La Dee-vina Comedia

I'm curious as to what your definition of "old" is when you say "plays like a wingman of old". I'm in my 60s, and to me "a wingman of old" means a wingman of the 60s and 70s. Those guys didn't run all the way into defence or necessarily all the way forward. They pretty much stayed in the traditional wingman's position, playing one-on-one with their opponent. Of course, in those days, most players, other than ruckman, ruck-rover and rover, stayed relatively close to their nominal positions on the ground.

While we knew about the academy picks we obviously could not have known that there would be no meaningful under-age football this year. That alone, is enough to say we did the right thing trading out a pick for this year. We turned what has become this year's much riskier option into last year's educated selection.

Interesting that the Herald-Sun had Tom McDonald listed in our best players. I didn't think he was in our best, or our worst half dozen. It will be interesting to see how the structure is managed when Gawn comes back. My gut feel is that Jackson will be "managed" to create a spot for Gawn.

You may be right. But the alternative argument might be that Weideman would not be playing as well as he is now if he had been brought back sooner. We will never know.

Just as Hillary Clinton's book cover, "What Happened Hillary Rodham Clilnton" was a question and answer all in one, so too, is your own post. Jones has been a loyal and consistent warrior, but it's time for him to announce his retirement. For the rest of this season, rather than questioning his place in the team, his career needs to be celebrated.

Footywire seems to think Watts (and Lynden Dunn) must no longer be playing. In the list of "Most Games, No Finals" both appear in the column of all players, past and present whereas their names are missing from the column showing current day players. Jack has played 174 and Dunn 196 games without a final. Personally, I'd like to think that's all the fault of Port Adelaide and Collingwood respectively. (The only current Melbourne player on the list is Steven May on 140. I'm not sure whether this number includes yesterday's game, or, indeed, any of this season).

6. Petracca 5. Oliver 4. Brayshaw 3. Lever 2. Langdon 1. Hibberd I'm surprised that Jackson has been in some people's votes, less so about Pickett, but isn't it great that our first year players (including Rivers) are more than worthy of their places in the team?

Here's a link to the story referred to in the opening post. (I can't help you if it's stuck behind a paywall). I like McKenzie's self-awareness of his deficiencies.

Six other teams are having their byes now during this so-called Festival of Footy. For example, Round 10, which finishes tonight, has four teams having a bye (Carlton, Hawthorn, Fremantle and West Coast) and Round 11 sees Sydney and GWS each having a bye. I dont know when other teams will have their bye but I expect our game against the Bombers will just become a game scheduled like any other without any need to squeeze it in as an extra game.

I've just gone to the Urban Dictionary to see if "vanders" or "vandenberg" has been included in the dictionary as part of the explanation of the meaning "harder than a cat's head". It hasn't, though it probably should be. If you go to that page you'll see a direct reference and link to AFL. The fifth* definition of AFL in Urban Dictionary is, um, unusual and unexpected. *It's numbered as the fifth, but it's actually the sixth.

Agree about Weideman, but not Jackson. I don't think Jackson has done enough in any game to deserve votes. Don't get me wrong, I like very much what I see, but I can't believe that he's been in the best 6 players in any game he's played.

Of all the players in the AFL, I would expect ANB to have the most tangible understanding of the impact of spinal injuries. Isn't his grandmother (or mother?) paralysed from a fall when working as a jockey? If so, I would assume his intent was not to cause harm. Even so, I expect that tackle will see him miss at least the next 3 weeks.

By the time we're ready for the Grand Final (let's assume mid to late October), the Covid situation could be very different. By then, Victoria's second wave may have passed and other States might find themselves in a problematic position. Right now, though, I suspect a deal might already have been done with Queensland, as a way of saying thankyou for keeping the AFL season alive, to hold the Grand Final at the Gabba, subject to the usual caveat of that State being Covid-safe at the time.

I think there's a bigger issue at play here rather than the specific incident and what penalty ANB might get. The reason players get tackled and then slung to the ground, fairly or not, is the holding the ball rule. Perhaps we need to think through exactly what we want this rule to be? The reason for the second action, the 'sling to the ground', is because the player with the ball is given time to dispose of the ball. What would happen if the player with the ball was given less time to do so? Would that remove the need for the second action? Also, why don't we change the rule so that a ball knocked out in a tackle is included in the category of 'incorrect disposal'. In short, a wholesale reconsideration of what we want the holding the ball/incorrect disposal rule to be might do more to eliminate dangerous tackles than penalising players.

I can see the logic in playing Preuss if Gawn doesn't play. On the other hand, I suspect (but with no hard evidence), that the Match Committee wants to find a way to get Tom McDonald into the team. I wouldn't be surprised if T McDonald comes in and shares ruck duties with Jackson, each doing about half the game.

Pity Chris Lamb still doesn't play for us. Then I could make a pithy comment about garlic salt being the one I like.

AVB received a big head knock early in the game. Was lucky not to be concussed or to have broken something. Could explain his fumbling, but he's never really been a slick ball handler. And should add that he wasn't alone, particularly in the first three quarters. For example, Langdon fumbled all night, although gets credit for being where the ball was so often at both ends of the ground.

A warrior, yes. But I still wonder whether that's enough. Last night he fumbled (but was not alone) and didn't do much with the ball.

Just east of Israel.

6. Oliver 5. Viney 4. May 3. Petracca 2. Weideman 1. