation]

The commentary did involve Luke Darcy, which explains a lot.

I’m on Brisbane from here, thank you very much.
I’d like to think I’m a pretty positive person in general, and try to not be too negative about people who are presumably just doing the best they can; but I lamented to Stella Jr today that I’m disappointed whenever I realise it’s the Luke and Jobe combo because I know I’m going to be complaining about them to him and really having to try hard not to pick up on every little thing.

[neilfws]

I normally love my finals, but found it hard to get excited about Saints/Giants. Still flat from last night perhaps. But the commentary did not help - not so much the barracking, just the sheer yelling which seems to have gone next level.

Looking forward to tonight though, may as well go with the Lions now.

[Sandridge]

Don't get the hatred.

I have many, many reasons for thoroughly disliking St.Kilda. Too many to list here.

The main reason is is that from 1961 till the Swans went to Sydney, I went to the football every week, to every team's ground. I found St.Kilda fans to be the most obnoxious, overbearing and aggressive of the VFL fan bases. Fully understand that not many people agree with me - maybe I stood in the wrong areas! There must be nice St.Kilda supporters - I've just never met any.

[Blood Fever]

[QUOTE=aardvark;876587]It's a South Melbourne thing. Our enemies from the other side of the lake affectionally known as "The Scum".[/QUOTE

I remember when the games were played for the Lake Premiership. There was rivalry but not hatred. A section of fans at Moorabbin were pretty feral. I'll admit I only went there a couple of times.

[Mark26]

Whenever the Swans are knocked out of finals, I always find myself barricking for non-Vic teams. I cannot for the life of me go for GWS. Good on them for winning when we could not, but the kindness ends there.

[Daisi]

I'm with you Mark26- I'm looking forward to a good game tonight, would love to see Brisbane or Port win the whole thing. Port just for Allir...he's a great player

and yes- I support the non Vic Teams but can't support GWS- ewwwwwwwwww

[MattW]

The commentary did involve Luke Darcy, which explains a lot.

I’m on Brisbane from here, thank you very much.

Or Melbourne - the only palatable outcomes.

[Mel_C]

Agree. The least obnoxious team and fans.
Nah not the ones I know. You would think they have won 20 premierships the way they carry on.

And I'll never forget the way they acted 3/4 time in the '05 Prelim. That last quarter was bliss.

[The Big Cat]

I have many, many reasons for thoroughly disliking St.Kilda. Too many to list here.

The main reason is is that from 1961 till the Swans went to Sydney, I went to the football every week, to every team's ground. I found St.Kilda fans to be the most obnoxious, overbearing and aggressive of the VFL fan bases. Fully understand that not many people agree with me - maybe I stood in the wrong areas! There must be nice St.Kilda supporters - I've just never met any.

Add to that Lindsay Fox's gloating when Paul Morwood and Silvio Fochini crossed to the Saints without a clearance.

[Sandridge]

Nah not the ones I know. You would think they have won 20 premierships the way they carry on.

And I'll never forget the way they acted 3/4 time in the '05 Prelim. That last quarter was bliss.

St.Kilda fans thought all they had to do in the 2005 Preliminary Final was turn up and a GF spot was theirs! Another one of the multitude of reasons I dislike St.Kilda comes from that game. A forgettable, home brand, fringe St.Kilda player refused to shake Goodesy's hand before the game. He should have accepted Goodesy's offer of a handshake - it would be the closest he got to greatness.

- - - Updated - - -


Add to that Lindsay Fox's gloating when Paul Morwood and Silvio Fochini crossed to the Saints without a clearance.

Absolutely!

[Mark26]

The Lions / Power game is a beauty. Both teams throwing everything at it.

[Sandridge]

The Lions / Power game is a beauty. Both teams throwing everything at it.

It's a cracker, isn't it!

[stevoswan]

It's a South Melbourne thing. Our enemies from the other side of the lake affectionally known as "The Scum".

Yes, Sydney based Swans fans.....get on board, respect history!:tongue::wink:

[KTigers]

For me the only acceptable winners now are the Giants and to a lesser extent Brisbane. The others can go jump in the
lake.

[Sandridge]

A 12 goal third quarter at the Gabba!!

Fun footy!

[Hotpotato]

The Giants should see off Port.

[rojo]

Wow! The Lions are seriously good. Amazing kicking on angles that drop in the lap of a player they are not looking at. Also the spreading of their forwards with the incoming ball aimed to drop over the head of the opposition player taking the front position. Precision kicking again.

[i'm-uninformed2]

The Giants should see off Port.

Beware the annual ritual of claiming the top four losers are inevitably going out in straight sets and whoa, look at the big Mo for the team that finished seventh.

I will say though that GWS did play excellent footy, and Melbournians might finally be realising what an elite talent Tom Green is. A total beast.

[KSAS]

For me the only acceptable winners now are the Giants and to a lesser extent Brisbane. The others can go jump in the
lake.
+1 Albert Park Lake?
The sleeping Giants have more of a chance imo to progress to PF than the hyped up Blues.

History shows a low percentage of top 4 teams going out in straight sets, which the Demons are now facing for the 2nd successive year (we did so unfortunately in 1986-1987 when home finals didn't exist).

[barry]

GWS has the most unique player left in the finals. Lachie Keefe. Key forward, 4 possessions, never used as a target, yet always selected in the team.
He must live near me because I see him around a bit and he's so skinny looks like the wind would blow him over.
Maybe he's the ultimate role player but can you win a flag with someone getting so less of the ball?

[stellation]

I will say though that GWS did play excellent footy, and Melbournians might finally be realising what an elite talent Tom Green is. A total beast.
It struck me several times in the game yesterday just how much his inside work and (bear with me) untackleability reminds me of peak JPK.

[lwjoyner]

re c7 commentatprs baracking for sts, i said that yesterday in a post of swans game. its getting bad they C7 need to insstruct commentators just to commentate i fact shut up unless somrthing is needed to be said aboutTHE GAME

[stevoswan]

The Giants should see off Port.

In Adelaide? Not so sure about that but I sort of hope they do.:wink:

They are certainly capable.

