AFL

[unapologetic pedant]

On 29/05/2024 at 00:24, unapologetic pedant said:

AFL tackles are usually one-on-one and scarcely more than a grab. Found out from Demons v Blues that robust tackling is too dangerous for fumblers.

It would appear I'm not the only sceptic. Fumblers have felt the need mid-season to clarify the "holding-the-ball" rule -

"After weeks of backlash from coaches and fans, the AFL hierarchy has directed umpires to shorten the reasonable time component of the rule.

It has become clear throughout the season that in discharging their duty of care whilst executing a tackle, tacklers are positively electing not to take tackled players to ground in the tackle or are generally doing so in a reasonable way including by not using excessive force, the league said in a statement.

As a consequence, we are seeing players hold on to the ball slightly longer and challenging the definition of reasonable time"

Clear as mud.

[unapologetic pedant]

Congrats to North Melbourne. First win of the year.

I'd like @Sports Prophet to look at the holding-the-ball free-kick given against WCE for North's penultimate goal and tell me AFL rules make sense.

A contentious call was also decisive in the Saints/Suns game. 

[Sports Prophet]

On 08/06/2024 at 20:12, unapologetic pedant said:

Congrats to North Melbourne. First win of the year.

I'd like @Sports Prophet to look at the holding-the-ball free-kick given against WCE for North's penultimate goal and tell me AFL rules make sense.

A contentious call was also decisive in the Saints/Suns game. 

That’s an easy one. A player who is not on his feet and drags an open ball back to himself is liable for holding the ball if tackled in the same manner as a player who is tackled having been deemed to have had prior opportunity to dispose of it. The commentator even calls it in that exact manner. 

The purpose of this rule is to dissuade players employing tactics to slow the match with another ball up. 

What could/should the player have done in this instance? Slap it out of there to a team mate or get to his feet. 

https://www.afl.com.au/video/1147445/highlights-west-coast-v-north-melbourne?videoId=1147445&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1717841221001

[unapologetic pedant]

48 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

That’s an easy one. A player who is not on his feet and drags an open ball back to himself is liable for holding the ball if tackled in the same manner as a player who is tackled having been deemed to have had prior opportunity to dispose of it. The commentator even calls it in that exact manner. 

The purpose of this rule is to dissuade players employing tactics to slow the match with another ball up. 

What could/should the player have done in this instance? Slap it out of there to a team mate or get to his feet. 

Not buying it. How was the bloke supposed to know he would be tackled a millisecond after he dragged the ball in? The tackler came from behind, out of his vision. Home crowd agreed with me. You're outnumbered, mate.

Did you see the WCE stuff-up that led to a North goal in the second quarter? Like a RL player throwing an intercept in his own in-goal.

[unapologetic pedant]

Another 20k attendance at AAMI Park v Knights. Anecdotal evidence of Essendon and Carlton merch dotted around. Hard to put a figure on how many AFL fans double-up when convenient.

Good chance Storm will average over 20k for the season. Some speculation on SM that the demise of the Rebels will benefit RL. Highly unlikely, ripple at most. 

Wooing the AFL multitude is a better bet. Fumblers are steeped in week-to-week club fandom. They go to games rather than sit on their sofas. If their Fumble team clashes with Storm, the former will no doubt take priority, but so what? A single-figure percentage of Magpies/Bombers/Blues/Tigers/Hawks members together would more than fill AAMI Park.

Further illustrates why Perth should get the 18th licence. And that Adelaide shouldn't be off the radar.

[lucky 7]

Lets see how Vicky Kicky house handles this.

[unapologetic pedant]

"AFL is planning to stage the first women's International Rules match between Australia and Ireland in Adelaide next year"

"The match could potentially be a hybrid game, or it could be Australian Rules given there are 33 Irish players in AFLW right now"

Intriguing, in light of @Sports Prophet's penchant for overseas recruits to NRLW.

