La Dee-vina Comedia

Yes, it was. Hawkins was swinging his arm as he was being tackled and accidentally hit May in the head. May chose to bump Franklin and the elbow ended up hitting Franklin on the chin. It's because May chose to bump that makes it so different from the Hawkins incident. I accept Franklin was hit by May's elbow. However, Franklin's over-reaction (or delayed reaction) should also have been scrutinised for staging.

I disagree with most here. It's been made clear to everyone that if you choose to bump, you wear the consequences, if there is a bump to the head, even if it's an accident. May should not have raised his arm to bump Franklin in the first place. It's just a dumb action (given the rules) and could have resulted in a more significant injury (hence the reason for the rules). What I don't understand is the statement that it's a "first offence". Really? Are we talking about the same May who has been suspended many times? Does this mean every player gets a "first offence" for every separate type of infringement? Wow.

No chance, unfortunately. He could play like he did on Saturday every week and wouldn't get close. Umpires are unable to award more than a paltry number of votes to players who don't start in the centre circle for most of the game.

Josh Kelly. Same year as Hunt and Salem.

I'm confident the Saturday night commentators are fulfilling what the program producers want. Evidence is Brian Taylor's transformation when he shifted from Saturday night to Friday night calling duties. On Saturday night it was all blokey forced humour (using that word loosely). On Fridays, he's much more committed to calling the game straight. Also, special comments providers need to come with use by dates. Any commentator who has been out of the game 10 years or more has lost touch with the way the game is played and as a consequence, doesn't really add much. That's why Jimmy Bartel, Jobe Watson, Luke Hodge and Daisy Pearce impress me; and why Matthew Richardson, Wayne Carey and so many others do not.

Sorry @Nasher. I was trying to make two separate points, although they are obviously related. I certainly didn't mean to imply that you and everyone else who watches games on TV automatically descends into numptiness.

6. Oliver 5. McDonald 4. Salem 3. Harmes 2. Jordon 1. Neal-Bullen

This is one of the most bizarre "changes" thread ever. Individual biases against players such as Melksham, Harmes, Brayshaw and ANB are so obvious. The change I would like to see is posters including in their comments whether they saw the game live or on TV. I'm convinced watching on TV does not allow an understanding of the roles players undertake which don't necessarily result in stats but contribute to the win. For example, ANB was running into defence to assist and was then the one who ran forward hardest and fastest to provide an outlet. Brayshaw runs back hard to help the defenders, essentially to allow Lever to play his intercept role. And anyone who criticises players for dropping marks last night clearly didn't appreciate just how slippery the ground and the ball were. Instead, we should be praising those who held on to the ball. As to changes? None unless forced.

I know it's a stretch because you asked about 'real journaists', but Mick Warner follows Richmond. On a slight tangent, does anyone know how Jesse Hogan (the journalist from The Age, not the footballer) is getting on? A Melbourne supporter who became ill (had a stroke, from memory) in, perhaps his early 30s a few years ago.

What do you mean by 'diversity'?

We're also due to beat someone by more than 10 goals, too. But I don't think it will be this week.

Getting around the auto-censor by swearing in Lithuanian?

Snap!

As much as it is always fun to criticise Collingwood, Buckley or anyone associated with that club, much of their current pain likely results from having been runner up in 2018. It is understandable that the club tried "topping up" after being one Dom Sheed kick from a premiership. It hasn't worked, but if it were my club, I would have been pleased that they tried.

I've always admired Caroline Wilson. I think she aggravates some by reporting without fear or favour. Inevitably, she will upset the supporters of every club because over the journey all of them will have done something stupid which she has uncovered. However, I do believe she has one weakness and that is an inability to admit she might have been wrong. That's not a hanging offence, though. I look forward to having her back on radio and TV.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/608379/fixture-update-start-time-changes-and-travel-arrangements-for-r8

Hopefully it's only a hypothetical, but would the AFL require the Swans to play if the players were OK to do so but the senior coach was not? I would have thought so...it's no different from the Senior Coach being ill as we saw with Clarkson a few years ago when Bolton took over.

When we last played at the MCG the ground announcer instructed that anyone who had been in Perth in recent days or on a particular plane flight between Melbourne and Perth had to leave the ground immediately. There was any way of enforcing that instruction, though. It may be the same this weekend for anyone who has been in Sydney in the last few days - Swans players and officials excepted, of course, subject to each passing a recent Covid test.

There seems to be an assumption in many of these posts that Michael Christian watches every game and decides on his own what should be the subject of sanction and what shouldn't be. I would have thought (without any evidence to back this up) that it is done another way with a small team of AFL employees who watch every game and identify potential issues of concern for MC to consider. If that's correct, MC is more like a judge with the evidence being presented to him by the AFL employees acting as prosecutors. Anyone know how the scheme actually works in practice?

How disrespectful. You could have at least suggested I was his son, rather than father!

Actually, I have a great deal of respect for Michael Christian, even though I may disagree with some of his decisions. He has taken on a thankless job knowing that every decision he makes will be scrutinised endlessly by the media and the general public. In addition, he knows every decision can be appealed and many will be overturned. It takes someone with grit and a true love for the game to take on this role.

Haymes Paint. (Just bumping this thread to give Haymes Paint a bit more value from its sponsorship dollars. If it's not going to get exposure from the MFC, Demonland will have to do.)

I don't think it's been officially decided. Rather, someone in the media has found out the results of the survey and assumed (wisely? unwisely?) that the AFL would respond to the 95%.

This one I disagree with. I find I'm not ready on a Thursday night for a game of football.

Humorous Tweet about our sponsor, Haymes Paint: