La Dee-vina Comedia

"looked cooked". I'm not sure how anyone can judge such a thing based on a TV broadcast. I just can't see how resting him from 120 minutes of football next week would make any difference. By all means, give him a lighter week on the training track if the data available to the club suggests it's necessary, but playing for 120 minutes, approximately 150 hours after the previous game doesn't seem to me like it would make much difference to any player (unless they're carrying an injury).

If asked whether I'd take this as the only option to see a Premiership any time in the last 50+ years, of course I'd say "yes". Who wouldn't? So, let's hope we do get to celebrate!

Thanks for correcting me.

I love your passion for the Dees. (However, if you consider it impartially, three goals in time on, including one after the siren with a kick of about 70m with a heavy ball, to win a game really is a better achievement than three goals in 3 minutes for a game already won. But you're right...today it should be all about Fritsch)

Kudos to the Polish president. That's leadership.

I seem to recall Malcolm Blight did something similar. It was the game where he kicked that monster goal after the siren to win the game. I think he kicked two other goals before that one, perhaps all in time-on, but perhaps not in 3 minutes.

He can have a rest in October.

I assume you're asking about whether it's a record for us? (Clearly Essendon achieved this feat in 2000, given they only lost one game for the whole season.)

Did we? And are they? Three more questions: How do you know? Has it been stated somewhere? And most importantly, does it matter?

I've never been a fan of Smith, but I thought his first half was very good yesterday and his second half non-existent. Perhaps that was the result of the heavy collision with Hibberd(?). However, I saw enough to see that if he's fit he could be a useful medi-sub because of his versatility. Nevertheless, assuming May and McDonald are both fit, they should both come in for Smith and Melksham respectively. Viney is a condundrum. At his best, he's an upgrade on Sparrow and Jordon, but in his last game he seemed to be struggling with pace and strength as seen by him being caught with the ball so many times. I hope the enforced break has been good for him, so I'd pick him, probably in place of Sparrow, who should become the medi-sub.

Such an even perfromance it was difficult to find 6 out of about a dozen possibilities. In addition, you could take the first 7 names and throw them in the air and whatever order they landed in would still look OK 6. Gawn 5. Langdon 4. Salem 3. Jackson 2. Fritsch 1. Petracca Others in the top dozen: Lever (7th), Spargo, Rivers, Oliver, Petty, Bowey

Respect. Seven different predictions (including the win which is unstated but implied by the Crows only kicking 6 goals while Brown, Fritsch and Melksham kick 11 between them). It's not guaranteed, but I suspect if any one of these six other predictions proves to be correct, we win.

There's an excellent article in today's Sunday Age about Brandon Jack's autobiography, simply titled '28'. The title refers to the total number of games he played for the Swans. The story explains how Jack has used his autobiography to describe how difficult it can be living in the shadows of, in his case, his famous father and brother, Kieran. Especially when you can't achieve the same levels of success. It should remind us of how hard it must have been for Tom Flower, Brian Stynes and so many others. Similiarly, there must be enormous pressure on sons of great players, too. Let's all remember that every player that makes it onto an AFL list has achieved far more than most of us. Every game they play is a bonus. And let's stop using silly epithets like "spud" when describing a player who won't be the superstar we want him or her to be.

This won't be the answer, but I've noticed that 10 of those names end in -on. Are they all the names of criminals? I hasten to add (to avoid defamation proceedings), that I don't mean the footballers themselves. Peter Foster (not the footballer!) certainly is.

I read that as "pecking" his hand. Maybe that's my mind thinking that "pecking" is the logical verb to follow on from the word "Sparrow".

Interesting stuff. If I tune in next week will you have one explaining how cryptocurrencies work, whether they impact on the money supply and whether paying players in Bitcoin is outside the salary cap?

I'm not sure if this will cheer up Old Dee. But I found it both incredible and heartwarming (although also a little bit weird).

So have most Carlton supporters

Perhaps your auto-correct is equally as pessimistic as you are. I think my task for the rest of the day is to find something in the news to cheer you up. And anyone else feeling maudlin. Perhaps we can start a new thread which is a "Cheer up Demonland thread" with optimistic and heart-warming stories only.

Poor Perth, missing out again. Here's some evidence that some types of crimes worldwide have reduced during the pandemic. And here's some more, although it does point out that some crime types (online fraud, for example) have increased.

I hope that's not the case. If he doesn't play because he's distressed, it will embolden those weak-minded trolls to go after him again.

To be fair, isn't crime down overall, allegedly because of lockdowns? Maybe the state Police have more capacity than usual. Nevertheless, if people are able to board planes knowing the person next to them has been checked and isn't carrying a weapon, they should also be able to assume that the person has appropriate approval to travel.

This isn't your main point (which I agree with) but I'm not sure it's umpiring standards that have dropped. I think the rules have been over-complicated making it nigh on impossible for the umpires to do the job we want them to do consistently. The AFL has been gifted an opportunity by Hocking's departure to Geelong to do something to fix both the rules and the MRO/ Tribunal/ Appeal system which Hocking ended up making worse, rather than better.

Yes and no. Apart from defence and border control, the Federal Government is not a service delivery agency. Most services (think housing, public transport, education) are delivered at the State level. Hence, the Feds aren't really set up to provide these sorts of services. However, if we've learned anything over the last 20 months, it is that the Feds must improve their capability to deliver services (vaccine purchase and distribution, for example).

Normally at this time of year this would be the most active thread on Demonland. By a long way.