Edited June 13, 2024 by unapologetic pedant

[Sports Prophet]

On 10/06/2024 at 17:21, unapologetic pedant said:

Not buying it. How was the bloke supposed to know he would be tackled a millisecond after he dragged the ball in? The tackler came from behind, out of his vision. Home crowd agreed with me. You're outnumbered, mate.

 

There is nothing to buy, because nothing is being sold, it is a simple rule.

The player is making a negative play by pulling the ball from an open play environment back under his body where it can’t be played. It doesn’t matter if he was to know someone was on him or not.

Like in all Australian Rules environments (which are 360 degrees) every player should expect there is a chance an opponent might be on their hammer. Like running with the ball from a mark and being immediately tackled by an opponent you didn’t see, this dragging the ball back in is a replica of a “holding the ball” decision.

It’s a free kick and I would expect with the explanation above you will understand why so.

[Sports Prophet]

On 11/06/2024 at 17:14, unapologetic pedant said:

Another 20k attendance at AAMI Park v Knights. Anecdotal evidence of Essendon and Carlton merch dotted around. Hard to put a figure on how many AFL fans double-up when convenient.

Good chance Storm will average over 20k for the season. Some speculation on SM that the demise of the Rebels will benefit RL. Highly unlikely, ripple at most. 

Wooing the AFL multitude is a better bet. Fumblers are steeped in week-to-week club fandom. They go to games rather than sit on their sofas. If their Fumble team clashes with Storm, the former will no doubt take priority, but so what? A single-figure percentage of Magpies/Bombers/Blues/Tigers/Hawks members together would more than fill AAMI Park.

Further illustrates why Perth should get the 18th licence. And that Adelaide shouldn't be off the radar.

I feel you have far too much appreciation for AFL to continually refer to the match as “Fumbleball” like some south Sydney born bumpkin who hates a sport because he was told to.

You are either using the term to play to the bumpkins that will jump on the back of any such reference, or you have disregarded your own intelligence to fall into the trap of playing at a bumpkin standard.

If you are proposing an enticement of Victorian AFL fans to become Storm supporters, then I don’t think snide Fumbleball comments will help. Even if they are predominantly hidden in an English RL forum.

It’s not like I’m angry with you… I’m just disappointed

P.s. can’t wait to go watch an ANZAC Day clash at the ‘G’ with you.

[Sports Prophet]

45 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

"AFL is planning to stage the first women's International Rules match between Australia and Ireland in Adelaide next year"

"The match could potentially be a hybrid game, or it could be Australian Rules given there are 33 Irish players in AFLW right now"

Intriguing, in light of @Sports Prophet's penchant for overseas recruits to NRLW.

Well, it just reinforces my point. Give an individual an opportunity, just wait for you to see how common the ambition is.

[unapologetic pedant]

3 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Well, it just reinforces my point. Give an individual an opportunity, just wait for you to see how common the ambition is.

Could you paraphrase please?

[unapologetic pedant]

3 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

The player is making a negative play by pulling the ball from an open play environment back under his body where it can’t be played. It doesn’t matter if he was to know someone was on him or not.

Without an immediate smothering tackle, he could have got up or given a hand-pass off the deck. And the umpire would have called "Play On". 

Hence, he concedes a free kick because he lacks the psychic power to anticipate tackles.

[unapologetic pedant]

4 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

I feel you have far too much appreciation for AFL to continually refer to the match as “Fumbleball” like some south Sydney born bumpkin who hates a sport because he was told to.

I said "Fumble" not "Fumbleball".

[Sports Prophet]

4 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Could you paraphrase please?

Show one man/woman a gold mine, see how many miners there will be.

[Sports Prophet]

3 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Without an immediate smothering tackle, he could have got up or given a hand-pass off the deck. And the umpire would have called "Play On". 

Hence, he concedes a free kick because he lacks the psychic power to anticipate tackles.

Physic has nothing to do with anticipation. A player makes the deliberate decision to “take possession” by deliberately pulling the ball under himself. He has made a deliberate decision to accept the ball, rather than move it on. It’s taking possession where he had prior opportunity to dispose of it.

