La Dee-vina Comedia

Bone spurs stopped him being picked. Apparently had someone else appear for him at the combine, too.

I agree. Let's move on...to "fewer" versus "less". This should help:

Good words. Did he say them to the players or to the members (eg, at the AGM)?

I think we do:

We'll win tonight. We'll also beat GWS and then miss finals by losing to an Essendon team that has already given up and will have more than half its team out injured or being prepared for 2021. It's the Melbourne way.

Let's be honest. It's not actually a word. It's the verbal equivalent of the mathematically impossible giving effort of 110%.

I used to believe that teams finishing in positions 5-8 were too far off the mark and therefore not worthy of playing finals. However, I've changed my view. With the occasional exception, I still believe they're mostly not worthy of playing finals from a football quality point of view (particularly teams finishing 7th and 8th). However, teams in the bottom half of the eight can learn valuable lessons about how to cope with finals. Not just on game day, but also in the preparation for finals, including player management in the weeks leading up to finals. It is not just the players who would gain valuable experience, but the coaches and the club as a whole.

Poor Clem had to cope with the nickname "Dim Clumsey". In the late 1980s, Ten's commentary team for the then VFA included some relatively unknown blokes called Bruce McAvaney, Eddie McGuire and Stephen Quartermain.

Whoah there! I'm not sure I've said anything about Smith. But now that you ask, I thought him being out there meant we played one short. A defender with four possessions hasn't done enough, irrespective of what his man might have have done. I've never been enamoured with Smith and don't see what he offers. Yes, he's athletic, but he doesn't have a footy IQ, so doesn't bring enough for mine.

Didn't the bandage go right around his leg? I'm not qualified in anatomy, but wouldn't that mean it was on both his hamstring and quad?

Jobe Watson and Jimmy Bartel provide excellent special comments. Rather than retelling what one can see, they explain the tactical play. That they are relatively recently retired also means their game style knowledge is current.

I just assumed that once the possibility of playing the 2020 Grand Final at the MCG was officially killed during the week, the team lost any interest it had in playing finals anywhere this year.

I spent much of yesterday's game trying to determine whether Brereton is a smart commentator or just wants us to think he's smart. Some of his comments seemed insightful; others seemed like flights of fancy with no justification on the vision available. Either he's a genius or he's got us bluffed.

Both were good commentators. Measured, articulate and not self-promoters.

Actually, I thought ANB provided more grunt yesterday than vandenBerg has provided at any time this year.

I struggle to understand whether we play a zone defence or not. If we do so, then was it Smith specifically that kept Papely quiet? It seems to me that stating that a particular defender was accountable for the performance of a specific forward runs counter to the argument that we play zone defence. So, which is it? Do we play zone defence or not? (That's a question for anyone, not just you DS, although I respect your opinion on the subject).

Most of this I agree with. However, I can't agree with the expression, "Nathan you have failed us". Irrespective of how they play, I don't believe in the idea that any player can fail us on the ground. (I'm not sure, by the way, whether the "us" you refer to means the supporters or the club itself...but that doesn't change my point.) I do, however, believe players can fail us (club and supporters) if they do not behave appropriately in their off-field life. I've never seen or heard of Jones doing anything off field that has been detrimental to the club.

I should add I feel dirty giving Langdon and Gawn votes of the same value as given to May and Petracca last week. I'm sure it's been discussed before, but maybe the Demonland POTY could adopt a different voting methodology next year? My suggestion would be to keep the concept of top 6 players, but instead of an automatic, unweighted 6/5/4/3/2/1, change to a score out of 10 for each of those players. For example, last week I might have given May 10 and Petracca 9 (and the other four players probably scores between 5 and 7). For last night's game, I would have given Langdon 6, Gawn 4, May 4, Neal-Bullen 3, Oliver 3, and Tomlinson 2.

6. Langdon 5. Gawn 4. May 3. Neal-Bullen 2. Oliver 1. Tomlinson Harmes' last quarter was very good and nearly got him the final vote

Obvious bias against us in Cairns. Sydney already given an 80 point advantage.

We're not flying from Maroochydore to Cairns? Under normal circumstances (and things are anything but normal both for the AFL and for Virgin Australia), Virgin has direct flights from Maroochydore to Cairns.

Sydney ringing the changes...

This year only, with pineapple added to commemorate the location of the big game.

Source? If it's just your conjecture, then I'll see you and raise you Harmes in defence and Smith forward/relief ruck

I'm still waiting for the Demonland software upgrade that includes an "Envious" button to go along with "Like", "Thanks" and "Love"