Tool of the year.....

[goswannie14]

Goes to Nick Maxwell. When being interviewed after the final siren he said it was a joke that the GF now had to be replayed.

:start rant:I've got news for you Nick, it's in the rules, learn them before you make a tool of yourself again.

I always thought this guy was an arrogant tool, Before today I could only say with any real conviction that he was arrogant, now I know he is both arrogant and a tool.:end rant:

[Matty10]

You are probably right. I was a bit disappointed that he reacted that way, but it was heat-of-the-moment, so I would give him the benefit of the doubt. I saw later that he was having a decent talk on field with Eddie M. and wondered if he was having a word to him about it.

[liz]

I think he comes across as a bit of a tool (onfield - off-field he seems OK). But have to agree with him that it is a joke that the GF gets replayed. Why not just decide it on the day? Seems unfair on the players and supporters, and is a huge anti-climax. Just because "it is in the rules" doesn't make it a good rule.

[Big Al]

Maybe a tool but I loved that we didn't get the clich? riddled crap we get from most players after a game. He was interviewed just seconds after the game when the emotions are at its highest and he gave us an honest assessment. I'm sure most players felt the same way. The result was unfair to the players and also unfair to the supporters. I know I couldn't have physically and financially backed up in 05 or o6 if it happened then. I'm sure the AFL won't let this happen again.

[goswannie14]

Interesting you should comment about the lack of cliches. I heard the Malthouse press conference on the radio. It was the first time he actually made sense in a press conference.

[swansrock4eva]

I don't think he was a tool at all. He is perfectly right - it is a joke! Back when the VFL was a non-professional, 1-state competition, it may have been ok, but in this day and age, it is unacceptable. Just think about a few things:

• If it had been a Eagles/Freo (and it could have been in 05/6), what do they do exactly? Jump back on a plane for 5+ hours on Sunday, to fly back across again on Wednesday or Thursday? Or do they stay in Melbourne, away from family, friends and any other commitments they had arranged in Perth for the week after the GF?
• Supporters - in this case we were lucky it was 2 Melbourne clubs, but as Big Al said, who out of us could have backed it up in 05 or 06? And think about the Eagles supporters those years - as much as we hated them, how horrid to either have to stay put in Melbourne and fork out a fortune in accommodation, or fly back and forth, or just fly back and not get to see the replay... Even for those who are Melbourne-based this time around, a family now has to find another $800+ to attend again seeing as Dimwit has decided ticket prices should stay the same... Who has a spare $800+ just lying around to throw on another GF?
• The EBA states that all AFL players must have 8 weeks off at the end of the season. This now means the Pies and Saints cannot legally commence pre-season training until the 28th of November at the earliest, a full 2 weeks behind the Dogs and Cats, and FIVE weeks behind the bottom 8 teams. That's grossly unfair for 2011 preparations.
• AFL draft camp - runs this week. Now the two clubs can't send their coaching panels to watch and interview etc - in a draft where there will likely be 100+ picks, this is pretty damn important!
• Trade Week - is scheduled for the week after next, allowing all clubs, at a bare minimum, 1 week to undertake list assessments, needs reviews etc to work out who they want to trade out, who they want to trade in. If the AFL decide to run it as scheduled, the Pies and Saints now have 2 days to get this right. That's ridiculous!
• Players have holidays and surgeries booked already - these now all have to be rescheduled. It will cost the clubs a fortune in things like cancellation/rescheduling fees for surgeries and hospital stays, and likewise for the players rescheduling their holidays. A great example is Shane O'Bree's wedding in Bali - planned for next weekend, many of the current Collinwood playing group planning to attend, now can't. Not only have some of those players lost $$ in terms of cancelling or rescheduling their trips, think about O'Bree's wedding - imagine if it was your wedding and a week out 20-30 people say they're not coming!
• Various club events such as B&Fs - Crown have already announced that any club B&Fs this week held at the venue have been pushed back to the following week to accommodate GF events - that will be Saints, Pies, Dogs that I know of, probably another couple too. Look at our own thread re our B&F here - people have booked hotel rooms, taken time off work etc etc, and I know of people who have done the same for some of these at Crown - now it's all thrown in the air.
• Media committments - think of all the football shows etc that now have to decide to run the extra week or not - if they do, think of the budgeting issues - extra wages, re-booking studios and venues etc. Likewise, papers and various other footy publications will have to reschedule a lot of their features for the coming weeks (e.g. post-season analyses etc).

