Well, here goes. This one is so obvious I made a point of finding as many other things the players have in common as possible, just to cause some confusion.

That said, I was absolutely amazed to discover some of these players were eligible. Even as I was posting the final 22, I was going back to check muttering "Really? Him? Really?"

All of these players were playing in 2025. It is an extraordinary team which would crush all before it. So why is Matthew Jefferson there? Is he a red herring? Harrison Petty would also be eligible and is a 'ranga' which would make him a Red Harry, and almost as surprising an inclusion as Jefferson. Bailey Laurie is also apparently eligible but I simply refuse to believe it and nobody sensible would.

So, what is it that binds this incredibly powerful best 22 together?

B:	Dane Rampe	Tom Barass	Sam Docherty
HB:	Harry Sheezel	Jacob Weitering	James Sicily
C:	Hugh McCluggage	Marcus Bontempelli	Errol Gulden
HF:	Jack Gunston	Eric Hipwood	Jake Melksham
F:	Cam Rayner	Aaron Cadman	Mark Blicavs
FOLL:	Max Gawn	Scott Pendlebury	Zak Butters
INT:	Tristan Xerri	James Worpel	Jayden Short	Matthew Jefferson

As always, answers in PMs. Unless you have checked and they are definitely wrong in which case blurt on the thread to vent your rage.

Edited yesterday at 02:571 day by Little Goffy
edit: I had Jayden Short out of position so moved him to the bench. No change to the actual list but didn't want anyone to think it was a clue.

Good on you @Little Goffy!

On to it soon. Meanwhile, I note a bench of only 4. If this team is up for 2026, you can fit Laurie in!

20 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Well, here goes. This one is so obvious I made a point of finding as many other things the players have in common as possible, just to cause some confusion.

That said, I was absolutely amazed to discover some of these players were eligible. Even as I was posting the final 22, I was going back to check muttering "Really? Him? Really?"

All of these players were playing in 2025. It is an extraordinary team which would crush all before it. So why is Matthew Jefferson there? Is he a red herring? Harrison Petty would also be eligible and is a 'ranga' which would make him a Red Harry, and almost as surprising an inclusion as Jefferson. Bailey Laurie is also apparently eligible but I simply refuse to believe it and nobody sensible would.

So, what is it that binds this incredibly powerful best 22 together?

B:	Dane Rampe	Tom Barass	Sam Docherty
HB:	Harry Sheezel	Jacob Weitering	James Sicily
C:	Hugh McCluggage	Marcus Bontempelli	Errol Gulden
HF:	Jack Gunston	Eric Hipwood	Jake Melksham
F:	Cam Rayner	Aaron Cadman	Mark Blicavs
FOLL:	Max Gawn	Scott Pendlebury	Zak Butters
INT:	Tristan Xerri	James Worpel	Jayden Short	Matthew Jefferson

As always, answers in PMs. Unless you have checked and they are definitely wrong in which case blurt on the thread to vent your rage.

can I get a hint? absolutely no idea. only idea is missed a whole season but that cant be right

2 hours ago, deemoralizing67 said:

can I get a hint? absolutely no idea. only idea is missed a whole season but that cant be right

Whole season missed is something I tried to skew towards to confuse people, so for removing a distraction the reward shall be a clue!

The shared feature is something which (without grinding statistics) I'd say has become more common in recent decades, but is still far from normal.

🤔🤔🙄🤷‍♂️

What 'bub said. Nice quizzing, @Little Goffy .

8 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

🤔🤔🙄🤷‍♂️

Thanks for including me, BB. Who are the other two?

Righto, I am surprised that people are stumped, but I guess it is a case of 'if you know the answer, the pattern is clear'. Time for another clue. Perhaps a very helpful one.

What they have in common they also do not have in common!

14 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Righto, I am surprised that people are stumped, but I guess it is a case of 'if you know the answer, the pattern is clear'. Time for another clue. Perhaps a very helpful one.

What they have in common they also do not have in common!

🤔Thanks.....

and .....no thanks 🤣🤣🤣

14 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Righto, I am surprised that people are stumped, but I guess it is a case of 'if you know the answer, the pattern is clear'. Time for another clue. Perhaps a very helpful one.

What they have in common they also do not have in common!

Allow me to be the first:

No.

Edited 20 hours ago20 hr by Timothy Reddan-A'Blew
Er...second

Time for a close to home clue. There are a few more 2025 Demons who are eligible from the current team but really it is quite a surprise for each one;

I was straight-up shocked that Christian Salem, Bailey Laurie and Harrison Petty were in.

Judd McVee is in but that's probably a lie anyway, and Jai Culley I was also a bit surprised to see.

Kolytn Tholstrup... actually not so much a surprise.

Historically, I found a 1-game Demon (Fuschia?) from 1930 who was eligible and I just have to give him a nod because the poor guy kicked two goals in a team thrashed by then powerhouse Richmond, but still didn't get another call up. So raise a glass to;

Geoff Frood.

'So obvious'?

In solidarity with all(?) the other head-scratchers I'm gonna put a couple of thought bubbles in the public (post) rather than private (PM) domain. So there!

It's the 'second easiest puzzle ever', yes? So we wouldn't be expected to know more about the otherwise unknown Geoff Frood than his MFC 1sts 'career', yes? And for that, @Little Goffy's statement appears to be all there is to know - other than it was an away game, at Punt Rd, it was round 10, and he wore No.33.

