MRP Results

[Face]

Do actually think the AFL want inconsistances.

Anyone with half a clue wouldn't be so stupid to ask such a question.

Of course they want it. You can't manipulate the competition by being consistent.

The fixture, the draft, the salary cap, umpiring, MRP, tribunal . . . you name it, the AFL manipulate it to suit their 'maximising revenue' agenda. Sporting integrity isn't permitted to stand in the way of the main game.

FFS they openly admit to it. Why in god's name would you ever argue otherwise?

Just curious..can you name or quote any time when the AFL have "openly admitted" ( your words) to manipulating any of your list except the fixture and perhgaps the salary cap to maximise revenue

Take your pick of AFL press conferences, they do it with every self justification.

"Image of the game" = "income from the game"

Do I guess you're an idealistic teenager?

Umpiring? MRP? Tribunal?? Cant recall any statements from the AFL openly admititng to manipulating them in the name of maximising revenue

You're either deaf or you might be time to take your head out of your arse if you aren't hearing it.

Can I ask, have the AFL ever appealed an incorrect MRP or tribunal decision like they have the right? Ever? At least to create the impression of impartiality?

Independent is a word they like.

Not sure if they (or you) actually understand it's meaning.

The AFL is far from perfect but far fetched stuff like this doesnt do the argument any good IMO

The only thing far-fetched in this conversation is your willingneess to believe in the AFL's flat earth press releases.

In fact flat-earthers would be a good description for AFL apologists like yourself.

[saint66au]

Im not an AFL apologist (or a teenager either lol) but neither am I a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist who thinks that the AFL meet every day, rub their hands together and discuss "how can we shaft St Kilda today?"

[Face]

So why reply to my post when it has absolutely nothing to do with what you claim to be arguing?

Sounds to me you are very much an apologist . . . or simply a troll like plugger66? (yes, St Kilda supporters can troll a St Kilda forum. Maybe if you understood that simple point you'd still be a mod and this site would be much better for the experience)

plugger65.5??

[saint66au]

Thats funny, I thought a troll was someone who came on here and sledged or took cheap shots at St Kilda..you know..opposition fans etc?

Seems though that you can be branded a troll for having the gall to judge the AFL on a case-by-case basis (and thats NOT being an apologist) , rather than a blanket abhorrance??

Ive been called a lot of things on here in my time, but never a troll..cool I can add that to the list

[Face]

What I took exception to was the suggestion the AFL wouldn't want inconsistencies.

You've replied to those comments ranting and raving about positions I haven't made or haven't taken.

A troll is someone who posts to seek attention. Has nothing to do with opposition fans as such (they are simply seeking a different form of attention). Christ, you could teach a monkey to weed out those obvious trolls.

This place consistently suffers from people who post not for conversation but for attention. It is why we see 10 threads on the same topic, it is why the largest threads are those involving pissing contests, it is why many feel there is an 'in' crowd. It is also why so-called moderators act like attention whores rather than taking a step into the background.

Now would you like me to explain why you replied to me because it clearly wasn't to debate the point I was making.

[saint66au]

I replied to you because I disgreed with your comments about the AFL openly admitting to manipulating the MRP, the Tribunal and the draft for their own ill-gotten gains. I think I have a right to do that. For my efforts I got branded a troll and attention seeker cos I had the gall to disagree with you?

I agree with you on one thing. Some people here do post to get attention and I too get annoyed when people start a new thread just so their point of view gets read. Theres a few serial offenders but I like to think I'm not one of them on either count. I post cos I love discussing the SAints. Like anyone here I agree with some opinions and disagree with others. Its what a Forum is all about.

Rant and rave? Hmmm Im not the one calling people attention whores

[stinger]

I replied to you because I disgreed with your comments about the AFL openly admitting to manipulating the MRP, the Tribunal and the draft for their own ill-gotten gains. I think I have a right to do that. For my efforts I got branded a troll and attention seeker cos I had the gall to disagree with you?

