Some rule change is has set the game back ten years.
A player that had a good game has the potential to be one of the all time greats in football history.
Some umpiring decision has sowed confusion throughout the entire league and football at every level.
A player that had a bad game has his career on the line.
A team's first quarter could define their day.
A team's last quarter could redefine their season.
A solid win has one team reinvigorated and a threat for the finals and perhaps the top 4.
A loss has one team's culture completely shattered.
A poor game by a captain has everyone asking what their club even stands for.
A team that won a game has redefined the style of football teams play in the 'modern era'.
3-4 moments from the weekend will be given about 3-4 days worth of radio talkback and panel show television time.
Is the bump dead?
Is goal kicking dead?
Is marking dead?
Are key position players dead?
Is the bump back in vogue?
Is the golden age of goal kicking?
Have players redefined the art of taking a mark?
Are we witnessing a renaissance of key position players?
they are the one's that really tick me off. One team beats a few rubbish teams all of a sudden people start talking finals, flags and a dynasty.
A player plays one or 2 great games, next thing you know "he is the best player in the comp"- when most times he isn't even the best player for his team. Best example was Dale Thomas for the pies a few years ago.
I notice how many in the media lament the focus on the defensive aspects of the game currently but when a game is played in a more open fashion, say like the West Coast/Collingwood scrap from the weekend, these same commentators criticise it as unaccountable football and that that style will never stand up in finals
Watching the VFL team on the weekend none of those points applied. I think I even spotted Patrick Bomber and Paddy Ambrose stood next to me; it was a great day.
i have started watching with the sound off. i talk to myself, far more insightful and entertaining. i have turned off all the footy shows, though I will occasionally tune in for bomber on 360 if essendon has done something. admittedly i will listen to a bit of "crunch time" on Saturday mornings if we have had a win on friday, ditto finey's sunday morning show with robert shaw. on sunday evenings if i'm driving i'll listen in to finey too for the entertainment value of dejected supporters ringing in about which ever club is now in crisis.
Yep, my enthusiasm for the game is at a low ebb as well.
Bombers have played ■■■■■ before and I was still keen to go along, this year, it is a bit of a drag and I am complaining about everything except the players, when usually I am complaining only about how the boys perform.
This thread kind of reminds me of this passage... (actually there's a better one where he talks about how new songs are churned out that basically are the same as the last hit but people just lap it up with NFI and it keep sthem busy...)
“The Lottery, with its weekly pay-out of enormous prizes, was the one public event to which the proles paid serious attention. It was probable that there were some millions of proles for whom the Lottery was the principal if not the only reason for remaining alive. It was their delight, their folly, their anodyne, their intellectual stimulant. Where the Lottery was concerned, even people who could barely read and write seemed capable of intricate calculations and staggering feats of memory. There was a whole tribe of men who made their living simply by selling systems, forecasts, and lucky amulets. Winston had nothing to do with the Lottery, which was managed by the Ministry of Plenty, but he was aware (indeed everyone in the party was aware) that the prizes were largely imaginary. Only small sums were actually paid out, the winners of the big prizes being nonexistent persons.â€
― George Orwell, 1984