[sharp9]

I thought that this would be easy for me but as I am watching games my SUB-CONSCIOUS keeps popping up and telling me who I really want to win. I don’t live in Sydney so perhaps I am spared some of the animus toward GWS. I’ve always kinda liked them ‘cos they’re from Sydney. Am I right? Also I really love what Kingsley is bringing. I was never a fan of the previous bloke who’s name escapes me. When you are watching a game and multiple times you look at the screen and go “Gee, whiz, I wish he played for us,” then it’s hard to hate them. Tom Green, Kelly, Himmelberg (didn’t he spend years trying to get out to Fremantle or something?) Taylor (OMG yes!) Idun, that Irish bloke (Brown??) Briggs, and my absolute Swans wish player from a few years ago, Callan Ward. Still can’t stand Whitfield. Yilch! On the other hand my wife barracks for St. Kilda and I was fully on board in 2010/2011. 1966 and all that. But, at the end of the day, I can’t stand Ross Lyon. I respect that he gets the best out of average troops but “You’re quite brilliant, Shane” says everything I need to know about him. I really like it when he loses. Just sayin’. I used to be really keen on Jack Steele. WTF has happened to him? So on to the next game. Always a had a soft spot for Melbourne from way back when Albee was coaching. I liked Garry and Neitz. Also wife’s first EVER game started with Farmer standing in a Richmond player’s head for one of the marks of the century. And the Paul Roos connection will remain as long as Goodwin is there, so nothing to hate. But they did win a couple of years ago - so they shuffle down the pack. Now, I’m finding it really, really hard to hate Collingwoodnthis year. I’ve tried, Lord knows I’ve tried. But he’ll I love Craig McRae. I want to hate the Daicos boys but I can’t. And I wish Beau MacCreary played for us. Where the hell did Nathan Murphy come from? Jamie Elliott is a genius and is genuinely not an asshole. A former Swan and an American in the ruck. And Jack Ginivan is taking his well earned medicine with class. On the other hand it’s nice to be able to just raid GWS’s midfield (Adams) and then totally rort the system (Quaynor) because you sooked it up over Buddy and Heney. I never, ever want anything good to happen to that Jordan tosser (on the field that is). Moore had the chance to choose us, didn’t he? His mistake and screw him. And if Eddie thinks I’ll EVER forgive him he is dreamin’. So no go for Collingwood, obviously….EXCEPT if they play Carlton, ‘cos I hate that mob with every fibre of my being. I can’t stand Michael Voss. He was a bully in the field and then a terrible coach first time round who had no business being in that seat. Can coach now but I still can’t stand him. So number 6 seeding for you!
Now I’ve always liked Brisbane. I remember the first year or so that I followed footy cheering them on when they made a huge late run into the finals with thingo from Carlton as coach…about 1996 I reckon. Walls! And then was fully behind them in their premiership years (even with Voss out front). There are so many fine players and seemingly good blokes (not Harris Andrew - yerck) Charlie, Neale, Big O, and lots of good kids - Wilmott, Fletcher, Robertson for a start. Coleman, love him. How did they get Berry for nothing?? (Well we got Buddy for nothing, no wait, Eddie orchestrated a ban for us NOT breaking the rules.) And I really love Chris Fagan. What a pathway he has taken and what a great coach he is. Anyway, so here I am watching halfway through the second quarter and my sub-conscious tells me that I want Port to win. Why??? In musing I realise that I just live Ken. So other things flow from that. They were in the @@@@ a few years ago and picked up 3 brilliant kids. They play without big egos and deserve everything they are getting. Normally I would want JHF to go down a rabbit hole for sooking it up and reaming the draft (essentially) at North but here I am
wishing him good things. What’s wrong with me? I’ve never liked Port. Ever. So I don’t know what’s happened to me but
1. Port Adelaide
2. Brisbane
3. GWS
4. Melbourne
5. Collingwood
6. Carlton

[Blood Fever]

1.Brisbane 2. Port Adelaide 3.GWS 4. Carlton 5. Melbourne 6.Collingwood.

[MattW]

1. Brisbane
2. Melbourne
3. GWS
4. Port
5. Collingwood
6. Carlton

[dejavoodoo44]

Personally, I'll be happy if any non-Victorian side wins. After the West Coast win of 2006, Victorian sides have won 14 of the 16 premierships. Under the reign of Gil, it's 7 to 1. Could just be coincidental, but I suspect that there might be an underlying reason or two, for the swing back to the traditional power base.

[The Big Cat]

Personally, I'll be happy if any non-Victorian side wins. After the West Coast win of 2006, Victorian sides have won 14 of the 16 premierships. Under the reign of Gil, it's 7 to 1. Could just be coincidental, but I suspect that there might be an underlying reason or two, for the swing back to the traditional power base.

Interesting that after Brisbane won the flag in 2001,2002,2003, then Port won in 2004, then Sydney 2005 and Eagles 2006, the AFL had an inquiry into the dominance of non Vic teams. Very quiet over recent seasons.

[Blood Fever]

That era created great trauma here in Melbourne.

[Sandridge]

1. Melbourne
2. GWS
3. Brisbane
4. Collingwood
5. Carlton

[i'm-uninformed2]

That post was quite the journey 😂

I’m Brisbane, Melbourne then don’t really care as I dislike anything to do with Adelaide as a city, Collingwood and Carlton speak for themselves, and the Plastics just don’t do it for me.

[Hotpotato]

GIANTS ….. just go all the way . Fabulous story .

[i'm-uninformed2]

It struck me several times in the game yesterday just how much his inside work and (bear with me) untackleability reminds me of peak JPK.

Yep. And he’s even bigger. I wonder if he has the same no weights edict as JPK, as it’d make him too heavy.

He’s a serious unit, and always was. I remember going through Canberra airport on the morning of the 2019 draft and by chance, he was right behind me in the queue with his mum, heading off to the Gold Coast for draft night. I’m 6’4” - and he was easily my height, and already built like a brick outhouse.

[Captain]

1. Collingwood 2. Giants 3. Brisbane 4. Melbourne 5. Port 6. Carlton

[Nico]

I hope GWS wins the flag. They've come from nowhere in the second half of the season and are playing very good footy.

[barry]

Kingsley head made the giants likeable. When he first started and was using the stress ball, I thought, oh no, he's another Brett ratten.
But now he's on the bench, relaxed, statesmen-like, he seems like destiny is on his side.

- - - Updated - - -

1. GWS
2. Brisbane
3. Melbourne
4. Port
5. Carlton
6. Collingwood

[KTigers]

My preferences are identical to Barry's above. It's highly unlikely but I hope GWS can do it. Sorry folks but I really find all the GW$
and "Plastics" references pretty f... silly. Yes, they were given a bunch of draft picks, but we've been given far, far more including
the entire eastern suburbs, north shore and inner west as a supporter base. We get our players to read virtue signalling statements
about rejecting gambling sponsorship whilst having a crypto mob as a sponsor. Seriously. The club is so full of it sometimes.
Oh well, you can't have everything.
It's very unfortunate but I suspect Collingwood are the best team this year and their handout, having the GF played at their
home ground will help them across the line. Like I said, an unfortunate situation. Hopefully we can remedy it next year.

