La Dee-vina Comedia

Why do you keep calling Lumumba "Harry"?

I don't think it's odd. There could be a number of reasons such as land value(ie, keeping it from becoming more expensive), Government directive (ie, if it's government owned land or a government-led project, the government might be insisting on secrecy) or not wanting to give those who may oppose the development opportunities to kill off the proposal before the funding is locked away.

I just found a fourth one the other day, too. All the rest went many years ago.

"The horror! The horror!"

Is it correct that after all the academy and father-son picks are taken pick 28 is likely to drift out a bit but pick 50 drift in? In other words, if that is correct, there wouldn't be 22 players taken between pick 28 and 50 but something more like, say, 15-17. In this year of less information from which to make selections, that would make the possibility of pick 50 being a successful longterm selection not significantly worse than pick 28.

This is a very interesting article about muscle development and the value of various products such as foam rollers, compression garments and ice baths. It seems to question the long-term value of ice baths. Given ice baths seem to be used all the time by AFL clubs, I now wonder whether that's the correct approach? I'm sure there will be some players keen for a reduction in the amount of ice baths they are required to take.

The world is full of incorrect predictions: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas Watson, president of IBM, 1943

Interesting to compare the leg muscle definition of ANB with Baker's in similar running poses. And comparatively, Petracca has a six pack while Oliver's body looks a bit more like a white wine cask.

Good opening post, but I think even after just one season I'd already have Langdon ahead of Michie.

Werridee, what's your thinking behind placing Melksham 3rd on your list?

Putting two and two together, I've just realised that our new full forward with the Sideshow Bob hair is a Demon-supporting, Demonland moderator with an interest in wine and who lives, or perhaps works (or both), in St Kilda.

Generally I would agree that having a "government led working party" is a recipe for constant delay. However, givem all the land we would be interested in is Government owned, giving the government leadership of this project could work in our favour. I expecy, however, that one of Pert's "jobs" will be to continue to push the government officers to make sure there is continuing progress. Government being in cahrge is another reason why Pert can't keep members updated. It's not "his"project to discuss. Any statements will be controlled by the government.

Ugh! Can't we just use names such as North, Collingwood and Essendon? (Not that it matters, but I have no idea who the Chardonnay Sippers are meant to be). Honestly, the continuing use of these so very unclever nicknames really irritates me.

You could both be right of course. Getting in a list is only half the battle. However, if Oscar does make it onto another list, I suspect he is more likely to play than not.

To be fair, you could ask that question over many things available for sale. The better question is, if someone believes there is a market for this product (and presumably there is), why can't they find a way of witing to print said calendars after the trade period concludes?

AFL is a dichotomy. On the one hand, for supporters, it's all about loyalty. It is impossible for a true supporter of any club to switch alliegances. On the other hand, for the clubs themselves and their players, it's a business. And that's OK. Supporters just have to appreciate that "club loyalty" is the domain of the supporters, not those who work in the industry. As supporters, all we should expect is that when the player is playing for us, he (or she in the AFLW) is loyal and gives his/her all.

bl**dy superpaloozer?

Of course, if you're living in Ohio, you're in the land that has alternative facts.

boozer?

The strategy might also reflect Goodwin's and/or the club's concern that unless the club does well this year, there might not be a "next year" for the current football department. Just like politics, the needs for short-term decisions might interfere with the greater good. I hope that's not the case, but it's a possibility that shouldn't be ignored.

Australian nicknames at their very best. Made all the more amusing by the likelihood that if Frawley didn't actually have a real nickname, his '-ey' ending would be removed and he'd become 'Frawls'. I'm disappointed in the amount of negative comments about him on this thread. Whatever happened to the "if you can't say anything nice, say nothing" axiom? I think any player who chooses to leave a club is perfectly entitled to do so. It's not like clubs are any more loyal to their players. Just ask Adam Treloar or Jack Watts. And while Frawley played with us, I always thought he gave it his best.

Thoroughly deserved. And it allows me to restate that I believe all the clubs Neale Daniher has been involved with (Melbourne, Essendon, Freo, WCE?) should annually play for the Neale Daniher Cup. It's simply determined by compiling the results of the first game each plays against each other into its own mini-ladder with the top team winning the cup. It would add extra interest in each of those games and continue to remind all AFL supporters of Daniher's extensive contribution to the game.

I wonder about the value of that. What's the success rate of Category B rookies across the AFL? (Of course, it depends a bit on the definition of "success".) I wonder whether the resources used to identify and then develop a category B rookie might be better spent elsewhere. I appreciate the concept of "high risk, high reward", but if the evidence to date suggests the rewards aren't there, maybe we are wasting our time with Cat Bs.

I'm trying to understand how this works from a player's perspective for someone told he is being delisted but will be rookied. Before this, those players could put themselves into the draft for anyone else to take, thereby getting another chance on a senior list, knowing the worst case scenario is ending up on the rookie list of the club that just delisted them. Does this change mean that those players won't have the chance of being picked up by another club?

I'm not convinced there is universal agreement on what the game should be like. Until there is a clear understanding of the desired end product, there's not a lot of point in tinkering with the rules. What I recommend the AFL does is to clearly articulate the desired game style it is looking for. High scoring? Close matches? One-on-one contests? A game for all shapes and sizes? 100 minutes? 120 minutes? Same game for men and women? Same game at the top level as at state leagues, amateurs and under-age? An exportable product? Best for TV? Or best seen in person? Then we can debate what rules should be in place to try to meet those aims. Otherwise the AFL is just going to be fiddling around and we won't know what they're trying to achieve.