My biggest gripe is when people clearly make racist comments or completely hypocritical comments. The biggest one being the 'they should get over it' debate...... that same logic could be applied for moving the date.

Good point.

I find that most people who make the 'we just need to move forward, and not dwell on the past' comments tend, funnily enough, not to be indigenous.

It's a bit easier to take the view that everyone should just build a bridge and get over it if you're not indigenous!!

On a more serious note, I think such arguments reveal an unwillingness to put oneself in the shoes of others, which complicates a number of indigenous affairs issues.

I've never celebrated 26 January because it never had much significance in SA until recently. 26 January is New South Wales Day, i.e. when the colony of NSW was founded in 1788, like how SA was founded on 28 December, 1836. Sure, NSW was first, but I've never understood what significance that would have to the 15 million Australians who don't live in NSW. Just like I wouldn't expect people from interstate to have anything much to do with SA Proclamation Day.

The real Australia Day for me is 1 January, i.e. when we federated in 1901. Bit hard to use 1 January though.

I'm not in favour of using Anzac Day as our national day; Anzac Day is for commemorating the fallen.

Either way, it makes sense to me to have our national day on a day that everyone can celebrate.

Again, preventing the most populous states from dominating the election was not the reason for the design of the original constitutional provisions for electing the president, nor the new system following the 1800 election which largely still exists today - I suggest you do some research.

Also, California did not exist when they created the system.

This was left in my letterbox today. Good to see Daisy getting his exercise.

Dutchy wrote:yeah I'm struggling to understand why he has been so good for Collingwood, 1 flag?

I'm equally struggling to understand what he's apparently done for 'footy in general'.

all you can do is accept what currently is.

Yeah, or you can point out the utter stupidity of the decision to admit them, maintain your support for getting rid of them, highlight the negative effects they have on the league, point out the benefits of not having them in, à la the successful 2020 season, and outline how a future SANFL without the cancers would operate.

Surely Warner makes the best XI?

[quote="Alex"]The SANFL crows jumper for this season looks a lot better than the old one

Umm, why dont they both just wear their AFL guernsey and stop ******* around

Crows maybe but why would Port Magpies, a foundation club of the SANFL not want to honour their heritage?

You're not the real original magpies.

PA fvcked off to the AFL and a new team Port Adelaide Magpies was created to play in the SANFL and has sincce been taken over by PA Power.

You are Port Power AFL Reserves team. So your saying that the PA team playing in the AFL was the 1 formed in 1870?
That doesn't fit with the other argument on here saying that the AFL team wasn't the real PA and was formed in the 90s....

You guys need to get together and work out what version you want to use when having a crack....

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk[/quote]I'll make it easy for you:

Port Power (AFL team) est. 1997
Power Reserves (SANFL) est. 2014

The Panthers secure former Lion Sam Skinner for 2021.
The 23-year old will make his way to Flinders University Stadium in 2021.

Measuring in at 198cm, Skinner is listed as a key defender but is also pretty handy up forward which is where he play a majority of his football in 2021.
Hopefully we see more Skinner this year, could teach some players a thing or two in principle. Hopefully he's injury-free and isn't afflicted by steamed hamstrings.

Can't really lose here.

The Poms win, and we make the final of the World Test Championship thingy.

The Poms lose... well, the Poms lose!!

I've no problem with Head batting at 4 for SA - provided that they put someone appropriate at 3. That would generally be one of the more experienced bats. I wouldn't put a rookie at 3 unless they're a specialist opener (i.e. nothing necessarily wrong with playing 3 openers if they're in your 6 best batsmen available).

“As a part of the LGBTQIA+ community I believe my sexual identity is owned by me, not a brand and that the outdated meaning no longer applies.

This is the most puzzling bit to me. I.e. the idea that having a particular sexual identity means that you have exclusive use of a particular word in the English language.

I can't imagine anyone would argue that the ice cream company is using this gentleman's sexual identity to sell their product.

Pretty obvious DOC was having a laugh there.

I mean, what sort of league would have different rules apply to different teams?

Next you'll be telling us some teams have twenty times the salary cap as the rest.