[goswannies]

Add to that Lindsay Fox's gloating when Paul Morwood and Silvio Fochini crossed to the Saints without a clearance.
No biggie for me. We got Paul back (though that’s offset by Jayson Daniels going back and forth the other way, I guess). We did lose Membey to them, who’s been a handy forward. But we got Cazaly, Lockett and Hall off them. And Andrew Dunkley played U19 & reserves with the Saints before making his way to us (via Tassie). And they did take a broken Dan Hannebery off us, while an equally broken Paddy McCartin came our way, I’d say we got far better value out of him, then they did out of Hanners. Sure, they got Dempster and Schneider and Zac Jones, but Craig O’Brien was pretty useful for us. And we probably got the best out of Trent Dennis Land and Fred Campbell before their careers dwindled at Moorabbin. On the whole, we’ve done alright from players crossing between the Swans and the Saints

[sharp9]

I thought that this would be easy for me but as I am watching games my SUB-CONSCIOUS keeps popping up and telling me who I really want to win. I don’t live in Sydney so perhaps I am spared some of the animus toward GWS. I’ve always kinda liked them ‘cos they’re from Sydney. Am I right? Also I really love what Kingsley is bringing. I was never a fan of the previous bloke who’s name escapes me. When you are watching a game and multiple times you look at the screen and go “Gee, whiz, I wish he played for us,” then it’s hard to hate them. Tom Green, Kelly, Himmelberg (didn’t he spend years trying to get out to Fremantle or something?) Taylor (OMG yes!) Idun, that Irish bloke (Brown??) Briggs, and my absolute Swans wish player from a few years ago, Callan Ward. Still can’t stand Whitfield. Yilch! On the other hand my wife barracks for St. Kilda and I was fully on board in 2010/2011. 1966 and all that. But, at the end of the day, I can’t stand Ross Lyon. I respect that he gets the best out of average troops but “You’re quite brilliant, Shane” says everything I need to know about him. I really like it when he loses. Just sayin’. I used to be really keen on Jack Steele. WTF has happened to him? So on to the next game. Always a had a soft spot for Melbourne from way back when Albee was coaching. I liked Garry and Neitz. Also wife’s first EVER game started with Farmer standing in a Richmond player’s head for one of the marks of the century. And the Paul Roos connection will remain as long as Goodwin is there, so nothing to hate. But they did win a couple of years ago - so they shuffle down the pack. Now, I’m finding it really, really hard to hate Collingwoodnthis year. I’ve tried, Lord knows I’ve tried. But he’ll I love Craig McRae. I want to hate the Daicos boys but I can’t. And I wish Beau MacCreary played for us. Where the hell did Nathan Murphy come from? Jamie Elliott is a genius and is genuinely not an asshole. A former Swan and an American in the ruck. And Jack Ginivan is taking his well earned medicine with class. On the other hand it’s nice to be able to just raid GWS’s midfield (Adams) and then totally rort the system (Quaynor) because you sooked it up over Buddy and Heney. I never, ever want anything good to happen to that Jordan tosser (on the field that is). Moore had the chance to choose us, didn’t he? His mistake and screw him. And if Eddie thinks I’ll EVER forgive him he is dreamin’. So no go for Collingwood, obviously….EXCEPT if they play Carlton, ‘cos I hate that mob with every fibre of my being. I can’t stand Michael Voss. He was a bully in the field and then a terrible coach first time round who had no business being in that seat. Can coach now but I still can’t stand him. So number 6 seeding for you!
Now I’ve always liked Brisbane. I remember the first year or so that I followed footy cheering them on when they made a huge late run into the finals with thingo from Carlton as coach…about 1996 I reckon. Walls! And then was fully behind them in their premiership years (even with Voss out front). There are so many fine players and seemingly good blokes (not Harris Andrew - yerck) Charlie, Neale, Big O, and lots of good kids - Wilmott, Fletcher, Robertson for a start. Coleman, love him. How did they get Berry for nothing?? (Well we got Buddy for nothing, no wait, Eddie orchestrated a ban for us NOT breaking the rules.) And I really love Chris Fagan. What a pathway he has taken and what a great coach he is. Anyway, so here I am watching halfway through the second quarter and my sub-conscious tells me that I want Port to win. Why??? In musing I realise that I just live Ken. So other things flow from that. They were in the @@@@ a few years ago and picked up 3 brilliant kids. They play without big egos and deserve everything they are getting. Normally I would want JHF to go down a rabbit hole for sooking it up and reaming the draft (essentially) at North but here I am
wishing him good things. What’s wrong with me? I’ve never liked Port. Ever. So I don’t know what’s happened to me but
1. Port Adelaide
2. Brisbane
3. GWS
4. Melbourne
5. Collingwood
6. Carlton

[Thunder Shaker]

1. Brisbane. Very watchable. Likeable players, most of whom I would have no trouble with if they played for us. Longest without a flag apart from Carlton.
2. Melbourne. A good side, a bit of an underdog.
3. GWS Giants. Yet to win a premiership. Nothing else to say really.
4. Collingwood. Second to fourth is fairly close. Would be ranked higher if they had fewer rough conduct charges at the Tribunal.
5. Port Adelaide. Poached Aliir. Where's the salary cap?
6. Carlton. Treat Sydney as a recruiting zone. Automatically disqualified after what they tried to do in the 1990s.

[rojo]

Am I reading it correctly that Collingwood is likely to face the Giants, and that the Lions will face whoever wins the Melb/Carlton game?

If so, with the Lions playing that match at home they should surely win. Then it would be up to the Giants/Port to topple Collingwood, which is a big ask. A Grand Final featuring the Lions v the Giants would be so sweet?

[KTigers]

Great story in the SMH about Toby Bedford. 18 games in four years at Melbourne, about to play his 18th game this
year at the Giants, who got him for a bag of chips. Has to be the recruit of year.

[MattW]

Re Maynard / Brayshaw:

- agree with Whateley here: https://twitter.com/FOXFOOTY/status/1701171065198702908?t=Tquf0CmTM5hP7Vuy7qk1sw&s=19; and

- Lyon and where Scott got to here: https://twitter.com/FOXFOOTY/status/1701180258450378817?t=KBSACpNc-qQSqGRnGcFeyQ&s=19.

[barry]

If Maynard gets anything less than 3 weeks, then the AFL is corrupt.

Also Michael Christian must resign

[Thunder Shaker]

GWS will not fear travelling to Adelaide for a semi final. They have won games at 11 different venues this year.

[liz]

Everything that truly matters - and what doesn't - ahead of the biggest AFL Tribunal case in years (https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/09/11/everything-that-truly-matters-and-what-doesnt-ahead-of-the-biggest-afl/)

Whately irritates me more often than not, particularly when gets going on umpiring or score review or tribunal issues. But I think this piece is good. He doesn't give an opinion on whether Maynard will or should get suspended, but instead focuses on the questions that need to be asked and answered.

My gut feeling remains that Maynard will be cleared because I think the prevailing "vibe" in the game is still that you are entitled to contest the ball in any legitimate way, regardless of consequences. And I think Maynard's initial attempt to smother was legitimate, and that he likely couldn't control his body after that.

But if he is cleared, I also have no problem with the sport moving the goal posts going forward to effectively outlaw what Maynard did. I'm just not sure how far you take it. You can say that once you choose to leave the ground you have to be aware that you will not be in control of your body and you are culpable for any injury that arises. But what does that do for marking contests, which are a defining feature of our sport?

And what do you do about a Tom McCartin / Shane McAdam case? Does McCartin lose his right to keep his eye on the ball and track it as it bounces? Is he obliged to be more aware of who is around him?

There was another good piece -that also failed to offer an opinion on what should happen to Maynard but is none the less interesting for that - in yesterday's Guardian.

