Round 16 is in the book – and it was a week with drama right to the final siren!
Both Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs had to work to the last second for crucial wins in the run home, with the result a widening of the gap between the top nine and everyone else.
Big Adelaide and Hawthorn wins keep their top-four hopes on track, while Collingwood, remarkably, are ten points and percentage clear on top of the ladder – no one’s catching that.
From trade chat to Tom Lynch, there’s plenty to discuss and dissect, too. Let’s dive in.
1. Thursday night footy rudely interrupts Seven’s inane trade chat
I’ve written a few times in Six Points this year about the issues facing Channel 7 in their ongoing ratings war with Foxtel, and the reasons why Kayo Sports numbers have surged this year while the free-to-air broadcaster struggles to maintain its numbers.
I don’t know whether it’s a key reason for the drop-off, but something struck me while watching Seven’s coverage of Port Adelaide’s win over Carlton on Thursday night: they don’t seem to have actual coverage of the footy as their top priority.
Mostly, that manifests itself in things like inane banter between Brian Taylor and Kane Cornes, or rambling anecdotes, or focus on controversy over the actual game at hand – think Cornes’ pre-game confrontation with Luke Beveridge a few weeks ago that dominated discussion.
But there was something far worse at play on Thursday night – endless, inescapable trade discussion.
We had Mitch Cleary, supposedly boundary-riding, intermittently chiming in with speculation about Miles Bergman’s contract status and the Victorian clubs interested in him. We had Tom De Koning’s future speculated about, Zak Butters’ state of play, and most egregiously of all, repeat shots of St Kilda list manager – and Carlton great – Stephen Silvagni in the Adelaide Oval stands to allow for a segue into Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera’s big upcoming decision.
It was as close as I’ve ever come to muting the footy – I probably would have if I hadn’t remembered, far too late, that Fox were doing their own commentary feed, which confusingly seemed to remember that its primary job was to cover the match.
Cleary is a fine reporter and an excellent newsbreaker, but his presence as boundary rider is a problem: that job should be solely to relay news from the ground to the commentary box and then on to the viewer about injury concerns, drama on the bench, and the occasional interview with a player during breaks in play and post-game about the way the match unfolded.
Not, as Cleary did a few weeks ago, asking Marcus Bontempelli after the Bulldogs’ win over the Saints where contract discussions with the club sit.
So if Seven are listening, please consider this: oddly enough, I and most footy fans would prefer it if your broadcast of the game on the weekend was, you know, actually about the game.
We already get saturation coverage of every little trade rumour during the week, supposedly because it’s what the people want, or at least piques our curiosity enough to engage with content about it. Hell, the AFL’s own media arm have a podcast every week revolving entirely around trade speculation.
It’s enough to make you long for the days where the fortnight of the trade period at season’s end were the only time this sort of thing got discussed; but it’s at least easy to shut it out during the week if you’re not interested.
That becomes impossible when it infects the actual coverage. The only discussion about Bergman worth listening to during the game is his outstanding performance, and in particular how he exposed Patrick Cripps moving forward while covering him defensively.
Give us some analysis, or at least talk in broad terms about, how he and Port’s midfield pulled this off – NOT how many extra dollars it’s adding to his trade value at season’s end.
Seven are by no means alone in this – but if they continue with this trend of prioritising anything other than the actual football, then watch them absolutely haemorrhage viewers.
Miles Bergman runs with the ball. (Photo by Sarah Reed/AFL Photos via Getty Images)
2. It’s officially a race in nine
It has been pretty clear for at least a couple of months that only nine clubs are a legitimate chance to play finals in 2025.
And at the conclusion of Round 16 – and more specifically, after Friday night at the SCG – I’m prepared to call it: this season is officially a race in nine.
Partly, it’s because the gap at the exact midpoint of the ladder is now a yawning chasm – there are two wins and an enormous percentage differential between GWS in ninth and Port Adelaide in tenth, who themselves are one win clear of the 11th-placed Carlton, the only team in that bottom nine who can realistically challenge for a finals spot on their percentage.
But in simpler terms, it’s also about quality: if a resurgent Sydney, with two stars in Errol Gulden and Tom Papley back in the team and at near maximum output, can’t beat the most vulnerably placed of that top nine, the Western Bulldogs, on their home ground, then it’s impossible to make a case for them winning enough games to appear in September, though I’m adamant they’ll be a major finals-shaper in the run home.
With eight games to go, the Power would need two of that top nine – or more specifically, two of the Bulldogs, Gold Coast or GWS now that Freo have dodged a bullet against St Kilda, to either split their run home or even have a losing record, while themselves winning at least seven of their remaining games. It’s a virtually impossible task.
But it’s still going to be a fascinating final two months of the home-and-away season, because as it stands, who could possibly say which of that top nine is going to be the ones to miss out?
The Suns are vulnerable after their recent three-match losing streak, but put Melbourne to the sword in the first quarter and have a game up their sleeve on everyone else – really, that seventh spot on the ladder is actually fourth consdering they’ll almost certainly handle Essendon comfortably on their own turf in that make-up game at the conclusion of Round 24.
The Bulldogs’ percentage is virtually an extra win over the Dockers and Giants, and possibly the Suns too; they have twin eight-point games against that former pair at Marvel Stadium, and will start favourites in seven of their last eight as it stands. They could genuinely finish anywhere from third or fourth to missing the eight entirely, or else having to do it the hard way again via an elimination final.
A few weeks ago, Hawthorn were clearly the team most in danger, but a hat-trick of wins, two of them over finals contenders, has not just made their path way easier, but given them a shot at the top-four – even though they have the toughest run home of anyone left.
Basically, every game is precious for that top nine, and a single slip-up might be enough to cost a team a precious September double chance, or miss out on the eight entirely.
A predicted cut-off? I’ll put the mark at 14 wins for the Bulldogs, Adelaide, Gold Coast and Geelong to be safe, thanks to their monster percentages – for Freo and GWS, they might have to get to 15.
Imagine a team missing the eight with 15 wins! It could very well be a possibility this season.
Joel Freijah and Will Hayward wrestle. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
3. Adam Treloar is no longer necessary
Listening to the Ads and Dunks podcast during the week, Adam Treloar spoke candidly of the devastation of his latest calf setback, one that has him racing the clock to be fit again before finals should the Western Bulldogs make it.
But unfortunately for the 2024 All-Australian and one of the nicest blokes in footy, his own fitness is just one of the questions Luke Beveridge will have when it comes to deciding whether or not to recall the veteran in the event of a September run.
Everyone knows the Bulldogs have an embarrassment of riches in the midfield – there’s a legitimate possibility three of them, in Marcus Bontempelli, Ed Richards and Tom Liberatore will have All-Australian blazers by season’s end.
Throw arguably the recruit of the year in Matt Kennedy into that mix, and it’s a group that Treloar was struggling to crack into even when in the team.
In a crucial, excellent win over a fired-up Sydney on Friday night, though, two young guns staked their claim to greater midfield responsibility in Treloar’s absence, and with Richards tagged by James Jordon and both Bontempelli and Liberatore subdued, were utterly crucial in securing the four points.
Joel Freijah was the obvious standout – with four goals, how could he not be. The most outstanding teenager in the AFL at the moment, the 19-year old has been stuck at half-back for the last month, but a return to a midfield/forward role against the Swans paid clear dividends for both him and his team.
What a luxury to be able to have him finishing on the outside and pushing forward to impact the scoreboard the complement the on-ball stars.
Less obvious was Ryley Sanders’ most important hand yet in his fledgling career: the second-year Dog’s clean hands and composure stood out in a hectic, fast-moving game at the SCG. More than Freijah, he was the one to take Treloar’s midfield minutes, and with 25 disposals at 92 per cent efficiency, his measured ball use and good decision-making were tremendous for such a young player.
The problem for the Bulldogs, as they found last year with Jack Macrae and Caleb Daniel, is there are limited spots in a midfield as stacked as theirs, and simply plugging them all in and expecting it to work isn’t always, or even often, a viable solution.