Groucho wrote:I'm sick of this constant bashing of me

Isn't it a shame that participation on this forum isn't voluntary.

Wanker goal umpire alert.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/this-is-s-backlash-over-plan-to-change-cricket-wickets-to-outs/news-story/b49c9c3a2e1f542f59a74b5b4949a78a?fbclid=IwAR3ZjSehmXwnZJ8FzWJC23GuhpEOw7aK30IzSw4a3yovna-J_prkKb5m3qw Christ, what utter nonsense. I think I need to go take some happy pills after reading this crap.

Adelaide v Fremantle - AO Chris Groom Cup

He was wearing golden parachute shorts, if that's a thing.

RB wrote:Freo will blow this.

I'll see myself out...

DOC wrote:SANFL is planning for the State game to be a curtain raiser to the Port Adelaide v Western Bulldogs AFL match.

Boooo

Smacks of selfishness. Literally no-one wins from this except the 12 clubs. Hopefully the backlash is significant enough to scuttle it.

StrayDog wrote:I think Glenelg played the Maggies out here circa 1970, not sure what the result was as my source's server has crapped out.

https://australianfootball.com

It was Round 1, 1971. Not sure what the result was. I have a feeling it was the biggest crowd at Elizabeth to that point.

Still have not signed in anywhere. Have been asked a few times if ive signed in and i just say na, im good thanks, nobody has argued.
More people need to stand up to this bullshit tyranny.

Wait a sec, you're saying you've not signed in at all, and nobody's argued or forced you to do it, but at the same time it amounts to tyranny?

Doesn't sound very tyrannical.

In fact being able to ignore the law, more or less without sanction, would be the opposite of tyranny would it not?

I'm struggling to understand why Collingwood care what the Power wear against the Crows.

When Port got the right to enter the AFL competition it came with conditions.
These were agreed upon and they registered their colours as black, white and teal.

*Silver, teal and black and white, I believe.

Given the limited instances in which the Power wish to wear the prison bar, it's hard to see this as anything other than Collingwood throwing their weight around.

North v Melbourne - Al Clarkson Cup

The IP issue is that the AFL are saying its not ok and Port are pushing the boundary including selling versions of a guernsey they don't have permission to.

AFL permission being needed to use or sell the guernsey without breaching the AFL's IP rights would require a) IP rights existing in relation to the PBs and b) the AFL holding those rights. I'm particularly skeptical re the former. As I said though, everyone seems to be very vague about what Port actually signed up to.

I think the main problem for Port is having competition points docked (something they would understandably be keen to avoid).

tigerpie wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Pleaded guilty and received a 12 month good behavior bond .... no conviction recorded.

No conviction wow that's wet lettuce treatment.

It's not exactly the crime of the century.

"The Power president... said the state league’s management made Port feel 'a little unwanted'..."

Well yes Kochie, you and your bastard cousins are indeed unwanted in the SANFL. ******* off to the VFL would be most welcomed.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:He was asked a question and he’s probably sick of telling lies.

Should make everyone involved play for the Redbacks for a season

That's harsher than a life ban.

^You don't have to 'apply' for copyright - it automatically attaches to your work as soon as you've created it. There's no copyright register or anything like that.

So in this case I agree there's absolutely no way the Power could've known about this unless someone from the club actually saw the painting itself.

People thinking even though the 'deliberate' out of bounds by Murray was proven to be touched by Spargo, it still should have been called deliberate [emoji38] [emoji38] The rule (Law 18.10.2) is that a FK is to be paid against a player who 'kicks, handballs or forces the football over the boundary line and does not demonstrate sufficient intent to keep the football in play'.

It doesn't say anything about touching an opponent on the way over.

In this case I don't think there was 'sufficient intent' so correct call would be FK to Melbourne.

I note also that the 'spirit and intention' (Law 18.10.1) of this rule is that 'players shall be encouraged to keep the ball in play'.

To me, this means that a deflection is irrelevant where it's clear that the player didn't demonstrate 'sufficient intent'.

Apachebulldog wrote:Some people are waking up but alas the gullible are still mesmerised.

Indeed.

Not sure why anyone would defend the Crows players who were responsible for the breach.

