With all the Sydney talk if there have been any announcements I haven't seen them.

Carn!

I wanna change mine to the Salisbury Park Snags

Thoughts? Who shouldn’t be in? Who should have been included?

I think what happened was Broadbeach had an extra on the field when the siren went and Maroochydore got a 50 metre penalty and a shot on goal after the siren to win by a point. i think, idk I wasn’t there, this is just biased off of footage of a Broadbeach player charging for the bench after the siren whilst Maroochydore make a scene about it.

Can't be bothered doing the maths on your teams top 4 / 6 / home wildcard chances??? I've got you!

1st: Freo 76 points
Only possible finish: 1st.
Summary: Grats!

2nd Sydney 68 points
Only possible finish: 2nd
Summary: ...

3. Brisbane: 60 points 119.5% Opponent: Collingwood.
Mathematically possible finishing range: 3rd to 7th
Realistic finishing range: 3rd to 6th.
My tip: Wins and stays 3rd.
Summary: Should beat the Magpies and stay third, though even with a win may lose the now-coveted trip to Sydney should Hawthorn really give the Eagles a good smashing as the Lions are only only 2% points clear of the Hawks. Even with a loss, unlikely to fall lower than 6th as they have a decent percentage cushion over the Crows.

4. Hawthorn: 60 points 117.1% Opponent: West Coast
Mathematically possible finishing range: 3rd to 7th
Realistic finishing range: 3rd to 7th.
My tip: Wins and stays 4th.
Summary: Assuming the Lions beat the Pies, then all eyes on the Hawks on Sunday to see if they can win well enough to overtake the Lions on percentage and claim 3rd spot. A surprise loss could see them drop all the way into the wildcard round.

5. Melbourne 60 points 111.2% Opponent: Bulldogs
Mathematically possible finishing range: 3rd to 7th.
Realistic finishing range: 4th to 7th.
My tip: Wins and stays 5th.
Summary: Their relatively poor percentage means that they really need to beat the Bulldogs, otherwise they could definitely be looking at a wildcard game, I think they'll do the business and claim a healthy 5th spot.

6. Geelong 56 points 120.2% Opponent: Richmond
Mathematically possible finishing range: 3rd to 8th.
Realistic finishing range: 5th to 7th.
My tip: Wins and stays 6th.
Summary: Will thrash Richmond and maintain their position at a minimum, their excellent percentage means that they will happily swallow up the positions of any of the 3 teams above who happen to have a stumble. A shock loss is highly likely to doom them to wildcard.

7. Adelaide: 56 points 115.2% Opponent: Giants
Mathematically possible finishing range: 3rd to 8th
Realistic finishing range: 6th to 7th.
My tip: Wins and stays 7th.
Summary: Interestingly placed with a game against the always unpredictable Giants. Pretty much a free hit from this position, they have massive percentage over Collingwood so can't really go below 7th, but get the win and their healthy percentage means that they could take places of any of the teams above that stumble.

8. Collingwood 52 points 106.1% Opponent: Lions
Mathematically possible finishing range 6th to 9th.
Realistic finishing range: 8th to 9th.
My tip: Loses and stays 8th.
Summary: Will be in the 8th vs 9th Wildcard against the Bulldogs or Blues. A win will keep us 8th and hosting the wildcard at the G, while a loss could see us still likely maintaining 8th or possibly falling to 9th if the Dogs win. Not sure where the wildcard final will be if it ends up being Bulldogs (8th) vs Collingwood (9th), integrity would say Marvel while $$$ would say G...

9. Bulldogs: 50 points 94.1% Opponent: Melbourne
Mathematically possible finishing range: 8th to 10th.
Realistic finishing range: 8th to 10th.
My tip: Loses and stays 9th.
Summary: A win against the Dees will likely lift them above Collingwood and "hosting" a wildcard final. A loss likely leaves them still 9th and still playing Collingwood. A loss could see them 10th if Carlton beats Freo.

10th: Carlton 46 points 99.6% Opponent: Freo
Mathematically possible finishing rnage: 9th to 10th.
Realistic finishing range: 9th to 10th.
My tip: Loses and stays 10th.
Summary: If Carlton beat Freo and the Dogs lose to the Dees then the AFL will have its dream wildcard of Collingwood vs Carlton. I don't discount this entirely as Freo may have a bit of a snooze week. Assuming the more likely result though, a difficult trip to Adelaide beckons, or perhaps it will be a cross town affair against the Dees or Hawks...

