I love a good Grant Thomas Bake...

[Joffa Burns]

There were 200 applicants and Demetriou had to go to his mate and asked him to apply? Doesn't say much for the candidates - all 200 of them.

Grant ‘f@t @rse’ Thomas the irrelevant w@nker bemoaning a job’s for the boy’s appointment and accusing the AFL of patronising the supporters.....bahahahahaha

Short memory (must have a) F@tty Thomas, you and Hairy Butterss patronized and mislead the saints members and football public with your “coaching selection processâ€

[Thinline]

Really, I think that the rights or wrongs of the interchange rule are secondary to the point that GT is cunningly making.

Any fool can introduce an idea developed by others.

GT's article is a deliberate swipe at Dimwit, and suggests the question that how come a friend of Dimwit's was the best of 200 applicants for the position.

Anderson was a lawyer, an eminently good one, engaged by the AFL. The context in which he and Demetriou got tp know each other was a professional one.

Much as I enjoy a good old fashioned conspiracy, if you think anything other than Anderson's nous go him the job, you're sadly mistaken

[plugger66]

There is no point saying the plans would be in 5-10 years with rules because I doubt they would know past the next 2 years.

I don't agree with that.

And without coming across as offensive, I think it's naive to think the AFL don't have a long term plan.

And unless they're a amateur bunch of lunatics, every rule change and decision they make would be made with the intention of following the plan.

I was talking about rules not how the comp will be run. I bet the latest rules werent on the table 10 years ago.

[starsign]

There is no point saying the plans would be in 5-10 years with rules because I doubt they would know past the next 2 years.

I don't agree with that.

And without coming across as offensive, I think it's naive to think the AFL don't have a long term plan.

And unless they're a amateur bunch of lunatics, every rule change and decision they make would be made with the intention of following the plan.

Johnny Member you have a short member ...er memory
And without coming across as offensive, I think it's naive to think the AFL don't have a long term plan.

these two clowns Zig & Zag have been making it up as they go along from day one
there's been a couple of obvious examples when knee jerfk reactions have seen them introduce new rules without any consultation whatever in sperm of the moment

The original interchange chaos and kick out fiasco's come to mind for starters

what ever happened to consultation with major stakeholders etc before new rules were muted, trialled then perhaps introduced through pre-season games

What we have witnessed over the past few years has been adhoc rule changed DURING the season with no consultation whatever

Call that long term planning ?? maybe for dictators who keep their long term plans under their pillow with their viagra tablets!!!

[plugger66]

There is no point saying the plans would be in 5-10 years with rules because I doubt they would know past the next 2 years.

I don't agree with that.

And without coming across as offensive, I think it's naive to think the AFL don't have a long term plan.

And unless they're a amateur bunch of lunatics, every rule change and decision they make would be made with the intention of following the plan.

Johnny Member you have a short member ...er memory
And without coming across as offensive, I think it's naive to think the AFL don't have a long term plan.

these two clowns Zig & Zag have been making it up as they go along from day one
there's been a couple of obvious examples when knee jerfk reactions have seen them introduce new rules without any consultation whatever in sperm of the moment

The original interchange chaos and kick out fiasco's come to mind for starters

what ever happened to consultation with major stakeholders etc before new rules were muted, trialled then perhaps introduced through pre-season games

What we have witnessed over the past few years has been adhoc rule changed DURING the season with no consultation whatever

Call that long term planning ?? maybe for dictators who keep their long term plans under their pillow with their viagra tablets!!!

I can only remember one change during the year and that was the interchange rules. You sound really upset with the rule changes. Can you tell all the ones that have made the game worse and why?

[meher baba]

Really, I think that the rights or wrongs of the interchange rule are secondary to the point that GT is cunningly making.

Any fool can introduce an idea developed by others.

GT's article is a deliberate swipe at Dimwit, and suggests the question that how come a friend of Dimwit's was the best of 200 applicants for the position.

Anderson was a lawyer, an eminently good one, engaged by the AFL. The context in which he and Demetriou got tp know each other was a professional one.

Much as I enjoy a good old fashioned conspiracy, if you think anything other than Anderson's nous go him the job, you're sadly mistaken

Gee, I've worked in a variety of organizations and dealt with a much wider variety, but I can't recall a lawyer being appointed the Operations Manager at any of them. Totally different skill sets.

That said, I disagree with GT this time. The rule change has had a good effect on the game. IMO there should be 2 subs and only 2 interchanges.

[Moccha]

I prefer a good pasta bake rather than a Grant Thomas bake

[stinger]

thomas is right.....100% spot on with his comments....

[plugger66]

thomas is right.....100% spot on with his comments....