Concussion an issue AFL can’t afford to smother | AFL | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2023/sep/11/concussion-an-issue-afl-cant-afford-to-smother)

[barry]

If you are going to consider what Maynard did as a smother, then you need to consider he got no where near the ball. In an equivalent marking contest it would be called 'an unrealistic attempt'.

I don't think the smother should come into it,.which removes the 'football act' argument completely.

[neilfws]

If you are going to consider what Maynard did as a smother, then you need to consider he got no where near the ball.

I certainly thought it was a very poor attempt at a smother. An effective smother is when a player runs in from the side and launches low and horizontally, close to the ball just as it leaves the boot. To me this looked like "being seen to attempt something" rather than a realistic effort. But then players "leap in hope" all the time.

There is so much debate around this one, very difficult to say which way the ruling will go. I can see the case for "footy act gone wrong" and also for "careless and consequences could have been foreseen".

[Sandridge]

If Maynard gets anything less than 3 weeks, then the AFL is corrupt.

Also Michael Christian must resign

Maynard got off and is free to play in the Preliminary Final. Now everyone knows how to take out an opposition's star player.

[KTigers]

mmm.... so now we have "the football act", the new go to for all those seeking to get off tribunal charges. Soon we'll have
the boofhead contingent down in Melbourne claiming it lies at the heart of the integrity of the game and should be
declared "sacrosanct" itself.

[Daisi]

This is a new low for the AFL. The Melbourne player's career is basically over, and the Collingwood player gets off. That's outrageous. All the AFL talk about protecting players from concussion and CTE is just that, talk. Nothing they say about protecting players can be taken seriously.

They really want Collingwood in the Grand Final, don't they?

I just want to add this....The Melbourne player was knocked out and players on the field thought he may have been dead...that's how bad this collision was. Have you ever seen another player knocked out cold from an attempted smother? nobody jumps that high...

This was, at the least, careless or reckless.

disgusting. And I just saw Eddie McGuire's reaction to the decision and I literally feel sick to the stomach. There is no sympathy or feeling for the injured player at all...

[Scottee]

Maynard got off and is free to play in the Preliminary Final. Now everyone knows how to take out an opposition's star player.Tortured doublethink is the only way to describe this. In years gone by was simply as a "charge" and was a very unambiguous way of getting suspended.

Now it is legitimate to take out any player after the act of kicking the ball as long as you were attempting to smother because it is "in the play".

Only lawyers can produce this sort of travesty.

If the same had happened to Paddy, how many on here would say it was "accidental". Is Tom next in line?

I won't get into the technicalities, but suffice to say Maynard had Bradshaw lined up and directly in his vision when he was charging him. It can hardly be argued that he didn't see the contact coming because he had his eyes on the ball or that he was outside field of view. The impact was a conscious choice.

This idiotic application of ad hoc precedents such as "in the play" is a perfect example of how, as an organisation the AFL doesn't know where it is going.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[barry]

The old boys network has won. Terrible result for the games integrity.

[MattW]

I certainly thought it was a very poor attempt at a smother. An effective smother is when a player runs in from the side and launches low and horizontally, close to the ball just as it leaves the boot. To me this looked like "being seen to attempt something" rather than a realistic effort. But then players "leap in hope" all the time.

There is so much debate around this one, very difficult to say which way the ruling will go. I can see the case for "footy act gone wrong" and also for "careless and consequences could have been foreseen".

It was a poor attempt at smother. I just feel really bad for Brayshaw to have received such head trauma, with life-long consequences.

I think the rules have to change to require players take greater steps to avoid the possibility of coming in contact with the opponent's head. I thought the comments from Chris Scott and Ross Lyon the night before were pretty telling. They tell their players to do all things possible to avoid hitting the opponent's head. The obligations placed on players should be stricter to reflect that sentiment.

[Captain]

I think the right result occurred. Was a pure accident and didn’t warrant a suspension.

[Hotpotato]

So they have condoned and declared that a legal act for future protagonists .

They are stupid . It was very careless and indeed reckless.

It should be appealed.

[mcs]

The result might be right to some degree at this point in time, but I doubt it'll stand as precedence for too long.

At some point the AFL is going to have its hand forced in terms of actively enforcing an effective duty of care in the way it runs the game. The sling tackle crackdown being the first step towards that.

If it wasn't a finals match, I think he would have been no chance to get off the charge.

[stevoswan]

Maynard got off and is free to play in the Preliminary Final. Now everyone knows how to take out an opposition's star player.

Disgusting decision by the tribunal. Makes "the head is sacrosanct" claim by the league an absolute mockery.

No one can ever again be seriously charged with 'charging', ie: bumping while off the ground....."I was attempting to smother".....it will be known as the Maynard defence.....and as you say, sets a precedent that can/will be used to take out opposition guns.

The AFL is officially a joke and the head is no longer sacrosanct.

[stevoswan]

I think the right result occurred. Was a pure accident and didn’t warrant a suspension.

You must think concussion is a joke Captain. Old school tough talk seems to be your thing. If you think turning his shoulder into Brayshaw's head to 'protect himself' was an 'accident' and that he had no other option that's real sad.

[Captain]

You must think concussion is a joke Captain. Old school tough talk seems to be your thing. If you think that was an 'accident' that's real sad.

Grow up and don’t put words in my mouth.

[stevoswan]

Grow up and don’t put words in my mouth.

You said it was an accident.

- - - Updated - - -

Maynard chose to turn his body and shoulder Brayshaw in the head.....anyone who says he had no other option is deluded. All players are told they have a 'duty of care' towards other players heads/brains. Maynard is obviously stupid....or a thug.

[Captain]

You said it was an accident.

Yes, I felt it was an accident. If you don’t agree, fine, then that’s your opinion.

I didn’t say concussion is a joke though. I resent that accusation and it sickens me. I’m fed up with your constant BS personal attacks too if you disagree with an opinion.

[stevoswan]

Yes, I felt it was an accident. If you don’t agree, fine, then that’s your opinion.

I didn’t say concussion is a joke though. I resent that accusation and it sickens me. I’m fed up with your constant BS personal attacks too if you disagree with an opinion.

I may have overstepped the mark with the 'joke' accusation, I apologise.....but I stand by everything else I have said about this incident.

[Kafka's Ghost]

As expected, the Martin decision resulted in a reduction to a one week suspension. Whether you agree with this outcome, or the Maynard one, or not, the whole system has been reduced to farce.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[liz]

Maynard chose to turn his body and shoulder Brayshaw in the head.....anyone who says he had no other option is deluded. All players are told they have a 'duty of care' towards other players heads/brains. Maynard is obviously stupid....or a thug.


The tribunal decided he didn't. That it was a reflex action, not a choice. I can live with that.

I'm not surprised he got off. I think it reflects what is still the prevailing attitude towards injury risk (even head injury) and "the essence of the sport". I suspected he wouldn't be cited, but I think it was great that he was and had to argue his case.

I thought the AFL's case was surprisingly persuasive and coherent. I think they often miss the mark. I was unconvinced by some of the defence case, but the tribunal disagreed.

Just because he got off that doesn't mean I think we should accept that action is just part of the game. I found the comments of Lyon and Scott on AFL 360 last night to be persuasive - and especially as they are coaches and are prepared to accept their players won't always go hard at every contest. I particularly liked Scott's phrasing - which I will do injustice to by paraphrasing - that shepherding and smothering are footy acts, but if you're going to do them, you damn well better make sure you don't hurt someone in the process.

However, I think the views expressed by Scott and Lyon remain in the minority at the moment amongst players, past players, commentators and commenters. We still need a shift before the game is ready to give up some of the "unconditional" elements of the game. This case will shift a few towards the Scott/Lyon camp, and the AFL may choose to try to nudge opinion further in that direction as a result of this. And from the multiple law suits they are handling.

[liz]

As expected, the Martin decision resulted in a reduction to a one week suspension. Whether you agree with this outcome, or the Maynard one, or not, the whole system has been reduced to farce.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I imagine that one of the strongest factors in Carlton's favour was the difference between the sanctions handed to Van Rooyen and Martin on the very same weekend. It's one of the problems that's inadvertently arisen from accelerating the MRO determinations - doing it after each game rather than waiting until the weekend is done. There seemed to be a view held across the commenters that I read that Martin's was worth two, but so was Van Rooyen's. Maybe the latter was on the borderline, and Christian plumped on the "one" side. But put the two together, decide that Martin's was worth two, and you have to give them both two.

[KTigers]

Tortured doublethink is the only way to describe this. In years gone by was simply as a "charge" and was a very unambiguous way of getting suspended.

Now it is legitimate to take out any player after the act of kicking the ball as long as you were attempting to smother because it is "in the play".

Only lawyers can produce this sort of travesty.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Yes, the exact same folks who will be benefitting from a Concussion Settlement down the track.
We are in the US at the moment and went to an NFL game on Sunday. They wear helmets and
the payout here was north of a billion dollars.

[MattW]

Yes, the exact same folks who will be benefitting from a Concussion Settlement down the track.
We are in the US at the moment and went to an NFL game on Sunday. They wear helmets and
the payout here was north of a billion dollars.

And have done for many years: Football helmet - Wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_helmet).

Interesting to read in that article that the NFL now mandate players in some positions wearing a protective cap on top of the helmet.

[Markwebbos]

I think Maynard should have got off. But I suspect they’ll change the rules for next year to outlaw it, I’m reminded of Gary Rohan’s horrific injury caused by a freak “football act”

[Mark26]

I believe we have a duty of care to protect our players from harm. Nobody wants to see Brayshaw retire from the game and live with the horrid repercussions of repeated concussions for the rest of his life.

How Maynard got off, is beyond me. It says the AFL isn't serious about consequences for players' actions.

I consider current penalties for a player who injures another far too lenient. I think the penalty should be commensurate with the player's injury.

Take Blakey on Friday for example. Blakey gets punched in the face. Our medical staff follow protocol and take Blakey off for the best part of the quarter. Meanwhile, Martin is free to continue playing. How is that fair? What's to stop a player from deliberately taking out a key player and giving their team an advantage? Martin should be made to sit off the same time it takes our medical staff to make an informed decision. And if an injured player needs to be subbed out, the perpetrator should be forced out of the game too. I'd take it further as well. If someone has to miss weeks because of a concussion, the penalty should be the same.

If a player has to retire from the game altogether, I'd be in favour of the perpetrator being a forced delist. Whether a club chooses to draft them again is their business.

I realise my view may not be popular, but I love our game and respect the players who sacrifice their bodies so we can enjoy the spectacle. We have to protect them because their playing time is short compared to the rest of their lives.

Only with serious consequences, would players think twice about these cheap footy acts.

[lwjoyner]

it would be interesting to know whoc posters support. maybe we need to incl club supported in system. club bias may come into posters comments. I will declare I anda swns and have been since i was a child.

[Roadrunner]

I believe we have a duty of care to protect our players from harm. Nobody wants to see Brayshaw retire from the game and live with the horrid repercussions of repeated concussions for the rest of his life.

How Maynard got off, is beyond me. It says the AFL isn't serious about consequences for players' actions.

I consider current penalties for a player who injures another far too lenient. I think the penalty should be commensurate with the player's injury.

Take Blakey on Friday for example. Blakey gets punched in the face. Our medical staff follow protocol and take Blakey off for the best part of the quarter. Meanwhile, Martin is free to continue playing. How is that fair? What's to stop a player from deliberately taking out a key player and giving their team an advantage? Martin should be made to sit off the same time it takes our medical staff to make an informed decision. And if an injured player needs to be subbed out, the perpetrator should be forced out of the game too. I'd take it further as well. If someone has to miss weeks because of a concussion, the penalty should be the same.

If a player has to retire from the game altogether, I'd be in favour of the perpetrator being a forced delist. Whether a club chooses to draft them again is their business.

I realise my view may not be popular, but I love our game and respect the players who sacrifice their bodies so we can enjoy the spectacle. We have to protect them because their playing time is short compared to the rest of their lives.

Only with serious consequences, would players think twice about these cheap footy acts.

Agree with most of this Mark, but some are accidental and in some cases split seconds are involved. If a player is not genuinely going for the ball as was the case with Martin, punishment should follow. I didn’t see the Maynard incident but the injury to Bradshaw appears bad and seriously disadvantaged the team.

It seems the appeals Board are hesitant to rub anyone out during the finals which is ridiculous. I know this has also worked in our favour but the point is that the initial Tribunal decision needs more examination by a majority from say 3- 5 ex players and that decision should then be final. They can look at each incident from every angle and there’s no need for advocates or players’ input. In the Martin case for example, he clearly wasn’t attempting to punch the ball so the ump could send him off for as long as the Lizard is off. Neither side is disadvantaged even if the ump gets it wrong. Then the incident is reviewed by the properly constituted Tribunal for a final verdict.

I guess I’m advocating a sending off scenario as in soccer. Worth a try as the current system is a joke and too many players are getting head injuries which have to be reduced to a minimum. Surely we have enough ex players and people with the necessary grey matter to come up with something better than what we have currently.

[Nico]

Maynard's was an old fashioned 'shirt front" and the reason the "down the ground free kick" was introduced. The non suspension takes the game back to the Mathews thuggery era and is now condoned. If Maynard had hit Brayshaw as he kicked it, he would probably have got 4 weeks for a shoulder charge. As they say, "life is all in the timing".

As for Martin; his eyes were firmly on Blakey, never the ball. Blakey was off the ground for 25 minutes of the 2nd term in which time Carlton kicked 4 goals. Blakey came back in the 2nd half and played a ripping half. The incident cost us the game, and that is not drawing a long bow.

[Scottee]

Maynard's was an old fashioned 'shirt front" and the reason the "down the ground free kick" was introduced. The non suspension takes the game back to the Mathews thuggery era and is now condoned. If Maynard had hit Brayshaw as he kicked it, he would probably have got 4 weeks for a shoulder charge. As they say, "life is all in the timing".