If Treloar progresses well with his rehabilitation and is fit for finals, Beveridge will have to weigh up whether an injury-prone veteran who is no guarantee to run out a match, and whose presence will reduce two exceptional young talents to bit-part roles, is worth the enormous risk.
Right now, I’d say it most certainly isn’t.
4. The holding the ball misunderstanding fuelling fan – and media – outrage
When West Coast captain Liam Duggan was pinged for holding the ball early in the last quarter against Collingwood, mere seconds after Magpie Ned Long had been granted significant leeway to dispose of the footy, people went nuts.
A bewildered Leigh Montagna, expert commentating on Fox Footy, said the seemingly inconsistent twin rulings, both of which went against the Eagles, are what ‘leads to fan frustration’; while on X, the Herald Sun’s Jon Ralph described it as ‘mystifying’.
There’s probably an element of anti-Collingwood hatred, as well as #Vicbias, fuelling the outrage in this specific incident, too – I doubt if it had been a Magpies player copping the rough end of the stick, the fury would have extend beyond aggrieved Pies supporters as it has with the Eagles.
Here’s the thing, though: both decisions were correct, or at the very least falling in a grey area where any decision was entirely legitimate under the laws of the game.
And the biggest issue – and the reason why both media experts and the general public were so bewildered – is based on a misunderstanding about what holding the ball looks like in the year of our Lord 2025.
Quite basically, the anger was generated around the belief that the number one factor in holding the ball calls is prior opportunity. Long, seemingly, had all the time in the world to fight the Eagles’ tackle and get a handball free, while Duggan was wrapped up virtually instantaneously by Patrick Lipinski.
The problem, though, is that this isn’t how holding the ball works anymore: these days, the most important factor is not how much time you’ve had to dispose, but whether you’ve made a sufficient attempt to dispose.
Presumably, that distinction is borne of the desire to reduce congestion and reward players making every effort to keep the ball moving, and punish the players who aren’t. In this instance, Long is fighting tooth and nail throughout to try and get rid of the ball, and eventually does; while Duggan surrenders immediately to a tackle that, cleverly, leaves one arm free.
There are, without a doubt, huge problems with the holding the ball rule and the way it’s enforced, because under the laws of the game, Duggan doesn’t technically need to have made a kick or handball for a play on call – all he needs to do is make a genuine attempt to dispose of the ball legally, and it should be play on.
That isn’t how it has been enforced for much of the year, and indeed, I strongly suspect that if Duggan had tried to drop the ball onto his foot and missed mid-tackle, he would have been pinged regardless.
But enough of the hypotheticals. There is enough grey area in the holding the ball rule that both decisions are entirely reasonable under the circumstances – and the fact that both went against the Eagles is just an unfortunate case of the rub of the green going against the underdogs.
The biggest issue is that holding the ball is, by definition, totally arbitrary: there is no set amount of time a player is allowed with the ball before they have to dispose of it, while the ‘360 spin’ tacklers sometimes do on players to try and be rewarded is more a convention than a hard rule, and in any case has gone out of vogue in the last few years.
Fixes are going to be hard, and cause as many problems as they solve – for instance, I don’t think we want to see a situation where Long, for instance, needs to get rid of the ball within two seconds or risk getting pinged, because the very last thing anyone should want is MORE holding the ball frees moments before the ball comes free.
Maybe we should just accept what the holding the ball rule is, understand fully the priorities the umpires are ordered to have while interpreting it, and move on with our lives.
5. Let’s calm down about Tom Lynch
Tom Lynch absolutely lost the plot on Sunday afternoon.
His first half, in which he gave away five off-the-ball free kicks, garnered zero disposals, and got himself reported for striking Jordon Butts, was about as disrespectful to coach Adem Yze as it gets, and as bad an example to possibly set as a senior player in a forward line filled with first-year players.
He should get two weeks for the hit to Butts’ face – a grading of intentional conduct, medium impact and high contact will do nicely – and will deserve every minute of his stint on the sidelines.
At the same time … let’s not overreact to this.
This wasn’t a king hit off the ball to an unsuspecting opponent: Butts was momentarily stunned, but got up to take his kick, which tells you something about the force.
