La Dee-vina Comedia

Ablett senior wasn't always a forward. Does anyone know whether he was an AA when he played midfield, or did he get all of his 8 AAs as a forward?

Hopefully, not his hairstyle.

You might want to move Matt Crouch (retired) from the "Ins" to the "Outs".

I keep reading on Demonland that Marty Hore has retired. Is that confirmed? I haven't seen it reported anywhere.

Up until this year I would have no argument with this statement (recognising that I don't recall Barassi and never saw Norm Smith). Now I'm starting to wonder. Are we, the spectators of the Flower era, remembering him as better than he actually was? I only say this because Flower only won the B&F once. That has never made any sense to me as he seemed head and shoulders (metaphorically, of course, as opposed to Gawn for whom that expression is both literal and metaphorical) above every other teammate in his era.

I'd go one step further. At least forwards have the Coleman Medal they can win. There's nothing equivalent for the defenders. Choose one of them for captain. Either Sam Taylor or Harris Andrews would have been an excellent choice.

I respect what you're saying, but I can't see how offenders could be dealt with without some form of public explanation. How would it work with the Rankine case? Would the AFL be suspending him for four matches without explaining why? Apart from anything else, it would make it "easier" for the AFL system to be inconsistent in its treatment of offenders. I could see a favoured player or a player from a favoured club getting a fine while a player from a less respected club might get a three-week penalty for the same offence.

I think Geelong; I hope Fremantle. And I'd love to see the word "Colliwobbles" resurrected with Collingwood losing from an unlosable position in a final.

I can't resist making a comment any longer. PF, you don't understand. You could "laugh off" being called a "white honky" precisely because that particular comment reflects that you are not part of a minority group. If, however, as well as being a white honky you were also, say, part of a religious minority or identified as gay, and you "copped plenty" about that, you might feel quite different. Before you say, "No I wouldn't", just check whether you've ever been part of a minority group before. if you haven't, then think a little further about how people in minorities might feel.

I'm unclear as to what this "strategy" role is meant to be. If it is some sort of forward-thinking role, I see it as the future of football. With Greg Swann now at AFL HQ I see the potential for lots of rule changes. Someone at the club needs to work out the impact of those changes. For example, if the AFL decides to get rid of the ruck nomination rule and mandate that ball ups and throw ins happen much more quickly, teams will need at least two players capable of taking the ruck man role on the field at all times. That has significant implications for list management, player development and game strategy. Ironically, I see this as the sort of role Simon Goodwin could undertake (as could most AFL coaches once their senior coaching days are over).

Interesting decisions for a club without a Senior Coach. It restricts the next coach's plans...unless the decision has been made as to who the coach will be and he has agreed with the decisions.

Didn't she also say, "Grief is the price we pay for winning a premiership"?

They all need to work on their...moustaches.

My interest in this game does not match my interest in the question of whether a cheap suit folds well. I don't think cheap suits fold at all well. But what would I know?

I'd give Viney the job of tagging him. And make it a hard tag. If Viney can cut N Daicos's output by 20 disposals, that's job done, irrespective of whether Viney gets any or not.

They have 4: Ashcrofts x2, Fletcher and Wilmot. And I'm surprised Logan Morris isn't there, too.

Following on from Dylan Shiel's suspension, you should add that both Maynard and Moore are subsequently suspended for reckless conduct causing harm to each other.

Sorry, but it needs to be said: the words that were allegedly used are not harmless.

I can just see how the process might pan out if AI was used to make the decision. It would analyse all the contenders, whether they were applicants or not, and determine that Simon Goodwin is the best choice.

Somewhat ironically, the continuing media assessment that the job is Buckley's to lose somewhat weakens his position. The people appointed by the club to make the decision might feel some subconscious pressure to appoint someone else just to prove the "process" was real.

This reminds me of a comment comparing Mick Malthouse's coaching style with Paul Roos. I can't remember who said it, but it was said that Malthouse demanded players change to meet his requirements and if they couldn't do that, they should move on. Conversely, it was claimed that Roos identified what a player's strengths were, and worked with the player to get the best out of them.

Firstly, do we know they didn't ask Jimmy Bartel, Jason Dunstall or any others of that type (whatever that means)? I think Watson appears to be an astute choice. He's not that long out of the game that it has moved on too far. I have found his TV commentary to be measured and shows an understanding of the strategic elements of the game. At the same time, he doesn't appear to over-react, which in TV commentary might make him seem dull to some, but measured to others. Importantly, having had one of the worst experiences in AFL that is possible, he knows the importance of having a coach who knows right from wrong.

We also need a GET STUFFED emoji.

We need a question mark emoji.

Sigmund Freud would be so proud.