As for Martin; his eyes were firmly on Blakey, never the ball. Blakey was off the ground for 25 minutes of the 2nd term in which time Carlton kicked 4 goals. Blakey came back in the 2nd half and played a ripping half. The incident cost us the game, and that is not drawing a long bow.Nico, you nailed it!

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Kafka's Ghost]

Maynard's was an old fashioned 'shirt front" and the reason the "down the ground free kick" was introduced. The non suspension takes the game back to the Mathews thuggery era and is now condoned. If Maynard had hit Brayshaw as he kicked it, he would probably have got 4 weeks for a shoulder charge. As they say, "life is all in the timing".

As for Martin; his eyes were firmly on Blakey, never the ball. Blakey was off the ground for 25 minutes of the 2nd term in which time Carlton kicked 4 goals. Blakey came back in the 2nd half and played a ripping half. The incident cost us the game, and that is not drawing a long bow.

Spot on. Regarding Martin, how his actions weren’t graded “intentional” is amazing. Or perhaps not. I did read one article which rhapsodised at length about how happy the AFL were Sydney was eliminated.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Mel_C]

...

And I just saw Eddie McGuire's reaction to the decision and I literally feel sick to the stomach. There is no sympathy or feeling for the injured player at all...

I felt the same way when I saw the McGuire footage. He is a horrible horrible man.

[AppleCore]

I agree that Martin's hit was an act of thuggery and that he deserved much more than 1 week, but I don't agree that "Maynard's was an old fashioned 'shirt front" " Please watch the incident again. It is absolutely nothing like a shirt front. Maynard was (perhaps like Rampe) unfortunate in terms of the player he made contact with.

[KSAS]

I felt the same way when I saw the McGuire footage. He is a horrible horrible man.

Eddie on FC tonight said he was just having a "bit of fun" and no way was he trying to be disrespectful to the Brayshaw family. How many times have we heard these hollow excuses/apologies before!!!!

Eddie was at a Footy function when the tribunal verdict came through, who then began shouting to the audience in passionate fervour "Justice has been served!!!"

He certainly looked like a buffoon and may not have realised he was captured being so on someone's phone!

[i'm-uninformed2]

I started the week viewing the Maynard incident as an unfortunate accident, and suspect it has been adjudicated accordingly.

But I did tend to find the discussion with Chris Scott and Ross Lyon on AFL360 persuasive, and pulling me more towards a contrary view. On this issue, unlike others where they will game the system a bit, coaches are pretty balanced. They neither want to see a player suspended unfairly, nor one concussed or injured. From memory it was Chris Scott who effectively said two things that resonated: as the person making the play at the other player and having left his feet, Maynard put himself at risk of carrying the duty of care; and that if that was a training drill, Maynard is not doing that to a teammate.

There’s no doubt this will be where it heads in the off-season as the rule is adjusted.

The one the AFL will find more challenging is the marking contest. Let’s say a player goes for a mark and makes no contact with the ball - what would now be deemed and penalised as an unreasonable attempt. In doing so, he knees a player in the head and concusses him. Is he liable, given his original action is unreasonable?

As for the discussion around the Blakey-Martin type incident, think the better solution is to let teams use their subs whilst a player is undergoing the concussion test. Trying to adjudicate incidents in game to determine if a player caused it is difficult, partly because the player has no right of appeal on it. Martin’s one might have been clear cut, but there will be plenty that aren’t.

[Thunder Shaker]

I believe we have a duty of care to protect our players from harm. Nobody wants to see Brayshaw retire from the game and live with the horrid repercussions of repeated concussions for the rest of his life.

How Maynard got off, is beyond me. It says the AFL isn't serious about consequences for players' actions.

I consider current penalties for a player who injures another far too lenient. I think the penalty should be commensurate with the player's injury.

Take Blakey on Friday for example. Blakey gets punched in the face. Our medical staff follow protocol and take Blakey off for the best part of the quarter. Meanwhile, Martin is free to continue playing. How is that fair? What's to stop a player from deliberately taking out a key player and giving their team an advantage? Martin should be made to sit off the same time it takes our medical staff to make an informed decision. And if an injured player needs to be subbed out, the perpetrator should be forced out of the game too. I'd take it further as well. If someone has to miss weeks because of a concussion, the penalty should be the same.
This is why the AFL needs to introduce the send-off rule. The Laws of Football already have this rule, but it is at the discretion of each league whether they have it. The AFL doesn't. The AFL should introduce it after gaining agreement from the clubs. I have discussed this before so I won't go into more detail here.


If a player has to retire from the game altogether, I'd be in favour of the perpetrator being a forced delist. Whether a club chooses to draft them again is their business.
That's probably going too far. Another way is possible. I would be in favour of making the perpetrators legally and personally liable for their misconduct. Perpetrators would reconsider wilful misconduct if their misconduct forced an opponent to retire, they got sued, and they were forced to pay their victims a big compensation settlement. That settlement would be coming straight out of the salary cap of the club. That would force such perpetrators out of the game. How likely is this? Not very; only one or two incidents occur each year that would be deemed wilful and most of them would not force an opponent to retire.

I can see legal action from victims against perpetrators as being the next change. Leigh Matthews was charged with assault for an on-field incident because the (then) VFL didn't use video footage as evidence. The VFL changed the Tribunal rules to allow it. Bad decisions could not be appealed so a player took it to court. The AFL introduced the Appeals Tribunal. Other examples that forced a change include Greg Williams getting nine weeks for umpire contact, Dunkley's late Tribunal hearing before the 1996 Grand Final. Another one that may force a change is Bedford (GWS) waiting 12 days for a Tribunal hearing because the Tribunal panel took a week off. The AFL needs to review its Tribunal processes and may need to change the Laws of Football as well, to clarify what is a reportable incident.

Finally, the Maynard decision was wrong IMO. Jumping into the air was not a legitimate attempt to smother the ball. Brayshaw was not kicking the ball with a foot growing out of his head.

[KSAS]

FWIW, I can understand why the Maynard smother is so decisive taking into consideration it resulted a player being knocked out unconscious for 2 minutes! A legal football act v player missing games with career & long term health concerns. It needed to be tested at the Tribunal & can see why Maynard got off under the current guidelines, which the AFL will now tightened further.

The way I see it, in future any impact to the head, regardless if it was accidental or legal, the verdict will be that the instigator didn't take duty of care & the penalty will be outcome based. I.E. Rampe & McCartin will not get off in future with their cases this year.

There will be more decisive cases tested in future which we've always used to accept as part of the game, particularly where concussion is involved. Marking contests (I.E. Tom Lynch case would not get off ) & friendly fire like Gary Rohan on Jeremy Cameron. Challenging times ahead for the rules of the game due to AFL facing increasing post career litigations in future.

P.S. I wonder if Maynard's attempted smother was successful if it change would how it was percieved or even the outcome with Brayshaw?

[barry]

Selwood sumed it up well last night on 'talking finals': earlier in the season that would have been a suspension, where concussion = suspension. Only late in the season has 'footy act' come into it, helping McCartin and Bedford, and now Maynard.