I'm sure there are a whole heap of other examples of the logistical nightmare this is. Another thought is the NRL grand final and conflicts with sponsorship of the events etc... In this day and age when the AFL touts themselves as a shining example of professionalism, this shows that some of their operations are still hideously archaic and steeped in a tradition that is no longer relevant in any shape or form to the modern game.

[Matty10]

I understand what you are saying swansrock4eva, but all this was known last week, and last year, and the year before that. If players, administrators, club officials, broadcasters, etc wanted to make a stand, they have had plenty of time to do it. They could have made a change in prior years if opinion was so strong against it.

Doing so after the event is a little pointless.

[swansrock4eva]

But even Demetriou said himself they haven't really thought about it as more than a vague possibility. They SHOULD have reviewed it after 2005/06 and lord knows why they didn't. But as with many instances, the AFL wait for a backlash, THEN change things. A perfect example was the hullabaloo with our very own 19th man saga against the Roos - the rule had stood for how long and then they changed it when they realised it wasn't the best option AFTER it got proved to be a mess.

[dimelb]

I understand what you are saying swansrock4eva, but all this was known last week, and last year, and the year before that. If players, administrators, club officials, broadcasters, etc wanted to make a stand, they have had plenty of time to do it. They could have made a change in prior years if opinion was so strong against it.

Doing so after the event is a little pointless.

Swansrock4eva has presented a powerful case for change, and I agreed with Maxwell on the replay. The only reason this sort of rule is allowed to persist because the occasion that challenges it is so rare. The game has changed almost beyond recognition, as pointed out. It's time the rule changed too.

[dimelb]

But even Demetriou said himself they haven't really thought about it as more than a vague possibility. They SHOULD have reviewed it after 2005/06 and lord knows why they didn't. But as with many instances, the AFL wait for a backlash, THEN change things. A perfect example was the hullabaloo with our very own 19th man saga against the Roos - the rule had stood for how long and then they changed it when they realised it wasn't the best option AFTER it got proved to be a mess.

And even then they got it wrong. The harshest and most disproportionate rule in the book, surely.

[goswannie14]

Could you imagine the amount of bleating from the tool if extra time had been played and St Kilda won?

[swansrock4eva]

And even then they got it wrong. The harshest and most disproportionate rule in the book, surely.

No doubt they still haven't got it right, but it's a lot better than the old rule of the headcount and resetting the scores. THAT was a disproportionate rule if ever there was one!

GS14, I think there'd be a lot LESS bleating if they ran extra time in the future. However, in this instance it has to go to a replay because that's the rule, but the rule is inappropriate in the modern day.

[Bas]

I was reading a story on Maxwell and his own football history is not that much different from our beloved ex Captain Kirky.

So I didn't see anything wrong in what he said, just shows how out dated the rules regarding a drawn grand final are. Can't add anymore to swansrock4eva post which nearly went on forever but all very wise and good!

[Nico]

But even Demetriou said himself they haven't really thought about it as more than a vague possibility. They SHOULD have reviewed it after 2005/06 and lord knows why they didn't. But as with many instances, the AFL wait for a backlash, THEN change things. A perfect example was the hullabaloo with our very own 19th man saga against the Roos - the rule had stood for how long and then they changed it when they realised it wasn't the best option AFTER it got proved to be a mess.

Demetriou said today that because it had only happened twice before in the history of VFL/AFL it was only a vague possibility but they always book the MCG for the following week just in case. He said a draw was part of their risk assessment and all parties that could or would be involved we aware of what would happen in the event of a draw.

I frankly thought the 19th man saga was a media beat up and the AFL should have left things as they were. The Swans should have been fined. If the North captain knew of the 19 men on the ground he was entitled to call for a count and under the rules our score would have been wiped.

[GoSouth33]

I like the idea of the replay even though I would have been stuffed in 2006. I really couldn't have got back for a replay if required. It gives more people a chance of seeing the game as well! I might even be a chance of seeing this one because I'm going to be in Melbourne next week.
Most of the golf majors have switched to "sudden death" playoffs with the British Open having a modified version with an extra four hole playoff. The US Open is the only one that retains the eighteen hole playoff the next day. If they're tied after that, it becomes a sudden death playoff.
I could even live with the idea of joint premiers.