Arrogant, entitled, and irresponsible.

Why do you care WHUFC? Who do you support?

He literally set out exactly why he cared:

I’m just sick of me and all my family doing our bit whilst your club on multiple occasions believe they are above and better than the rest of us.

Not sure why it would be relevant who he supports.

Good on the AFC though for admitting their complacency and acknowledging that the players' behaviour was not in line with community expectations.

I see it but I don't believe it. Geelong about to win following a bye.

Geezus this match is shithouse.

If GWS were ready for a team, then so is Tasmania IMO.

Big Phil wrote:To be confirmed today, but I believe the start time will go back to the traditional 2:10pm start...

<clears throat>

2.20 would be the traditional start time Phil

Interesting question I saw on twitter, how many of the Kiwi XI make the current Aussie team? I reckon their bowlers have us covered currently.

Warner
Latham*
Williamson* (c)
Smith*
Labuschagne*
Taylor* (vc)
Watling
Jamieson
Cummins*
Lyon*
Hazlewood

*=certainties, the rest I could be convinced otherwise Boult in for Hazlewood, otherwise I agree with this.

JK wrote:When do we stop referring to society being in a pandemic? This virus won't ever be eradicated, so how long before we just consider it an everyday part of life as we've done with the flu?

When a large portion of folks are vaccinated (unfortunately in Australia this is probably still some months away).

Actually in Israel, where they're world leaders ATM in getting vaccinations into folks, they've been able to adopt very lax measures as a result.

To a lesser extent this is true in America and the UK where they're also getting close to 50%.

I.e. we are seeing things return somewhat to normal more quickly in countries that are getting on top of things, including by faster vaccine rollouts.

I don't expect you to agree with me as the facts don't suit your particular (and internally inconsistent) plandemic conspiracy narrative.

However I will counter your disinformation by providing facts for those who may be weighing up whether or not to get vaccinated.

There is reason for us to have great confidence that COVID-19 will no longer mess our lives about once a high % of us are vaccinated.

Why is there always one wanker journalist at every press conference?

At what price do we vaccinate people with an experimental drug?

'Experimental drug' is a seriously misleading term for the vaccines approved in Australia - before vaccines are approved for use in Australia, they go through rigorous testing processes for safety and effectiveness.

Daisy I don't expect to change your mind, but if anyone else has any concerns about getting vaccinated, I'd recommend speaking with your doctor or viewing info provided by state/federal health authorities - see links below re vaccine safety if interested:

https://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/public+content/sa+health+internet/conditions/infectious+diseases/covid-19/vaccine/about/covid-19+vaccine+safety%2c+testing+and+trials

https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/learn-about-covid-19-vaccines/are-covid-19-vaccines-safe

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/questions-about-vaccination-questions-about-vaccination.pdf

Whatever the opposite of flat track bullies is, that's the Swans.

Lose to Hawthorn and the Gold Coast.

Beat Brisbane, Geelong, Richmond at the MCG and flog West Coast.

Doesn't make any sense.

It's hard to believe they're still recording this number of cases in NSW a good two weeks after things started getting big there.

Unfortunately I think these big numbers are in part due to the selfishness of a (small) minority of people.

The success of restrictions depends on people having a sense of social responsibility.

You get your hackles up about health departments reporting case numbers, and suggest that this amounts to 'scaremongering'.

Meanwhile, you spread nonsense conspiracy theories about vaccines and imply that health authorities and governments are attempting genocide of the Australian population.

Wanker goal umpire alert.

Whately = knob

The biggest problem in here is the , it doesnt effect me so who cares attitude of 95% of the posters.

The irony here is that one of the central themes of your ravings over the last year or so is that, because 95% of people won't be seriously affected by catching COVID-19, we should just let it spread through the community and sod the 5% of elderly or immuno-compromised folks who get seriously ill or die.

I should also point out that even if we took that 'It doesn't affect me so who cares' attitude, many of the 95% would actually be affected by the enormous strain that would be placed on our hospitals.

Armchair expert wrote:Probably time to let anyone that wants a jab get one

old farts have had enough time to get one

I think we're definitely getting closer to needing to open it up to everyone.