So it's a big inconsistency, and AFL will need to codify it for next season.

[Mel_C]

Let's go Melbourne. I can't handle another week of Carlton in the media. It's going to be bad enough with Collingwood.

[Sandridge]

Let's go Melbourne. I can't handle another week of Carlton in the media. It's going to be bad enough with Collingwood.

With you, Mel. C'mon Dees! Smash 'em!!!

[Mel_C]

That acting by McGovern was worse than Alex Rance.

[Mel_C]

Carlton winning the score reviews again.

Pickett very undisciplined.

Melbourne have to stop bombing it in.

Cripps is such a faux tough guy.

[Sandridge]

C'mon Dees! Big second half please!

[Blood Fever]

Pickett is a clown who never learns.

[Mel_C]

Seriously Melbourne what are you doing?? The game should have been over!

[longmile]

Umpires coming good for Carlton in this final quarter

[Blood Fever]

Demons blew it big time

[Mel_C]

Piss off Melbourne, what a joke of a team. Two years in a row out in straight sets.

Now we have to put up with the prospect of a fairytale Collingwood v Carlton grand final. It's going to be a very painful week. Please please please Brisbane do us a favour and smash them!!

[i'm-uninformed2]

A total choke. Melbourne’s inability to construct a forward line while it has a generational midfield, ruck and tall defence combo means they’ll have left a flag or two on the table.

[Captain]

The one positive might be Grundy can announce he can come to us now!!

[The Big Cat]

No such thing as a concussion test at Carlton.

[Kafka's Ghost]

That loss will gnaw at the guts of Dees fans forever, but the next sixth months will be excruciating.
Meanwhile, the rest of us have to suffer the incessant media worship of Carlton.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sandridge]

Piss off Melbourne, what a joke of a team. Two years in a row out in straight sets.

Now we have to put up with the prospect of a fairytale Collingwood v Carlton grand final. It's going to be a very painful week. Please please please Brisbane do us a favour and smash them!!

The only good thing about a Collingwood/Carlton GF is that one of them would lose. On tonight's game, I couldn't see Carlton getting anywhere the Pies.

[Blood Fever]

Don't reckon they'll get anywhere near Brisbane either.

[Markwebbos]

No such thing as a concussion test at Carlton.

Surely Weitering had to do one based on that vision? Carlton should face the same questions and consequences as Port.

[KTigers]

And then there were five. C'mon Giants.

[KSAS]

Piss off Melbourne, what a joke of a team. Two years in a row out in straight sets.

Now we have to put up with the prospect of a fairytale Collingwood v Carlton grand final. It's going to be a very painful week. Please please please Brisbane do us a favour and smash them!!

I still remember how devastating it felt when we went out straight sets in successive years (86-87), which sent us spiralling to near extinction 6 years later. Different era (no home finals, all in Melbourne) and circumstances (we were privately owned). Nevertheless, the question will be raised whether Melbourne are now psychology spent as premiership contenders? At least they have a flag to hang their hat on.

As for Carlton, they remind me of Fitzroy in 86 where they carried similar finals euphoria winning the first 2 knockout finals by less than a kick (unfortunately, including us in SF). They entered the PF spent & banged up with injuries and were consequelnlty smashed by Hawthorn (eventual premiers). Can see Carlton having same fate next week at the Gabbatoir!

[KSAS]

From a omen perspective, I heard a Carlton supporter this week ring up & claim since the late 70's Carlton have always won a flag after Argentina had won the soccer World Cup the previous year! (Likewise Hawthorn, when Argentina had lost the World Cup final the previous year).

[MattW]

So, Carlton have won two finals despite not being the better side in either?

[KTigers]

From a omen perspective, I heard a Carlton supporter this week ring up & claim since the late 70's Carlton have always won a flag after Argentina had won the soccer World Cup the previous year! (Likewise Hawthorn, when Argentina had lost the World Cup final the previous year).

That's a very interesting point. When you travel to Argentina, you notice that they talk of little else. In Spanish, of course.

[Nico]

Watching last night I thought Melbourne were quite small, with the exception of their tall backs.

[Hotpotato]

Roll on Giants , win another one.

[stevoswan]

Go Giants.....and stay out of it umpires. Ports first goal was from a very soft crowd free.

[Hotpotato]

V good overlap footy from both teams.

[Mark26]

V good overlap footy from both teams.

It's a quality game to watch. Lots of talent and dare and skill execution on both sides.

[Sandridge]

Giants acquitting themselves very well, at the moment. Foot and hand skills were sloppy early in the quarter but they take a narrow lead into quarter time.

Long way to go in this game but if you're looking for a team to beat Collingwood, i reckon the Giants are up for it more than the Power.

[Daisi]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'? I hope they lose big-they are just so boring and generic..

[stevoswan]

Giants are stamping their authority on this match.....may it continue!

[Hotpotato]

Crowd sign
“In Toby we Strut”

I don’t mind it .

[stevoswan]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'? I hope they lose big-they are just so boring and generic..

I must have missed that.....explain? I mean, they can't be Sydney and they know it.

[Mel_C]

I wasn't expecting this.

I don't care who wins, as long as they beat Collingwood next week!

[Hotpotato]

Boring ?
They are the very opposite .

[Sandridge]

Boring ?
They are the very opposite .

Agreed! They're absolutely smashing Port at the moment. Making the Power look very, very timid!

[stevoswan]

They're 29 points down and two goal reviews have gone against Port and their fans are livid.....it's beautiful.

[Sandridge]

The last 6 scoring shots for the Giants were behinds. They should be that far in front they'd be uncatchable. Power would think they're close enough to threaten but, at the moment, the Giants are a class above. And they're good enough to give Collingwood a hell of a fright!

[Thunder Shaker]

The last 6 scoring shots for the Giants were behinds.
The last 5 scoring shots for Port have also been behinds.

After the Giants' goalfest in the first half of the second quarter, it's gone Port behind, then six Giants' behinds, then four more Port behinds.

[stevoswan]

Just hope the Giants keep the belief in the second half, I'm off to watch a movie on the HT big screen....I'll keep an eye on things via my phone. Go Giants!

[Hotpotato]

What’s the movie ?
Has ‘Her Indoors’ got the remote again ?

[Blood Fever]

Giants should be 56 points up, not 26.

[Hotpotato]

Yeah but Giants have stopped playing fast movement .

[The Big Cat]

Aliir has been very fumbly tonight.

[Hotpotato]

Why would the Giants keep kicking out to where he (Aliir) even is . Crazy.

- - - Updated - - -

Fine mark by T. Green (and goal).

[Sandridge]

Fantastic by the Giants! They've made me think that Collingwood making the GF is not quite the certainty I believed it to be!

[Hotpotato]

They were 15th in round 12.
It’s a dream run .

[barry]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'? I hope they lose big-they are just so boring and generic..
Whatever is the 'richmond' style which now Collingwood and the Giants possess, it's a bloody effective way to play.... and it only takes half a season to learn.