And why is that. Dont expect an answer, you dont have the courage or more importantly the knowledge of football.

[The Fireman]

the sub rule is a winner and here to stay

[Thinline]

Really, I think that the rights or wrongs of the interchange rule are secondary to the point that GT is cunningly making.

Any fool can introduce an idea developed by others.

GT's article is a deliberate swipe at Dimwit, and suggests the question that how come a friend of Dimwit's was the best of 200 applicants for the position.

Anderson was a lawyer, an eminently good one, engaged by the AFL. The context in which he and Demetriou got tp know each other was a professional one.

Much as I enjoy a good old fashioned conspiracy, if you think anything other than Anderson's nous go him the job, you're sadly mistaken

Gee, I've worked in a variety of organizations and dealt with a much wider variety, but I can't recall a lawyer being appointed the Operations Manager at any of them. Totally different skill sets.

He was a sports law specialist with a background in commercial law. Pretty sure there was an MBA in there too, from memory. Took control of a practice group as no more than a pup when his senior partner died suddenly. Frankly, he was a gun. There are plenty who make the leap from private law or accounting practice to COO/CEO within the confines of the sports industry. Travis Auld at Essendon and then Gold Coast is another example. Malcolm Speed the former Cricket administrator is another.

I have no personal loyalty attached to AA by the way. Just know people who worked with him.

[SaintPav]

thomas is right.....100% spot on with his comments....

And why is that. Dont expect an answer, you dont have the courage or more importantly the knowledge of football.

Mick Malthouse would disagree with you.

[plugger66]

thomas is right.....100% spot on with his comments....

And why is that. Dont expect an answer, you dont have the courage or more importantly the knowledge of football.

Mick Malthouse would disagree with you.

Well he would have me covered for knowledge but at least i gave some reasons why I like it. I am sure he would have better reasons why it is no good but unless he comes on this forum we may not know them. And I cant ask him because his Son doesnt play at my local club anymore.

[SaintPav]

thomas is right.....100% spot on with his comments....

And why is that. Dont expect an answer, you dont have the courage or more importantly the knowledge of football.

Mick Malthouse would disagree with you.

Well he would have me covered for knowledge but at least i gave some reasons why I like it. I am sure he would have better reasons why it is no good but unless he comes on this forum we may not know them. And I cant ask him because his Son doesnt play at my local club anymore.

I agree with your reasons but we cannot be certain if that was by design. I think most people would like a bit more transparency behind these decisions. Most people don't trust the AFL which is normal and quite frankly, I don't blame them.

[Moods]

thomas is right.....100% spot on with his comments....

And why is that. Dont expect an answer, you dont have the courage or more importantly the knowledge of football.

Mick Malthouse would disagree with you.

Well he would have me covered for knowledge but at least i gave some reasons why I like it. I am sure he would have better reasons why it is no good but unless he comes on this forum we may not know them. And I cant ask him because his Son doesnt play at my local club anymore.

I agree with your reasons but we cannot be certain if that was by design. I think most people would like a bit more transparency behind these decisions. Most people don't trust the AFL which is normal and quite frankly, I don't blame them.

You know what Saint Pav, I've been following footy for 35 years (or near enough) Has anyone EVER like the AFL commission or in particular the man in charge? They no longer introduce him at GF's b/c he always gets embarrassingly booed (whoever he is)

And yet our game goes from strength to strength - being easily the most popular and most watched sport in the country - the envy of it's nearest rivals, RL, ARU, and soccer. For all the rule changes that are supposedly sabotaging our game, I reckon just about every one of them has been a great introduction, and is one of the reasons the AFL maintain their popularity.

The sub rule has been fantastic I reckon (terrible for supercoach players though) and allows for a fairer contest. Who doesn't want that in any sports contest? I've also enjoyed Watson, Swan, Selwood, even Judd pushing fwd and kicking goals and proving that they aren't just endurance/clearance experts but can do other tricks. The mark of a true footballer I've always said is one who can create a goal - this coming from a bloke who played the majority of his footy in the backline

GT has an agenda I reckon - his hatred of Demetriou and Anderson is obvious whenever you hear him speak.

I don't love the AFL commission, but why would I? My vested interest is with the saints, not the greater need of footy. This is why RL is stuffed, b/c the clubs still have too much say.

[meher baba]

Really, I think that the rights or wrongs of the interchange rule are secondary to the point that GT is cunningly making.

Any fool can introduce an idea developed by others.

GT's article is a deliberate swipe at Dimwit, and suggests the question that how come a friend of Dimwit's was the best of 200 applicants for the position.

Anderson was a lawyer, an eminently good one, engaged by the AFL. The context in which he and Demetriou got tp know each other was a professional one.

