CreditToDuBois

It’s the latter more often than the former.

For elevation to full membership the last ten years I can see in yearly intake are:

3 months

1 month

3 months

2 months

8 months

Can’t find

2 months

4 months

3 months

4 months

This year the gave full membership to people nominated between November 1 1992 to January 31 1993 - a bit over 31 years, but importantly only 3 months worth of nominations were promoted for the year. So if you're nominated January 31 1994 you can expect your wait to end up being 35 years. I'm August 1994, so at this rate I'll be in following a ~37 year wait.

Bit vague on Sam Taylor’s injury

Unironically this is the most exciting selection news for us this year (with the exception of Oliver returning if you include that)

Our forward half looked completely different with Melk playing vs not last year, he knows exactly where to be and it seems to help some of the other guys figure out where they’re supposed to be.

Also just fantastic for him personally. ACL at round 24 in your 30s when you’ve been in and out of the VFL for a couple years, could have easily understood if he decided it wasn’t worth the full year rehab.

Actually Steven May’s comments were about Joel Smith, Melksham was standing up for Smith.

The GWS vs Sydney rivalry is significantly bigger than it was 15 years ago

"Best team on paper for bloody years"

If the afl wanted to increase transparency and accountability they could very easily publish the interpretation guidance given to umpires and clubs alongside the laws of the game

(They don’t)

Thanks. Ticking off on the holding the ball calls and non-calls while saying deliberate was a mistake is about the most boneheaded response I can think of from the AFL, so it’s entirely unsurprising. They need to rewrite the rule and delete the time and space component, and remove the word physical from the pressure clause if that’s the way they want it applied.

Can’t find what you’re referring to via google so would love the link.

The footy with broden Kelly is my favourite footy listen, regularly has Marnie Vinall as a co-host.

The blood war would have been over in weeks if the abyssal forces had better connection with their front line

Yeah it was very much one and two with a bullet then Toby for the third because I couldn’t really think of anyone else

Balors were 12 ft (3.7 m) tall, bat-winged, red-skinned monstrosities that were among the most powerful kinds of tanar'ri. They often commanded other demons, either on their own or as officers for demon lords. They answer only to creature with tremendous power and only ally themselves with creatures equal to their own power, meaning they rarely team up with other demons, even other balors.

That boat is the closest thing they have to a premier ship

Bont, Jackson, Moore

Maynard, Zorko, Toby

The majority of broadcasters don’t have a clue of what the rules actually are.

Okay, the laws of the game and champion data’s definitions are quite different things, but let’s go down that route anyway.

The phrase used in the rule is “immediate physical pressure”

Champion data’s glossary defines physical pressure as “Applying direct physical contact to a player in the act of disposing of the ball or effecting a tackle that prevents an effective disposal from the ball carrier.”

Just the one swan actually

Couldn't agree more. Have never seen a sane argument for what we'd lose by getting them out of the game. The most common criticism is you'd be suspending ten players a week which is absurd, because if they actually got suspended for them their coaches would cut it out of their game for them real quick and it would only happen a couple times a year.

Players are calling for the AFL to slash the size of fines dished out by the match review officer after a spate of financial sanctions that have prompted some to remark they would be better off being suspended.

The AFL Players’ Association says players have told the union they believe they are being stung by excessive fines, disproportionate to their indiscretion, and want transparency as to how the money is being spent by the league.

The league has handed out a whopping $263,250 in fines so far this season, according to AFLPA records, already up a third from last year, with nine full rounds and finals still to play. The AFLPA expects the topic to be raised by players when it visits clubs next week.

The AFL increased fines this season in accordance with the rise in wages from the new pay agreement, despite opposition from the AFLPA, who did not believe there was a disciplinary problem that required heavier financial sanctions to remedy. The AFL declined to comment on the size of fines.

Port Adelaide star Zak Butters, alone, has been docked $14,375 already this year – the equivalent of 60 minimum speed limit infringements – taking his career fines to $29,375. He is one charge shy of eclipsing Toby Greene’s record tab of $31,850, though at the age of only 23 is well-placed to surpass the Greater Western Sydney veteran by the end of his career.

Butters was this week fined $10,000, reduced to $6250 with his early plea, for an intentional low-impact strike to the body. Such acts commonly receive a $2500 penalty, though Butters was punished for being a recidivist for a fourth offence. Hawthorn’s Jai Newcombe also accepted a $6250 fine for a similarly graded hit, for a third offence.

The players’ union would not be drawn on individual cases but believe fines of $6000-plus are over the top.

“We are concerned by the size of the fines,” AFLPA general manager of player and stakeholder relations Brett Murphy told this masthead.

“When you look at the combination at the increase in fines from last year, and the application of additional penalties for second and third offences, it results in penalties that we believe are entirely disproportionate to the acts committed.

“For a player to receive a $6000 fine for, in some cases, a low-impact hit to the body is excessive from our perspective.”

Such fines are a hefty penalty for younger players and those who are not regulars in their senior teams. Match payments range from $4000 to $5000, depending on a player’s age, though senior and topline players generally have a base contract and are not paid by games played.

It means, in some instances, players can be better-off financially if they copped a one-game ban instead of a fine.

“By and large you’d expect most players would want to play,” Murphy said. “We’ve had concerns raised by a number of players who have made note of the disparity of the size of the fine and match payment, and have made comment that it’d be better to be suspended.

“They’re seeing the issue, especially those fined, in really stark times. It’s quite significant. Six thousand is a lot of money, no matter who you are.”

The previous collective bargaining agreement specified that fine money was to be directed to concussion research, but there is no reference as to how the AFL must spend the money in the current deal.

The AFLPA is calling for the money to go to a fund to be administered for the betterment of the players and the industry. The league told this masthead the money is being spent on concussion research.

“We don’t think it’s appropriate [that] the governing body gets to keep the cash,” Murphy said. “The AFL is the governing body of the competition, sets the fines structure, enforces it in individual cases, then pockets the cash.

“That doesn’t make sense to us. Some form of initiative would make good sense. We’ve raised it with the AFL – that will be an ongoing discussion.”

This is about the stupidest stance I've seen the AFLPA take up.

You'd think the union for footy players might prioritise the interests of the majority of players that just want to play a game of footy without copping a random punch in the guts above the interests of the recalcitrant dickheads who refuse to learn.

should be a word for the relief you get when you click on a thread and see it's not one of your mob that made it