[KTigers]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'? I hope they lose big-they are just so boring and generic..

Really? Are they? It's probably a good idea. I'm not sure the Swans have ownership of the word "Sydney". If they do, someone needs to
tell the people running the Opera House and the Harbour Bridge. New York seems to have survived having the New York Yankees and
the New York Mets. We'll probably be okay too. Boring, generic? Right now they are about as far from that as a footy team can get.

[KTigers]

Whatever is the 'richmond' style which now Collingwood and the Giants possess, it's a bloody effective way to play.... and it only takes half a season to learn.

Yep, one of them is going to be in the GF in a week's time. I'd keep doing it if I were them.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Really? Are they? It's probably a good idea. I'm not sure the Swans have ownership of the word "Sydney". If they do, someone needs to
tell the people running the Opera House and the Harbour Bridge. New York seems to have survived having the New York Yankees and
the New York Mets. We'll probably be okay too. Boring, generic? Right now they are about as far from that as a footy team can get.

Agree. I reckon it’ll be great for both Sydney teams. Quite frankly, the footy the Giants are playing right now is compelling, and I’d love to see them mess up the AFL’s dream of a Collingwood-Carlton GF.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KTigers]

Agree. I reckon it’ll be great for both Sydney teams. Quite frankly, the footy the Giants are playing right now is compelling, and I’d love to see them mess up the AFL’s dream of a Collingwood-Carlton GF.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep, I'm hoping for a GWS-Brisbane GF. Collingwood-Carlton will be unbearable, and get the AFL so excited they'd extend the
MCG GF contract to the year 2525 and induct Darcy Moore and Patrick Cripps into the Hall of Fame during the parade the day
before.

[Blood Fever]

Agree. I reckon it’ll be great for both Sydney teams. Quite frankly, the footy the Giants are playing right now is compelling, and I’d love to see them mess up the AFL’s dream of a Collingwood-Carlton GF.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Last night and next week are the first times I have barracked for GWS. Really hoping for a Lions/Giants GF.

[waswan]

Last night and next week are the first times I have barracked for GWS. Really hoping for a Lions/Giants GF.

Im the same, great to watch.
Pies are similar, coaches back them both in the ein their own ball, not much negative footy (swipe intended).

Most teams have 3 players they like to use to carry the footy, GWS have 15.

Awesome to watch

[Hotpotato]

I’d call it instinctive rapid linkage footy, it works for the majority of the time and is exhilarating to watch.
I want to be at a Lions v Giants Granny.
Here’s hoping.

[stevoswan]

What’s the movie ?
Has ‘Her Indoors’ got the remote again ?

No "hers" in my house, I live on my own. It's great!

The movie was "The Scorch Trials" (Maze Runner sequel).....enjoyed it.:wink:

Nice to see that the Giants scorched the Power.

[Mountain Man]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'?

There was a home made crowd sign that read "Sydney Born"

[MattW]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'?

There was a home made crowd sign that read "Sydney Born"

Ugh - go Collingwood.

[wolftone57]

I think Carlton have been fortunate to have come across two teams who couldn't kick a goal to save themselves. Next week will be a greater challenge, that if they give Lions the same chances will come back to bite them ion the bum. I think next week will be the reckoning for Blues. I am tipping Lions by 10, if they kick straight.

Giants are in top form. First they dismantled Saints. Then Port. Next week they play Pies. People say giants and Pies play a similar game. They play the Richmond frenetic, get the ball on at all costs game. But there is a difference. With the Giants if they turn it over they back up and their mids get back or the defence destroys you. But Pies on the other hand, they give you a chance on every turnover and if you use the ball well you cut their defence out of the equation. Their mids do not fold back quick enough and sometimes not at all if they lose the ball. They can be exposed pretty badly. Dees exposed them after quarter time again and again but could not buy a goal. I think Giants get it done by about 30 points.

A Lions v Giants GF for me. These are the two really in form teams. The AFL will try to get Pies over the line but I think the Giants have far too much structure in place for the Pies. The Pies have a problem in the ruck and if you don't give Moore & Murphy what they want, the long bomb to intercept, they are loose as a goose. Their best player back there is Maynard anyway but Greene plays him very well. He'll play rope a dope on Maynard all day and he'll fall for it. Bobby Hill won't get the room he did against Dees. I think when Ash goes to him he is going to realise he is being taken by a bloke just as quick and elusive. He will have to play both ways all of a sudden, not his strong point.

[KTigers]

Do you see how the Giants are trying to rebrand as 'Sydney'?

There was a home made crowd sign that read "Sydney Born"

Which is true. Not that it matters, but we can't actually say that.

[barry]

Worrying for the Giants is they kind of hit a wall in the last quarter. Reminded me of the last quarter of our 2022 prelim. In hindsight it was the end of our run. We ran out of puff, and got trounced in the grand final. Maybe the Giants are running out of puff too.

[BRS328]

The Giants fade out in the last quarter coincided with the shoulder injury to Briggs which had a big impact on clearances. Anyone who thinks ruckmen are overrated should look at a replay of this game. This is why Grundy is crucial to the Swans in 2024. With the 6, 6, 6 rule centre clearances were the biggest issue Port had, and when Briggs went off there was a noticeable change in momentum. When he returned to the field he was clearly affected by the injury and was no longer as dominant

[MattW]

Which is true. Not that it matters, but we can't actually say that.

Yeah, but so what? It's cheap crap.

[Bloods05]

Which is true. Not that it matters, but we can't actually say that.

They were born in a Melbourne boardroom. The very notion that they are a club that grew out of Sydney is ridiculous.

[Kafka's Ghost]

A Lions-Giants GF; no Victorian team, an AFL admin thwarted and a media pack that’s lost its mind. I’d like to see that!


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Ruck'n'Roll]

The Giants fade out in the last quarter coincided with the shoulder injury to Briggs which had a big impact on clearances. Anyone who thinks ruckmen are overrated should look at a replay of this game. This is why Grundy is crucial to the Swans in 2024. With the 6, 6, 6 rule centre clearances were the biggest issue Port had, and when Briggs went off there was a noticeable change in momentum. When he returned to the field he was clearly affected by the injury and was no longer as dominant

a) Flynn is no slouch, so if Briggs is unavailable they won't be completely stuffed for a ruckman.
b) And where is Ludwig?

[KTigers]

They were born in a Melbourne boardroom. The very notion that they are a club that grew out of Sydney is ridiculous.

Do you reckon it was the same Melbourne boardroom that decided South Melbourne needed to move up to Sydney in the late
70s/early 80s? Cos I don't remember seeing any people up here marching down George St demanding Sydney have its own
VFL team.

[Bloods05]

Do you reckon it was the same Melbourne boardroom that decided South Melbourne needed to move up to Sydney in the late
70s/early 80s? Cos I don't remember seeing any people up here marching down George St demanding Sydney have its own
VFL team.
So what? They're the ones making the claim, not us. We know who we are and we are comfortable with that. They are trying to invent an identity based on a falsehood. Two very different things.