La Dee-vina Comedia

Must be sons of witches.

Before delistings and trades can be discussed, not only do we need to know what the list sizes will be in 2021 and beyond, but also whether the AFL will change the rules on how many picks clubs must use in this year's draft. Has the AFL made any announcements about that? If, for example, there is no obligation to pick anyone this year (which I do not expect to be the case) we may choose to ignore the draft and prefer what we already have.

If he plays on, I hope the decision is made on matters other than giving him a chance to play 300 games. Personally, I'm ambivalent. I doubt he would play many games in 2021 but I also respect the comments from Redleg above. That is, we need to reward him for sticking fat during the bad times. However, if the club believes that's what this year was about, then have we already done enough? I'm not sure.

And about 10% of the time people can't even say stastistics...stastitics...statistics properly, so say "data" instead.

I wouldn't worry too much about border closures and lockdowns in 2021 for the following reasons. 1. Queensland has a State election on 31 October. Once that date is passed, whoever is in power will be able to lift any restrictions without worrying about the impact at the ballot box for a few years. 2. If Victoria is still in any form of strict lockdown, meaning no crowds at AFL games, by March next year, Dan Andrews won't still be Premier. Let me be clear - I'm not anti-Andrews. I'm just predicting what I think would happen to him should he over-reach by maintaining a strict lockdown into 2021. His own party will fear for their prospects at their next election (due November 2022) and will overthrow him. Whoever replaces him will get the job only because he/she promises to lift most of the restrictions. Hopefully the scientific world will succeed in developing a vaccine so we won't have to worry about politicians from all sides playing politics with the AFL and other aspects of our lives.

I wouldn't object to the 20 minutes being changed as long as the total time including time on was expected to be 30 minutes. I suspect that was what was in McLachlan's mind when he wouldn't commit to 20 minute quarters in his recent statement.

Why? Over the last 20 years, I believe the AFL has done a good job on all things commercial, including matters like expansion. The second tier competition would fit into this category. On the other hand, over the same period I think the AFL has poorly managed two things. The first is how it has managed the game itself, such as the rules, the "look of the game" and the MRP/MRO/Tribunal process. The second is the AFL's PR and communications strategy. In short, I suspect the changes to the second tier are likely to have been well thought through but have been poorly communicated so we don't appreciate the reasoning behind the proposal.

It's a good question. Perhaps there are greater revenue options, such as sponsorship and broadcast rights, for the changed competition. I may well be wrong, but I would have thought that any additional revenues from these sources wouldn't be enough to move the needle.

I'm unclear on the basis for these two bolded statements. If they're from Caroline Wilson's article, I'm not convinced that her opinion should automatically be accepted as fact.

Keep in mind that the coaching group can see the broad scope of the field far better than players on the ground. It's also possible that Goodwin is giving a new instruction which differs from the instructions he had previously given, such as at the most recent break between quarters, because the opposition may have changed their tactics.

Here's the list of wine names for 10 other clubs. I think Richmond is #2, Collingwood must be #3 and surely Essendon is #5.

I think we notice the mistakes because most of the camera work is actually pretty good this year. Finally, the directors have realised that close ups of play are unhelpful and that medium distance and sometimes long distance views, including those form behind the goals, are better for giving a true perspective of the game.

Late, but... 6. May 5. Langdon 4. Petracca 3. Rivers 2. Oliver 1. Gawn I was amazed to see the Herald Sun opinion that Pickett was best on ground, a decision not shared by anyone here.

I think we're aiming too low worrying about whether we'll make finals. What's the highest we can be at the end of the final round if all results go our way from here?

I think you might also need to separate out fixed and variable costs. Or, to put it another way, every business is different and a single formula probably doesn't work for every business. Also, I've always thought the GF Public Holiday was a stupid idea as it seems to kill momentum for the big day rather than enhance it. I'd abolish it, but if it has to remain, in future years make it the Monday after the GF, not the Friday beforehand.

I expect Melksham to continue his defensive role and play on Ridley. Hibberd (if fit) for Jetta (injured or not) is the only change I would make. Why wouldn't the Match Committee reward the team that played GWS? We've been saying for years that our main problem is psychological. Changing a winning combination doesn't appear to me to be a way of building confidence into the players.

Port Adelaide have been coping OK with the "fly in, fly out on the day" routine. I suspect if we want to blame travel arrangements, not only would we be clutching at straws, but masking the real problems.

Such a cop-out of a statement. What does it mean? It could mean nothing more than Ross Lyon letting anyone and everyone know that he'd like to coach again, anywhere.

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.