La Dee-vina Comedia

Brayshaw did very well in defence when he went back after May went down. I'd be keen to keep Brayshaw back there because as soon as B Brown is ready we'll have a selection dilemma as to who Brown replaces. McDonald to the wing as planned seems logical when Brown comes in with Brayshaw staying in defence. It becomes a problem against a team with three tall forwards unless Hibberd plays "tall". I'm thinking, therefore, that perhaps Hibberd comes in for May and when May returns, Jetta makes way for him. I'm wondering why Jordon only played 56% game time. If he's run out of gas, time he was rested. Maybe Chandler for him?

4 words, so doesn't count

Recipe for disaster, but trying to squeeze 8 into 6 doesn't go. And then shuffle, because the order is too hard to determine. End result? 6. Petracca 5. Oliver 4. Gawn 3. Viney 2. Lever 1. Salem Apologies to Langdon and Brayshaw (as well as McDonald and Fritsch)

As a matter of interest, do you subscribe to the theory that there is no 'i' in team??

Intended typo?

You mean this guy?

I'll post in this thread because it's about radio announcing although not SEN. Congratulations to Gerard Healy on 3AW who in last night's Sports Today show made the folllowing statement in a passionate call for more Thursday night football: "Thursday night football should be on every day of the week".

I would have thought it likely that the medical sub should be a player with versatility given (based purely on numbers) that the injured player to be replaced is most likely to be anyone other than a key position player. I therefore expect that key position players such as Petty, Weideman and both Browns are unlikely ever to be the sub. A key position player with versatility so they can play on smaller players, onball or on the wing, such as McDonald or May (although obviously I don't mean that May would ever be in this position) might be suitable to be the sub.

The thing about Gawn's kicking is that the result is consistent. Therefore, he doesn't need to change his technique. All he has to do is aim further to the right each time.

Very good question which makes me doubt my position.

Just stating an obvious fact...Melbourne supporters are smart people. Best not to drill down any deeper.

As a matter of interest, does the 12th man/woman in cricket get that game credited to his or her career? Also, as I've posted before, in the days of the non-interchangeable 19th and 20th men, those selected on the bench were credited with a game, whether they played or not. I see no difference here and believe it is the correct decision. Apart from anything else, purely as a work-based issue, they have had to turn up to work, in their working gear and had to be emotionally tuned into the game so they can be ready to play if called upon.

It was interesting to see him at the end of the GWS game in discussion with Josh Kelly and Jayden Hunt. If I recall correctly, they were all at Brighton Grammar together. That school must have had a tremendous First XVIII in their final year.

Wrong. You're a Melbourne supporter which clearly shows you're smart.

Blind-spot? Didn't Oliver get a number of off-the-ball free kicks against the Giants?

I've watched St Kilda in two games - against us and against Essendon. In both games the Saints persisted with short kick-ins (ie, 15-20 metres, usually to the pocket) as teams used to do regularly before this rule change. It seems that they haven't modified this part of their gameplan to suit the new rules. Conversely, we appear to have done so. It helps that Steven May is such a good kick. We appear to have been lucky with two recent rule changes which have matched with our recruiting: Steven May to full back with the aforesaid change to kick-ins; and Ben Brown just when the rules have made it easier for key position forwards.

What the hell was dermie rabbiting on about with everything? I always find Dermott's comments to be a really good example of highly articulate sophistry ultimately tending towards meaninglessness.

Like Mark Lee's arms. (According to the one and only Jack Dyer.)

Thank goodness. Your suggestion that he had embargoed some stories made me wonder what else he knew about St Kilda which was so much worse than the Rod Owen story that it shouldn't be told. What I found surprising in the story was that Melbourne was considered to be so much more professional than St Kilda and therefore a better environment for Owen. I'm pleased, but still surprised.

But is that his mistake or the fault of the player who kicked it?

If the remaining 5 players are all mentioned in the Changes for Next Week Thread, we've reached maximum harmony on Demonland.

Whatever else is in the contract, I hope we get better control over his hairstyle.

Don't tell WADA.

I'm quite comfortable with Brayshaw on the wing. I thought he was good in that role against the Giants, especially in the first and last quarters. But if (and it's a big if, in my view) Melksham comes in, does Brayshaw take Sparrow's role, whatever it is, and Melksham go to the wing?

I admit that's better than I had expected it woud be. If I'd been asked to guess, I would have thought it would have been something like 36/50. I must be reading too much Demonland where the losses get magnified!