Much as I enjoy a good old fashioned conspiracy, if you think anything other than Anderson's nous go him the job, you're sadly mistaken

Gee, I've worked in a variety of organizations and dealt with a much wider variety, but I can't recall a lawyer being appointed the Operations Manager at any of them. Totally different skill sets.

He was a sports law specialist with a background in commercial law. Pretty sure there was an MBA in there too, from memory. Took control of a practice group as no more than a pup when his senior partner died suddenly. Frankly, he was a gun. There are plenty who make the leap from private law or accounting practice to COO/CEO within the confines of the sports industry. Travis Auld at Essendon and then Gold Coast is another example. Malcolm Speed the former Cricket administrator is another.

I have no personal loyalty attached to AA by the way. Just know people who worked with him.

I've seen many accountants become COOs. And I've seen some lawyers become CEOs. I just haven't seen many lawyers become COOs. I'm not criticising the bloke, just saying that those who have described the selection process that put AA in his job was unusual probably have a point.

[Thinline]

I don't care a fig if they have a point or they don't. Fact is the bloke got the job. So what.

Way I see it is there's football, and then there's the political marketing machine.

I care little for the goings on at the latter. Bores me silly.

[fingers]

Maybe the sub rule is good maybe not. I really don't know.

What I do know is that I am sick and tired of the rule changes. Umpires have a hard enough time when the rules we simpler - now they have to make decisions in an unbelievably complex set of rules.

Just leave the game alone.

[stinger]

And yet our game goes from strength to strength - being easily the most popular and most watched sport in the country - the envy of it's nearest rivals, RL, ARU, and soccer.

.

as it was in the 50s and 60s...long before we had an afl commission ffs....

[SainterK]

[vacuous space]

Well [Mick] would have me covered for knowledge but at least i gave some reasons why I like it. I am sure he would have better reasons why it is no good but unless he comes on this forum we may not know them. And I cant ask him because his Son doesnt play at my local club anymore.

I think Mick and the rest of the coaches disliked the 3+1 arrangement more than anything else. From what Mick said OTC, the coaches were pushing for 4+1. Mick effectively said that the more you increase the numbers on the bench, the less it hurts to lose somebody.

From my perspective, I don't really like having a guy sit and watch 2/3 of a game. I don't like having a guy with fresh legs come on part way through the third quarter. I'd rather have had Jamie Cripps available for full games rather than being used as a late game sniper. I liked that we used to include everybody and I think that the coloured vest spectacle distracts and detracts from the game itself.

Teams are still experimenting, but when the dust settles, I expect teams to be shorter, quicker and rotations to remain high. I think the rule change will have very little impact on injury prevention. I don't like the change, but what am I going to do? Watch soccer? I'm not about to do anything drastic. I'll leave that to flag waving interchange stewards the next time they see a phantom 19th man.

[Spinner]

There were 200 applicants and Demetriou had to go to his mate and asked him to apply? Doesn't say much for the candidates - all 200 of them.

Grant ‘f@t @rse’ Thomas the irrelevant w@nker bemoaning a job’s for the boy’s appointment and accusing the AFL of patronising the supporters.....bahahahahaha

Short memory (must have a) F@tty Thomas, you and Hairy Butterss patronized and mislead the saints members and football public with your “coaching selection processâ€

[Enrico_Misso]

Grant Thomas is spot on.

Anderscum is braindead.
Continually wants to change the game.
Never consults.
Doesn't think things through.
Presides over a corrupt draw.
A corrupt draft.
A corrupt MRP.
Umpires being co-erced into different rule interpretations on a week by week basis.
Pushes a new clubs agenda based on marketing criteria rather than what is sustainable and wanted.
And now we learn he only got the job because he and Dimwit are peas in a pod!

[Spinner]

Grant Thomas is spot on.

Anderscum is braindead.
Continually wants to change the game.
Never consults.
Doesn't think things through.
Presides over a corrupt draw.
A corrupt draft.
A corrupt MRP.
Umpires being co-erced into different rule interpretations on a week by week basis.
Pushes a new clubs agenda based on marketing criteria rather than what is sustainable and wanted.
And now we learn he only got the job because he and Dimwit are peas in a pod!

In all fairness, the league is run extremely well.

Extremely well.

[Enrico_Misso]

How exactly is the draw extremely well run.?

It is lopsided.
Full of irregularities.
Certain teams always play each other twice.
Blockbusters.
No attempt to even try and even up the number of games played by each club against each other club over time.

A sports-loving foreigner looking at it would conclude that at best the AFL is extremely backward in producing such an unfair schedule.
At worst they would conclude the AFL is corrupt.