2 hours ago, Greg Schneider said:

We hear a lot about Latrelle but how is Xavier settling in @Ghostwriter ? Getting along with the young group? Thanks

I forgot to mention the one thing about Reggie that I find unusual… he refers to his girlfriend as “Me missus” which is not something you’d ordinarily hear from an 18yo. Even Leb and XL agreed, both saying they refer to their girlfriend as “My partner.”

Reggie has been in the relationship with her for over three years. Clearly he has no commitment issues 😁

PS: XL has been in his relationship only a couple of months. But they met the old fashioned way… at a bar in the city. 😅

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

True. But it's been clear for many years that the club allocates lower numbers to "premium" players and numbers in the 40s to "fringe" players. I accept that for some players who receive a jumper in the 40s it may make them work that much harder. But it's also possible that players with numbers in the 40s might have their confidence shaken if they see the number allocation as an implied criticism of their capabilities.

It's not helped, by the way, by "promoting" Langford and Lindsay from 19 and 20 to 4 and 5 respectively.

Honestly, I think this can go anyway that the individual so chooses to take it. Even Langford and XL didn't start with as lower numbers that they've been given.

Some players might prefer a lower playing number as a semi status symbol, but others are quite OK with keeping the higher number first given to them and making it their own, such as Tom Mc Donald 25, Kozzie Picket 36, Mark Jamar 40, Guy Rigoni 43, Peter Rode 41 and at the extreme end you've got BBB at No.50.

Young Paddy Cross would do well to forge a name for himself similar to Peter Road and similarly the Moose with 27 having a career as prestigious as the great Anthony Ingerson. Similarly, I know Killani is honoured to wear No.34.

It's not the playing number your given that matters, it's how you own it.

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

True. But it's been clear for many years that the club allocates lower numbers to "premium" players and numbers in the 40s to "fringe" players. I accept that for some players who receive a jumper in the 40s it may make them work that much harder. But it's also possible that players with numbers in the 40s might have their confidence shaken if they see the number allocation as an implied criticism of their capabilities.

It's not helped, by the way, by "promoting" Langford and Lindsay from 19 and 20 to 4 and 5 respectively.

I think that was quite deliberate La Dee-vina Comedia, new broom we are moving on clear air, all jumpers will be allocated as we see fit, no time for mourning former stars who are no longer associated with the club.

On 05/03/2026 at 13:10, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Do jumper numbers also reflect locker numbers in the changing rooms at the MCG and wherever we train? If so, there is presumably a limit on lockers available and therefore numbers. Also, that would mean there is some opportunity to put players needing numbers near particular players that may mentor them, should a vacancy be available.

Having said that, and as I've said before, I don't like (1) players switching numbers during their careers and (2) the club allocating numbers in a manner that would suggest to players that the club doesn't have confidence in their ability. By giving draft picks and rookies numbers in the 40s, the club has already signalled to those players that it has a lack of confidence in them. If I were Kynan Brown or Taj Woewodin, I would have felt that I was up against it from the moment my jumper number was announced.

It did when the wiz temporarily took up 8 before returning to 33. He spoke moving to the row with Neitz etc, (possibly called Hollywood??)