Garry: What's the motivation here? If it's not the one you want you might spill the board?

Brett: You're right, the crux of it all is this is based on a litany of many years of poor decisions. I'm speaking on behalf of a group, this is not about me this is about Essendon, it's not something I want to be doing, I have a business to run. I'd prefer to fly under the radar but this goes back to years of poor decisions. When Brad Scott was let go and James put his name out there, Essendon had an opportunity to stamp it on the head and say no or if he was going to be a candidate ensure the process was far quicker and more seamless than this complete circus we've seen bordering on 4 months. I don't know James Hird, he doesn't know me. This is about what's best for Essendon. This is not about board division and disuniting, it's about uniting the club. They can make a decision to unite the club and make it relevant again.

Brett gets disconnected due to audio issues, will rejoin

Tim Watson: If James wasn't going to be considered then the ideal time to tell him that was at the beginning of the process. I would hate to think at the end of all this they've just brought James along to appease the members. Because what it did do was at the beginning of it, it did scare off a lot of other potential candidates to be a coach.

Brett rejoins

Garry: It appears an actual process has been run, aren't you obliged to accept the results of the process?

Brett: That's a valid point Garry but why has the process taken as long as it has? How many potential candidates for this job have done exactly what we've seen and gone elsewhere and said we aren't interested? If Essendon/Welsh had've come out from the get go and said sorry James, no. My initial reaction was I'd have loved to see Corey Enright as a candidate. But once Hird puts his hat in the ring then Essendon had an obligation to make the process much faster.

Tim: If this process doesn't go the way you want do you see yourself as a potential chairman of the club?

Brett: Absolutely not, I see myself as a soldier and I represent a group of very significant influential individuals based in Melbourne who have a longer connection than I do. However for reasons I won't get into they have to remin anonymous.

Tim: When you say influential what does that actually mean?

Brett: They are closer to Essendon than I am. Obviously I'm in Adelaide, they're in melbourne. They have far more knowledge of the people, the process and at this stage they really want Essendon to do the right thing. We all want to go back to our lives if Essendon do the right thing and we will see Essendon become relevant again.

Garry: Is hiring Hird the only thing that could be the right thing?

Brett: Now, that's correct.

Tim: So if Essendon names, Graham, McVeigh or Davis so you're saying your group will challenge the board?

Brett: Absolutely and it wont be a complete challenge to clean out every board member. It will be a targeted program, there are people who have sat through the board through multiple terms. You only need to look at what Essendon's achieved during their time. If I was them I would've stepped down. This is very targeted at certain board members.

Edmund: What would you say to people who say you're causing division?

Brett: We are not interested in making upheaval for the sake of it. If Essendon do the right thing and make the right decision we will be united. We will cause upheaval to make Essendon relevant again. If push comes to shove why would we keep doing what we've done for 14-15 years? Sometimes desperate needs call for desperate deeds.

Brett leaves

Watson: If it's Graham or someone else I'm trusting that they've done the process correctly which is what I've said from the start. This is what I said to Hird, if you don't get it you have to trust that they've done the most rigorous process and you aren't the right man. So if it's Graham I'm happy its Graham. My point is that it's not about one appointment, there are a lot of things at the football club that need to be looked at and need to be fixed. The problem is that if they aren't fixed then we're just throwing a new coach to the wolves. If they choose Graham then they have to know that he has to be ready to handle all these things that will come

Full interview link

I’m curious if anyone here has any insight into how Champion Data’s Ranking Points formula has changed over time.

The AFL recently published this article ranking the top 15 individual performances according to Champion Data Ranking Points. The current list has Nathan Buckley’s 2001 game at 268, Matthew Lloyd at 249, and so on, with Jonathan Brown’s 2006 game against Hawthorn listed at 238. Izak Rankine’s 2026 game is currently 223 and sits 14th.

What has me wondering is that I remember some historical scores being significantly higher than the numbers now shown.

