La Dee-vina Comedia

Caro is no longer the Chief Football Writer for The Age. She has, in effect, retired as a full time journo and now provides maybe one article a week. Given that, it's not surprising if she hasn't written about Richmond's covid breaches. That's the stuff to be covered by The Age's full time footy journos.

I'd also get rid of the change that allows the kick in from a behind to take place up to 15 metres outside the goal square. I suspect the thinking was that it would get the ball out of the defensive zone. What I think has actually happened is that the ball now lands so far from the goal that it's in no man's land and is too far away to be quickly returned for another score. And still too far from the other end for a quick score, either. As an aside, that makes inaccurate kicking a bigger penalty than ever before. I realise that the rule didn't actually change the practice from the defender kicking the ball to himself before leaving the goal square. What I would do now is change the rule so that not only does the kick out have to be made from inside the goal square, but it must also be at least 15 metres. That would mean no kicking to one's self first.

I hadn't realised that Bartlett has been there 7 years. Caro says his appointment was "anointed" by Demetriou. What, exactly, does that mean? My first thought was that Demetriou had a role in his appointment but on a second reading, it could mean, well, nothing really, other than Demetriou not stopping the members from voting in who they wanted. Does anyone remember the event? Was it accepted at the time that Demetriou had some involvement in Bartlett's appointment?

I think all the senior AFL coaches are on safe ground this year because of the difficulties associated with the pandemic. But I wonder whether anyone at the AFL might be on shaky ground. We know that around 20% of AFL staff have already left (or will be leaving) as part of the trim, but I wonder more specifically whether Steve Hocking's position is secure. For all we know, he may be seen as the saviour of the season. Alternatively, he might be recognised as the person who allowed the game to change so much but not for the better. After factoring in the shortened game time, I don't believe the low scores and poor matches has much, if anything, to do with the disrupted season and everything to do with coaches playing defensive tactics which are made worse by rule changes that have not got to the real problems.

Phew. For a moment there I thought you were avoiding the auto-censor. But you really did mean bunch of G's rather than the potentially more profane "bunch of C's".

You've left off the obvious. Two games played at once. One played east-west, the other north-south. The AFL can charge twice the price to enter, too. What great value, though, given everyone is apparently so time poor. Twice as much football in the same amount of time.

It might be easier and less painful to change your mates.

Not something one would have read about the Eagles 15 years ago. How times have changed.

Chin up, SWYL. Whenever being alone gets you down, know that Demonlanders are your friends, even if we sometimes vehemently disagree with each other.

Not sure about that. I suspect it's more likely to be the AFL not wanting a reduction in broadcast rights' payments. 28 games in 2021 plus 17 games in 2020 averages out at 22.5 per season. Suspiciously close to 22, and over, rather than under, to avoid any legal claim about the AFL offering less product (averaged over two years) than promised in the agreement. The problem with one quarter being longer than the rest will be obvious on a really windy day.

While that's his reputation, I didn't see it in the games he played for us. I'm not saying he shouldn't remain on our list, but I also think he's still some distance away from his best footy. Will he get there? I don't know.

And we're playing mutiple games in September! Even when we were runners up in 2000, we only played once in September.

Such a terrible expression. Cheap suits don't fold, they just get crushed. Expensive, wool suits, on the other hand fold the best. As to the issue being discussed? I'd hate to think the club or the players will look back on 2020 and use the travel issues as an excuse. I don't understand how travelling means a player can't nail a handpass or kick in Q1 of any game. Yes, I could see the argument that by the end of a game the players are tired, but our losses generally haven't happend that way.

Pretty sure Carey needed a minder, too, and for similar reasons.

Yes. But both started from a much more talented base than any player on our list since Robert Flower (or, in Carey's case, arguably, ever).

Our usual gameplan isn't defensive? I only ask, because it surely isn't an attacking gameplan. As to changes, the GWS loss changes everything. We should definitely pick a team to win, not to give young players experience, farewell those likely to retire or try fringe players to see who belongs. It all depends on who is available to come in, but any or all of Preuss, Bedford, Pickett, Baker and Smith could be omitted. ANB and AVB should remain because even with their weaknesses, they offer more than the five others mentioned. Hunt could also be omitted, although I still wonder why we haven't put him back in defence where he's played his best football. I would much rather have him than Smith in the backline, although I'd prefer Lockhart to either.

Yes. For two reasons. Firstly, because he has a contract and with the financial restrictions now impacting the AFL and clubs, we will not have the soft cap room to pay him out. Secondly, every coach and every club has an excuse for this year because of the extraordinary circumstances caused by Covid

Not a chance. That would be like choosing Julia Gillard to be PM and keeping Kevin Rudd in the Cabinet. (Or, to show political balance that some seem to think is necessary here on Demonland, choosing Malcolm Turnbull to be PM and keeping Tony Abbott in the caucus). There's no way it could work. I expect Goodwin to be coach in 2021. Whether he makes it to 2022 would, I think, depend on whether we make the finals next year. No finals, no 2022.

If a line has already been put through a player's name for 2021, that player shouldn't play again this year. I don't know who that might be, but I want us playing the future, not the past. While I'm sympathetic to the idea of Jetta (if he is retiring, voluntarily or not) and Jones (if he's suitably fit and retiring, voluntarily or not) getting a farewell game, I don't think that's the right message to send when the coach has just talked about the club being tougher. Perhaps if there was a game at the MCG I might think differently.

Looking at these photos, I'm pretty sure Biden is wearing one of those MFC ties. Trump, too, might be on board.

Listening to Brad Johnson delivering special comments last night brought home to me two things: if you're not concentrating, when he starts speaking his voice sounds eerily like Eddie McGuire. I kept thinking Eddie was calling the game his comments are not very special. He offers minimal insight.

6. Viney 5. Oliver 4. Petracca 3. Rivers (has he played enough games to win the club's Best First Year player award...if we have such an award?) 2. Fritsch 1. Gawn

Not sure I agree about Salem. I think he's had his most consistent year to date. As an aside, I've been wondering whether they'll try him in the midfield tonight. From all the changes, I don't see an obvious replacement for Brayshaw in the middle.

I've never watched an episode of Open Mike. Is it live or recorded? If it's the latter, is there any suggestion that it's edited? Mind you, if it's edited you'd expect the best bits to remain, unless they're defamatory.

I'm prepared to cut Goodwin some slack for the 9 years since 2006 he wasn't here!