I agree with you on one thing. Some people here do post to get attention and I too get annoyed when people start a new thread just so their point of view gets read. Theres a few serial offenders but I like to think I'm not one of them on either count. I post cos I love discussing the SAints. Like anyone here I agree with some opinions and disagree with others. Its what a Forum is all about.

Rant and rave? Hmmm Im not the one calling people attention whores

[Face]

So correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the head of the AFL's umpiring departmet openly admit they umpire the game's stars differently to other players?

If that aint an admission of inconsistency I don't know what is.

Not all their admissions of inconsistencies are so blatant - some require a little comprehension and independent thought from the reader.

Do they allow precendent in the MRP/tribunal/appeal process? How in god's name can natural justice be served without it?

Read/listen to their reasons why they don't allow it and then try and tell me they want 'consistency'.

I'm happy to debate the issue but attributing the comments of others to me isn't debating that issue.

[degruch]

Hardly a long shot to suggest the AFL manipulates the 'business'...what do you think an open draw is?

[Face]

Maybe the make believe lawyer could take the time to explain why precedent is so critical to delivering natural justice?

Or maybe he will simply continue to troll these forums unchallenged in his never ending quest for a bit of attention between nappy changes?

Oh that's right . . . Saints supporter . . . couldn't possibly be a troll.

[stinger]

settle petal ...you might give yourself away....

[Face]

I might do what?

[plugger66]

So why reply to my post when it has absolutely nothing to do with what you claim to be arguing?

Sounds to me you are very much an apologist . . . or simply a troll like plugger66? (yes, St Kilda supporters can troll a St Kilda forum. Maybe if you understood that simple point you'd still be a mod and this site would be much better for the experience)

plugger65.5??

At least I have learnt that you have absolutely know idea. Saves me wasting my time with a person who simply is simple.

[vacuous space]

It's clearly some sort of troll conspiracy. If you can't see it, then you're not looking hard enough.

Keep watching the skies. 2012.

[Leo.J]

I don't think the AFL specifically target us, or any club in particular, but clubs do get a better run when they fit in with the 'direction of the game' (or better known as the AFL's agenda).

The 'direction of the game' effectively translates to maximum profit at any cost, even if equity or equality are compromised.

The AFL is a business first and foremost, and a sport second. $ are what matters most as far as they are concerned, fairness in the AFL is a thing of the past.

The MRP is no different to any other department of the AFL, regular inconsistencies that can only be explained by either incompetence, nepotism or undisclosed agendas.

[Face]

So why reply to my post when it has absolutely nothing to do with what you claim to be arguing?

Sounds to me you are very much an apologist . . . or simply a troll like plugger66? (yes, St Kilda supporters can troll a St Kilda forum. Maybe if you understood that simple point you'd still be a mod and this site would be much better for the experience)

plugger65.5??

At least I have learnt that you have absolutely know idea. Saves me wasting my time with a person who simply is simple.

You mean it saves you having to waste time with someone who would embarrass your simple world view. Some might say it is you that has know idea.


Simple would be trying to be contrary for the sake of it with a juvenile "the AFL are always right" attitude.

I was hoping the self-appointed SS spokesman for the AFL would embarrass himself further trying to justify the ridiculous and ignorant claim he made earlier.

Actually I'd love you to point out one area where the AFL are consistent to back up your ridiculous claim. Just one will do. Either the AFL have no claims to wanting consistency or they are totally incompetent. You choose.

[starsign]

er..... perhaps they are consistently inconsistent????

[rodgerfox]

I don't think the AFL specifically target us, or any club in particular, but clubs do get a better run when they fit in with the 'direction of the game' (or better known as the AFL's agenda).

The 'direction of the game' effectively translates to maximum profit at any cost, even if equity or equality are compromised.

The AFL is a business first and foremost, and a sport second. $ are what matters most as far as they are concerned, fairness in the AFL is a thing of the past.

The MRP is no different to any other department of the AFL, regular inconsistencies that can only be explained by either incompetence, nepotism or undisclosed agendas.

100% correct.