Chook

You were pretty much spot on with your predictions, so well done to you.

Interesting. Thanks for the heads up.

It really is ridiculous that some people don't get better at things they love doing. Even if you are by yourself, simply thinking through the things you are doing and then changing one aspect at a time if it isn't working, can fix your problem in no time. I spend about an hour every day on the oval by myself practising stab passes and goal kicking and I've improved out of sight. You'd think these AFL players, with all the advantages they've got, would be nailing them from everywhere. Their field-kicking is usually outstanding, so why can't they apply the same practice principle to getting the ball through the big sticks?

This begs an interesting question. Does anyone actually know roughly what percentage of people who live in Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, Footscray, North Melbourne, Richmond and Hawthorn actually barrack for those clubs. Would it be like 50% or more like 95%?

Richmond's, right?

I had a horrible dream last night that Colin Garland had to retire because of his foot. I was devo, but then I woke up, so it was okay.

There's nothing better than an unexpected Seinfeld quote.

Exactly. And even then, Jack's going to have to wear a pineapple on his head to get as much recognition as Nick, Nat an' Nui. It's unfair to compare one player to three anyway (don't blame me for that joke, blame Cometti).

Bupkus. Sorry. But ten points is better than zero.

It's not about the voice, it's about the incessant catch-phases reeled out one after another. I'd mute the TV, but Tim Lane and Malcolm Blight are on, both of whom actually think before they speak.

Why should it matter? Clubs consistently say that they don't take any notice of media speculation, so why would our players care what our odds are, or whether the majority of tipsters will be backing us?

Yes, but if you want to be taken seriously on this forum, it's Trengove (no 'r') Petterd ('e,' not 'a') and Moloney (not Maloney) - and never, ever use any Watts-puns. But on topic, Jack Trengove is definitely good enough to at least get a nomination for the Rising Star, but considering players usually only get nominated in weeks where their team wins, he may have fewer opportunities to get the nod than other players.

^Ten points to anyone who actually reads all that.

Will it last the season?

The biggest evil in any sporting competition is inconsistency. Whether it be with umpiring, player performance, rules, fixturing, tribunal decisions, drafting, salary concessions or anything else, the only thing that should separate the good teams from the bad are those who know the rules and are able to play to them. We, Carlton and other clubs did this with regard to the draft, but Richmond did not. I'm all for changing the rules to benefit Richmond - who will be incredibly disadvantaged in the coming years - but those rules must remain in place long enough for other clubs to benefit from them, otherwise any benefits granted cannot reasonably be argued to not constitute bias towards one club.

Good thing he's there, then. Perhaps he can change some young minds before it's too late.

Well, I guess Newton out is the obvious choice. It'll be interesting to see how Jamar goes by himself and how Scully fares against the team he supported as a youngster. I hope he plays well.

Then my judgement will be all the more accurate.

I wasn't mad. Sorry if I sounded that way.

Are me and Sam Newman the only ones who couldn't care less about this? Honestly, they wasted an hour on the Footy Show - and I say "wasted" even compared to most of the crap on that program - "breaking" a story that all the people to whom it actually matters (Brendan Fevola, Michael Voss and Fevola's family) already knew about. So Fev has a problem with gambling, you say? He's getting it treated, you say? Then why should anyone but him get involved, I ask.

Yeah. Don't let his two goals fool you, Bate was pretty awful on the week-end, and I am not a Bate-Basher. Not poor enough to be dropped, though. Neither was Dunn for that matter. It's always harder to pick the outs after a win, so it's going to be very interesting to see who the unlucky one or two are. But I rated Bartram our second-best player against Adelaide, right behind his Holiness Chip "SOBOS (Son of Brother of Spud)" Frawley.

Wow. An AFL-level player puking on a 3k? He must be pretty talented then, since fitness is obviously not what got him where he is.

Yes, but you also want to instil in every player the idea that good performance will keep you in the team, and poor performance (no matter who it's from) will see you dropped. If Scully is dropped (which he should be because he was one of our worst performers two weeks in a row), but is a s good a player as his draft pick suggests, then he'll dominate in the VFL and be swiftly re-included in the senior side at the expense of another poorly-performed player. It's a fool-proof plan. Scully still gets game time (albeit at a lower level), less "fashionable" youngsters like Bail and McKenzie get to stay in the position that they've earned, and everybody realizes what it takes to keep a spot in the team.

I'd be unbelievably happy if they did that. As I've said all week, Scully was our worst-performed player this week and was also poor last week. He's young, so it's no sleight on him at all, but if they drop Scully to the VFL and bring in Sylvia, I'd be stoked. I'd love to have been able to see a backline with all of Rivers, Garland, Warnock, Macdonald and Frawley in it to see how all our talls would work together, but I guess I'll have to wait. IN: Sylvia OUT: Scully BENCH: Macdonald, McKenzie, Bennell, Newton.

Unless you posted it last year, that's an observation, not a prediction. But it's true, nonetheless.