I agree with the ruling and the decision. You can disagree or protest as much as you want and you won’t be alone, even amongst the faithful. All I was doing is explaining it.

[Sports Prophet]

3 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I said "Fumble" not "Fumbleball".

You know what you are doing. So you can either change it or not, I don’t really care, but I do enjoy our conversations and prefer them to be without weak sledges. 

[unapologetic pedant]

7 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Show one man/woman a gold mine, see how many miners there will be.

I knew there were some Irish girls in AFLW, didn't realize it was as many as 33.

Possibly a consequence of precipitate over-expansion.

[unapologetic pedant]

15 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

If you are proposing an enticement of Victorian AFL fans to become Storm supporters, then I don’t think snide Fumbleball comments will help. Even if they are predominantly hidden in an English RL forum.

Check out some Fumbler comments on SM about PVL - "bogan shyster liar", etc.

The F word is just part of NRL/AFL badinage and bonhomie. Floating-voter Victorian Fumblers might not be as prickly as their counterparts in Sydney.

Believe it or not, I have a BigFumble account. Can't post though (insufficient privileges). Something went wrong with the confirmation email.

Tone would be a challenge. Obviously F word a no-no. Members have to choose an AFL team for their profile. Fitzroy not an option, so I went for North Melbourne.

Interestingly, the NRL section on BF is a lot more active than the AFL section on L.U.

[lucky 7]

17 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

"AFL is planning to stage the first women's International Rules match between Australia and Ireland in Adelaide next year"

"The match could potentially be a hybrid game, or it could be Australian Rules given there are 33 Irish players in AFLW right now"

Intriguing, in light of @Sports Prophet's penchant for overseas recruits to NRLW.

AFL trying to be relevant on the international stage and to think there is not a single profeesional or semi professional AFL club outside of Australia.

[lucky 7]

1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Check out some Fumbler comments on SM about PVL - "bogan shyster liar", etc.

The F word is just part of NRL/AFL badinage and bonhomie. Floating-voter Victorian Fumblers might not be as prickly as their counterparts in Sydney.

Believe it or not, I have a BigFumble account. Can't post though (insufficient privileges). Something went wrong with the confirmation email.

Tone would be a challenge. Obviously F word a no-no. Members have to choose an AFL team for their profile. Fitzroy not an option, so I went for North Melbourne.

Interestingly, the NRL section on BF is a lot more active than the AFL section on L.U.

Probably because bigfooty posters have a huge fear of the NRL and just look at the comments to confirm that, and have a huge fear of PV as confirmed by bigfooty posters.

[unapologetic pedant]

On 14/06/2024 at 16:02, unapologetic pedant said:

Fitzroy not an option, so I went for North Melbourne.

My new faves almost pulled off the shock of the season. For once, a miss didn't do the trick. Sickener.

[unapologetic pedant]

On 14/06/2024 at 17:13, lucky 7 said:

Probably because bigfooty posters have a huge fear of the NRL and just look at the comments to confirm that, and have a huge fear of PV as confirmed by bigfooty posters.

Posters are voters.

NRL fans who think the PNG franchise will be a free lunch should check out reactions on BF. 

[The Future is League]

4 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Posters are voters.

NRL fans who think the PNG franchise will be a free lunch should check out reactions on BF. 

I like others read the comments on BF when i want a laugh, and no other sport has more insecure posters than the AFL.

To say they jump at shadows is an understatement.

[unapologetic pedant]

3 hours ago, The Future is League said:

I like others read the comments on BF when i want a laugh, and no other sport has more insecure posters than the AFL.

To say they jump at shadows is an understatement.

One of the most belligerent anti-NRL posters has the self-incriminating username "weewilly". He was comparing PVL to Hitler the other day.

[The Future is League]

18 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

One of the most belligerent anti-NRL posters has the self-incriminating username "weewilly". He was comparing PVL to Hitler the other day.

Yes and he's still allowed to post comments. which tells you all you need to know about Bigfooty mods, which suggests to they support his comments, otherwise he would be banned for a short while.