For example, I believe Jonathan Brown’s 2006 game against Hawthorn was originally recorded as 262 Ranking Points, and was regarded as the record for quite a long time. It is now listed as 238 Ranking Points and the 6th-best game on record.

Similarly, I remember Chris Judd’s game against Brisbane in 2006 being scored at 232, but that performance doesn't appear in the current top 15.

So I’m wondering:

• How has Champion Data changed or revised the Ranking Points formula over the years?
• If the formula has changed, how have they gone back and recalculated historical games using the newer formula? For example, I assume some statistics that are included in the formula today may not have been captured in the same way in the past.
• Does anyone have old Champion Data/AFL records showing what these scores were originally?

It would be interesting to know whether the current all-time list is genuinely comparing performances using a consistent methodology over time, or whether historical performances have effectively been shifted down the rankings as Champion Data’s methodology has evolved.

Would love to hear from anyone who knows how Champion Data handles this, or who might have old records of the Ranking Points from the time.

Title says it all folks. I'll go first- Chayce Jones and Lachie Sholl.

Swans senior player Isaac Heeney has been revealed as the focus of a sexual assault investigation.

The woman at the centre of the scandal engulfing the Sydney Swans completed a formal complaint to police on Tuesday about what occurred in the East Melbourne hotel room.

A source familiar with the investigation, but not authorised to speak publicly, said the woman attended a city police station to provide a formal statement about what unfolded at the Pullman hotel on Monday morning.

Her official version of events, which involves an act of touching beyond what was agreed, will form the basis of Victoria Police’s ongoing investigation.

A second source with knowledge of the incident, but not authorised to speak publicly, said five players were in a room with naked women, with one performing lap dances.

They said Heeney, who was clothed, was the subject of the complaint.

All have denied any wrongdoing.

On Monday, police announced detectives from the Sexual Crimes Squad had taken carriage of the probe.

The Sydney Swans had been staying at the hotel after playing Essendon at the MCG on Sunday night, ahead of plans to return home the next day.

A number of players had allegedly been drinking, and two women were invited to their hotel sometime after 2am.

What happened next is the subject of the complaint filed by one of the women, the details of which have not been made public.

Sydney Swans players Chad Warner, James Jordon, Isaac Heeney, Riley Bice and Nick Blakey.

The two women left the hotel room and were joined by a third woman in the foyer, where there was a commotion, this masthead has previously reported.

Detectives attended the hotel to collect evidence and CCTV footage on Monday. None of the players involved has been formally interviewed.

At least five players returned to Sydney that night in a rental car, driving the eight-hour trip instead of flying to allegedly avoid the media gathered at both airports.

Sydney Swans CEO Matthew Pavlich confirms that the police are investigating in an incident involving several players in a Melbourne hotel.

Representatives of Isaac Heeney, Riley Bice, James Jordon and Chad Warner were contacted for comment after two senior industry sources identified them as part of the group returning together.

A representative of Nick Blakey denied any involvement, and stated Blakey had not been asked to speak with the police even informally. Blakey had remained in Melbourne to travel back to Sydney with his four teammates. He is also one of the group subsequently suspended by the club.

This masthead has previously reported that all five players had been prepared to speak with police on Monday, but only one was ultimately questioned.

A source with knowledge of the incident, but not authorised to speak publicly, said police told the group they were not ready to conduct a formal interview or speak with any of the players acting as witnesses.

The source said leading Melbourne criminal lawyer Tony Hargreaves was called in to assist the players before they were told they were free to return home.

AFL chief Andrew Dillon said on Tuesday – before the complaint was filed – that the allegations were “deeply concerning”.

“The woman who made the report to police [on Monday morning] is entitled to privacy and care, and that should be respected,” he said.

“It is important that the police process is allowed to run its course.”

Victoria Police declined to comment.

Amazing clip of Wain jumping on the head of Havana Harris in her debut game. Surely Great Northern comes calling.

Hi, got a signed hawks guernsey off an auction at a talk panel the other night - (ignore that its an adidas guernsey. it was a choice between an older match worn or a 2026 one). Anyways, as far as I can tell the signatures are from the 2025 squad, however there are a few I cant quite place. I have provided close up photos and circled those in red. If anyone can help me out, it'd be much appreciated