And the shared feature existed in 1930, but then became more common in 'recent' decades, yes?

'Common' isn't a tricky word. So, unless the team all live in different English villages, each having community open green spaces, DG's clues, having 'common' in common, mean 'the feature' is something they players are/do/have that is the same but they each are/do/have their own, yes?

Consider the gauntlet thrown, LG!

Is it something positional or numerical? The only other thing on my mind is a goal with first kick or something simalar

Edited 16 hours ago16 hr by deemoralizing67

keep in mind that with the addition of our good friend Geoff, it cant be draft related or something too obscure with stats is out of the question as those stats were not recorded

38 minutes ago, deemoralizing67 said:

keep in mind that with the addition of our good friend Geoff, it cant be draft related or something too obscure with stats is out of the question as those stats were not recorded

Yep, the only stats recorded for ogfG in 'AFL Tables' is his 1 game and 2 goals.

1 hour ago, deemoralizing67 said:

The only other thing on my mind is a goal with first kick or something simalar

I think the author would prefer that you PM suggestions to him rather than posting them on the thread.

(At least you have suggestions, so you're one up on me!)

From Demonwiki:

Forward signed by Melbourne in July 1929, Frood kicked nine goals in a Reserves game in his first month at the club, but had to wait until midway through 1930 to make his debut when he was a late replacement for the injured George Margitich.

It was a tough act to follow considering Margitich had kicked 11 goals the previous week, and Melbourne were beaten easily but Frood was his side's outright top goalkicker in his only game - one of just five players in league history to achieve that feat.

He remained with the side through the 1932 pre-season but didn't play seniors again.

In a wild coincidence, George Margitich is also eligible. I checked only when he was mentioned here but I was not at all surprised.

Quite something to see a player kick 267 goals in just 5 seasons, at over 3.5 goals a game. Perhaps a precursor to the fabulous Allen Jakovich, who is definitely not in the team.

Edited 14 hours ago14 hr by Little Goffy

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

From Demonwiki:

Forward signed by Melbourne in July 1929, Frood kicked nine goals in a Reserves game in his first month at the club, but had to wait until midway through 1930 to make his debut when he was a late replacement for the injured George Margitich.

It was a tough act to follow considering Margitich had kicked 11 goals the previous week, and Melbourne were beaten easily but Frood was his side's outright top goalkicker in his only game - one of just five players in league history to achieve that feat.

He remained with the side through the 1932 pre-season but didn't play seniors again.

Darn! That was going to be my guess!

@Little Goffy, is there anything you can share with us that supports your contention in your OP that this is 'so obvious'?

The worst you could do is finally make it just that.

8 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

'Common' isn't a tricky word. So, unless the team all live in different English villages, each having community open green spaces, DG's clues, having 'common' in common, mean 'the feature' is something they players are/do/have that is the same but they each are/do/have their own, yes?

Consider the gauntlet thrown, LG!

3 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

@Little Goffy, is there anything you can share with us that supports your contention in your OP that this is 'so obvious'?

The worst you could do is finally make it just that.

When that gauntlet was thrown, I saw it flying directly at me and thought I was about to get smacked in the face with an answer, but no, somehow it sank... soooo... close...

In this team, indeed the uncommon thing is the thing they have in common, though as you say they do not have it in common with each other. The individually unique is the collectively unbiquitous! But the confusion of the inclusion of Jefferson may be iniquitous!

Oh, also, were I to play at AFL level, I would in fact be eligible, though only by the narrowest shave to another who, it turns out, could also be on the team. But I don't like him even though he grew up as a Melbourne supporter.

I've only got one more clue coming, and if that doesn't give it away it is every man for himself and each to their own.

9 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

When that gauntlet was thrown, I saw it flying directly at me and thought I was about to get smacked in the face with an answer, but no, somehow it sank... soooo... close...

In this team, indeed the uncommon thing is the thing they have in common, though as you say they do not have it in common with each other. The individually unique is the collectively unbiquitous! But the confusion of the inclusion of Jefferson may be iniquitous!

Oh, also, were I to play at AFL level, I would in fact be eligible, though only by the narrowest shave to another who, it turns out, could also be on the team. But I don't like him even though he grew up as a Melbourne supporter.

I've only got one more clue coming, and if that doesn't give it away it is every man for himself and each to their own.

A very nicely crafted post, LG.

Didn't get me anywhere.

But, yeah, very nicely crafted.

(p.s. As gauntlets are thrown down, not at, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at its sinking...)

It's curious that no one has cracked it (as opposed to cracked it, as I think we all have done or are about to do!) I hope we're not going to find there's been some flaw or transgression in your construction or clueing @Little Goffy. It's been too much 'fun' for it to come to that end!

58 minutes ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

It's curious that no one has cracked it (as opposed to cracked it, as I think we all have done or are about to do!) I hope we're not going to find there's been some flaw or transgression in your construction or clueing @Little Goffy. It's been too much 'fun' for it to come to that end!

I'm getting pretty anxious about it, to be honest. But I swear I double checked them all.

12 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Historically, I found a 1-game Demon (Fuschia?) from 1930 who was eligible and I just have to give him a nod because the poor guy kicked two goals in a team thrashed by then powerhouse Richmond, but still didn't get another call up. So raise a glass to;

Geoff Frood.

Now that’s Frood for thought (or should that be Fraught?).