Dee-tonator

Our last two games could have a significant effect on the final ladder. It would show a lack of respect for the code if we selected anything less than our best available team. Suggestions that TMac be dropped just so a youngster can get a game are bizarre. He has been the kingpin in our defence for a good part of the season and has probably earned at least one more year. For a player who was written off by many two years ago, that's a remarkable performance. Fitness and form, not age, are the criteria for selection. If we win both games we might even help push Collingwood out of the top four. That is a worthwhile objective in itself.

May for Adams would normally make sense. But with only two games to go, you could make a case for giving the youngster some more AFL experience and letting May's battered body have a good rest before the next pre-season . Brown or Woewodin for Windsor? Either change will probably weaken the team. Not much use promoting Billings, who does not seem to feature in any long-term plans. As for the rest, everyone in today's team (with the possible exception of Sparrow) did enough to keep their place.

To the entire team: Restored some pride.

Form is temporary, class is permanent. And today showed why Judd McVee needs to be part of the Dees' future.

6 Langford - our next superstar. 5 Rivers - huge lift in form. 4 McDonald - sturdy and reliable. 3 Petracca - strong second half. 2 Oliver - worked his socks off. 1 Fritsch - he even chased and tackled! Merit award to Chaplin and the entire team for showing the kind of spirit that has been sadly lacking for too long.

Magnificent game of football. So proud of the tremendous fighting spirit our players showed for the first time in ages. Langford will be our next superstar. And Oliver looked hungrier for the contest than I have seen him for at least two seasons.

Just hanging in there but credit to everyone so far for putting in a big effort against classy opposition. Only first-half disappointment is Petracca's almost total lack of impact.

I have no bias for or against either Chaplin or Goodwin. I was just pointing out that Chaplin has given a chance to a player who never got one from Goodwin. Your suggestion that selection decisions for the Bulldogs game could have been finalised before last weekend's matches seems a bit far-fetched. Knowing Goodwin's cautious approach to changes, I suspect he would merely have switched Petty to defence as the additional tall. And yes, that is pure speculation on my part.

Good to see Adams get a chance. At least it shows Chaplin's thinking is not totally aligned with Goodwin's.

In a sane world, reputation should have nothing to do with any decision on whether an offence has been committed. Every incident should be considered on its merits. Reputation (ie previous record) should only come into play when sentencing is decided. The AFL's inconsistency in disciplinary matters is totally farcical.

Very sad day to see a premiership coach depart in this manner, especially when he has been undermined by so many off-field issues. But football coaching careers are similar to those of politicians. They almost invariably end in failure. In Goodwin's case, at least we have one glorious season to remember. I hope he finds success again in whatever role he takes up next.

We could: (1) Bribe an attendant to put itching powder in their socks. (2) Put Bowey on a crash diet of human growth hormone. (3) Find a way to clone Max. (4) Pray.

This was taken in their premiership year of 2016. I doubt if it has ever happened again.

I'm sorry, you misunderstand my original post. All I was trying to indicate is that player managers have no loyalties to our club, so McVee might well get advice from that quarter which would not be in our interests. I've supported the Dees for just over 60 years, so I would never say anything with the intention of harming the club. Mind you, I hope our players and coaches, McVee included, are all deeply ashamed of their abject surrender last week.

Does that include the final quarter?