Jump to content
Melbourne Football

ecguymer

Members
  • Posts

    242
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ecguymer

  1. 5 hours ago, thisphantomfortress said:

    It's only an issue because we didn't have the collective balls to cut free of them in '99. 

    ...that was mostly because Howard proposed a model where parliament picked the president, the president had less powers than the governor-general currently has, and can be dismissed by the PM apparently at will.....He didn't want the republic so he came up with a model that even die-hard republicans would thing twice about voting for it

  2. 16 hours ago, jw1739 said:

    FMD, after 6 years of government being hijacked by LGBTIQ+ we now have the fucking republic issue again.

    I like the monarchy; they're almost certainly cheaper than the alternatives, they don't fuck shit up, and they don't come with the incessant political campaigning that would come with most republic models......ok, maybe like is a bit strong a word......

  3. We hear the most about the South Melbourne bid because they are making the most noise; most of the others considering a bid are mostly keeping quite, presumably waiting on the criteria to be released. And I'm pretty sure the South Melbourne bid happened before the FFA had even confirmed they were actively looking at expanding the league. We're also getting noise and speculation about bids that don't actually exist yet (no one has actually organised a bid for South Sydney or Canberra yet, and I don't think Northern/Queensland Furry have confirmed there intent either way yet; and as for Canberra, Capital Football has outright said that they will not be making a bid themselves as they have other priorities). As we are still waiting on the criteria, we have no idea who has any chance of getting in at this stage; for all we know, there could be a "not from Melbourne or Sydney" clause or a "no currently existing clubs" condition in the criteria (though I doubt it); at this point all we know for certain is that the FFA want 2 new clubs to start from the season after next and they they are currently getting input from some major stakeholders while drawing up the details for how it's all going to work.

  4. Ultimately, if the FFA does do a crackdown on simulation, they'll need to be careful not to deviate too far from internationally accepted interpretations of the rules in an effort to appease the "it's not the Australian way" crowd (many of whom don't seem to like the sport to begin with); as doing so would be detrimental for player recruitment (both international players coming in, and good young players wanting some seasoning before going overseas), the apparently growing international audience the league currently has, and for international opportunities for our refs (one of the ways that we can currently improve the refs, both individually and as a group); and then potential flow-on effects to sponsorship and international investment

    • Like 3
  5. 16 minutes ago, KSK_47 said:

    Ok. This is the last time i will say this. Going to ground and faking an injury are two different things. Going to ground is fine. Faking an injury is not

     

    ....I think I missed you making that point earlier, and it does help explain what you're saying better; I'm still not fully understanding your stance and interpretation, but I suspect that mostly comes from my own lack of experience, and I'm happy to just leave the issue alone

  6. 3 minutes ago, KSK_47 said:

    Its to make it look worse than it really is in an attempt to sway the refs opinion on the player that made the tackle. 

    Surely you know the answer to that

    ....so...you're saying that making sure that the ref knows that an incident happened is trying to deceive him/her?

  7. 6 minutes ago, KSK_47 said:

    Attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury is simulation. Holding your face, rolling round like you have been injured when you are not is simulation. Theatrics is simulation

    Obviously there is no clear cut answer but what Brandan did last night (like what North did against us) is simulation and should be punished

    Just out of interest, when a genuine offence occurs and the player fouled over-reacts; how is that attempting to deceive the referee? Yes they are feigning injury, but it is to draw the attention to a situation that happened that is in violation of the rules.

  8. 10 hours ago, bumpyknuckles said:

    I think he/she was referring to my post about having a season seat but wanting to sit with friends.

    Apparently I have to pay for a new seat, cant transfer over my season seat for a ticket elsewhere.

    That is what the club told me anyway, well they didn't tell me, after saying it was a ticketek issue, a mate called asking the same question and they told him.

    you get a discount if you "upgrade" your ticket, but moving or downgrading doesn't seem to be an option

  9. 8 hours ago, RedAndWhitePride said:

    As someone has already stated on another forum, the quietness of the Geelong bid may suggest that they know it's in the bag,

     

    or they could just be waiting for the criteria to be released before they expend more time and effort, like the FFA has asked people to do

  10. O' Rourke has also come out and said that the criteria will be released early in the new year and that bidders should avoid putting in heaps of time and effort (and lay off pushing for Government support) until said criteria is released; this makes me half thing that some of the bids that are being actively pushed may have elements that either will be or are likely to be incompatible with the criteria......and part of me would find it quite amusing if South Melbourne ignores this advice, keeps pushing its bid, and then when the criteria is released finds out that much of the work they've put in can't actually be used...

×
×
  • Create New...