Is it a bad look? Absolutely – we don’t need punching in the game – but as it stands, because the contact wasn’t forceful in the least, it would be against precedent for this to go to the Tribunal.
Calls from Channel 7 that it was a ’roundhouse’ and ‘a bar room hit’ from Nick Riewoldt and Theo Doropoulos respectively are all seriously over the top, too.
I doubt I’ll get many friends with this (very tenuous) defence of Lynch, so let me qualify by saying this: I’d absolutely be comfortable with this being four, six or eight weeks. Punching sucks.
It’s up to the AFL to decide whether they want every punch, regardless of whether it knocks a player out or not, to be worthy of a significant ban. Until that happens, though, we work with what we’ve got.
6. Blues fans show exactly why they’re so fun to make fun of
For most of my childhood, footy’s biggest laughing stock was indisputably Richmond.
The shattered talkback radio calls. The repeat ninth-placed finishes. Fans microwaving their memberships. That Focus on Football board challenge at the end of 2016 that was the perfect mix of delusion and desperation.
Then, of course, the Tigers started winning flags, and now, even as they endure the start of a long and tough rebuild, they’re a club to respect.
For the last half-decade, Carlton and Essendon have fought for the vacant football comedy throne, trying to one-up each other with ill-fated move after bone-headed decision after on-field disaster.
The Bombers have had some great hits – the disastrous mishandling of Ben Rutten’s axing as coach, repeat trade period wins that did nothing to improve on-field results, and of course, endless calls for James Hird’s return – but I think the weekend that was for the Blues cemented THEM as the AFL’s biggest laughing stock.
Why? The fans are just that little bit more unhinged than anyone else’s.
Talkback radio after a Carlton loss is now endless fun; if the the genuine fury, surely precious little of it being performative, in the face of yet more on-field mediocrity, of the nuffy contingent of their supporters delights me so, having not known anything other than a rubbish Blues, then I can only imagine how much joy it brings to people who had to deal with them at the height of their power in the 20th century.
But it was rubber-stamped with the defacing of Ikon Park with pointed – and horrendously spelled – calls for heads to roll at board level (though not Michael Voss, oddly enough).
For the club to decide Voss needed extra security to attend their VFL game on Saturday night actually goes beyond being funny. It’s actually embarrassing, and should horrify everyone associated with the Blues, from supporters to club donors to players to executives, that such a measure would ever need to be taken to protect the club’s public figurehead from their own members.
I don’t think the people who vandalised Carlton’s headquarters fully understand how everyone else in the footy world views an act like that, either.
It’s not an act of resistance against a club run by morons and a desperate plea for change; it’s just another glorious sign that the Blues are tearing themselves apart, and yet another chance to take giddy schadenfreude in their misery, knowing it’s richly deserved.
I wonder if the people that went to Ikon Park in the wee hours of Friday morning know that, by writing those messages, they’re making their club exactly the laughing stock they want Carlton to stop being.
Michael Voss looks despondent during Carlton’s loss to North Melbourne. (Photo by Robert Cianflone/Getty Images)
Random thoughts
– I feel like making stand rule violations a 15-metre penalty rather than 50 metres would be an extremely popular rule change.
– It’s quite amusing that North losing by 85 points is still only their THIRD-worst defeat to Hawthorn in Launceston in the last 13 years.
– Imagine the Vic Bias calls if it had been a non-Victorian player getting snubbed for Jeremy Howe on the front cover of the AFL Record for their 250th game and not Marcus Bontempelli.
– Is Jack Gunston ageing in reverse? Was genuinely cooked two years ago.
– It’s very funny that the Lions being able to outspend Essendon by $100,000 on Sam Draper AND get Oscar Allen on big money doesn’t annoy half as many people as the Cats supposedly having a war chest.
– There was a lot of talk on Seven and Fox Footy around the new Toyota Legendary Moment ad coming out this week, and it annoys me that they were predicting Leo Barry’s mark or Peter Daicos’ goal as the new moment without realising both have ALREADY HAD ONE.
– Alix Tauru is just wonderful – but he’s going to have to either learn to kick or be significantly less ambitious with his decision-making.
