So why are heights allowed to be disclosed?
Surely such disclosure may upset some players who are vertically challenged!
3 Likes
Yeah, but who cares about those short-arses?
2 Likes
Is that figure the population in general or elite athletes? I’d say those that perform at the highest level would probably be more susceptible. They typically have elite standards / are perfectionists. They are incredibly driven. They are also in the public eye.
Fark off with this rubbish
Clearly you knowing their weight makes them run faster.
1 Like
No surprise, seeing that GWS have an association with Hedge Fund types who provide some financial backing to the club.
What’s next, surpress their musical taste because they get ridiculed.
Lordo would of like to have surpressed his drinking preferences, as revealing Cruisers gave him some blow back.
1 Like
In a contact sport weight matters big time, if they are not publishing it, fine, another example of bottom feeding policy making. But they absolutely should be giving it to other clubs.
Weight classes exist for a reason. In footy where is big and small thrown in together, body composition is a factor professional player need to know. Going into a footy field knowing a new KPF has put on 10kg over the summer is a big deal for how you play them.
2 Likes
If it was that important, wouldn’t teams just lie about it each year? It’d be a real easy way to get an advantage.
1 Like
They do lie. About heights as well
4 Likes
Latest rule/interpretation changes. Fair to say the game is disappearing further up its own arse. Now laying a tackle from behind can result in a reportable offence if there is incidental head contact with the ground should the forward momentum of the tackle be considered excessive. And no whistling? 
2 Likes
LOL, they’re gonna regret this one.
Only if they actually apply it, of course, and the lickspittle media hold them to it.
Potential for hundreds of suspensions!
5 Likes
Hang on, that reads as if tackling a player from behind is reportable even if the head doesn’t hit the ground, surely I’m not reading that right?
3 Likes
Are rucks immune from the second bit?
Imagine encouraging fend-offs at the same time as promising suspensions for them.
2 Likes
looking forward to seeing these being dramatically applied from rounds 1-4, then never brought up again
6 Likes
Until Zach Merret runs someone down from behind in round 17.
6 Likes
Can we skip the couple of weeks of outrage and over analysis and just wait until the games start to complain?
That’s how I read it. Could still be reportable even if head contact was avoided.
The new fend-off interpretation is a compulsory week off (if only low impact).
It’s a weird change, given their record of categorising so much legit deliberate stuff as “careless”.
2 Likes