La Dee-vina Comedia

I think the "agreement" is that assistant coaches are not approached during the season except for senior coaching roles. I don't think there's anything that says an assistant coach can't move between seasons. After all, how did Yze get to us?

Isn't that a frame taken from the TV recording? I seem to recall that there was no professional photo taken at the time and that the person with the camera that flashed was sought out for her (his?) photo. If that amateur, well-timed photo was ever published, I've never seen it.

Whether it is the best mark ever taken is arguable. What is not in question is how incredible the photo is. Perhaps only the photo of Shai Bolton's mark earlier this year is better.

There are three ways to interpret this data when predicting for future games: When Margetts umpires the data suggests we're more likely to lose because our win rate with him umpiring is 33% worse than when he's not the umpire When Margetts umpires the data suggests we're more likely to win because the law of large numbers (otherwise known as "the law of averages") would indicate that the win rate with games he umpires should move toward the mean (ie, to get from 24% to 36% would require us to win more than we lose). The data is meaningless

Earlier in the year, one of the broadcasters pointed out that set shot accuracy from sideways kicks is higher than for straightfoward drop punts. That may be why. However, that data needs to be looked at more closely. I suspect that the accuracy varies greatly with distance from goal. Tom McDonald was too far out for a sideways kick where I suspect the odds favour a straight run in. (Although I accept it worked for ANB).

Really? Why do you say that? (Serious question.) I would have thought that Demetriou would win the "most disliked" prize.

Bowey could come in if the Match Committee decided to persist with Hunt in the forward line in Pickett's place.

Brad Scott is having a busy time. Isn't he also being suggested in some quarters as the next coach of Collingwood?

Sorry. Missing some punctuation. That should read another S. Hocking decision. It has been announced that Steve Hocking has accepted appointment as Geelong's new CEO. It will be interesting to see how his time at AFL HQ will be remembered. Overall, I think he's been a positive, but that's not to say I agree with everything he's done.

If Majak is the answer, what's the question? As a serious response, throughout his career Daw has shown occassional glimpses of ability but has been unable to show consistency. I still see him as a "break glass in case of emergency" type player and that emergency is probably only when all of Gawn, Jackson and Weideman are unavailable or if May and Lever are both unavailable. To Daw's credit, he's still a handy emergency choice.

6. Salem 5. May 4. Lever 3. Gawn 2. Petracca 1. Fritsch Can't make my mind up about Hibberd's game. Only a few possessions of his own, but kept Toby Greene's numbers way down, except for the matter of 3 goals in a low scoring game. I guess that's closer to a fail than a pass. (And I'm not suggesting Hibberd should be near the votes).

What. A. [censored] (Edit: I can't believe a word starting with the letter T and ending in osser needs to be censored!)

This team may well have beaten our senior team in the Neeld years. (I'm not sure whether that says more about this team or the past).

Is marketing expenditure part of the soft cap? Even if it's not, the necessary budget cuts might have reduced our PR team and with it the ability to promote games and other activities.

I saw his death notice in The Age today (2 July). He was President of the MFC for a couple of years in the late 1970s. Sacked Dennis Jones as coach and replaced him with Carl Ditterich. Here is his Wikipedia entry.

I put the lack of comment on the GWS supporters' forum down to three things: the people of western Sydney don't know they have an AFL team the people of western Sydney don't realise the world is bigger than just western Sydney the people of western Sydney don't now how to use computers

As good as he's been, I can't see him beating Jackson or Jordon. Therefore, I can't see how he's as short as 50 to 1!

I suspect the Match Committee want to give B Brown a few games in a row when he's finally ready to see how he goes, just like they did with Weideman. They wouldn't want the first one of those games to be when he's not fully fit. I get it that it seems counter-intuitive to have him as an emergency if he's not fully fit, but I suspect what that means is that if one of Gawn, Jackson or T McDonald isn't able to play, the Match Committee would rather Brown come in rather than Weideman or M Brown as once they're in, how many games in a row should they then be given? That would then keep B Brown out too long.

Classic example of the problem with the English language. 'All' or 'nothing' are often considered to be opposites. But would you rather win [censored] all or [censored] nothing?

I suspect that it's all about Sydney (the city) viewership. Channel 7 knows that Sydney people will watch a game involving Sydney (the team) but not much else. Furthermore, people from Adelaide will still watch games even if neither of their local teams are involved. So, of these two options, Channel 7's biggest audience will be Dogs v Sydney, not PA v Melbourne.

Amusing, but that's not how sports betting works. The odds don't change for the person who makes the wager once that wager is placed. Those odds remain fixed for that bet. Certainly, odds can lengthen and shorten over time but only for future bets. Note: If you're under 18 and reading this, stop doing so and return to this post after your 18th birthday.

We generally play 7 forwards to allow for rotations, so there's still room for ANB. However, under this model, Pickett and possibly ANB might have to chip in to assist with on ball rotations.

And if we were struggling, I suspect you would you say it was Goodwin's fault.

But it's an ABC story, so clearly unbalanced. I need to see how the Murdoch press cover the issue. Oh. Sorry, wrong thread.

This is an interesting albeit long analysis of the current Covid vaccination situation. (And it's produced by neither the ABC or Murdoch media). As with all media analysis, though, treat it with care.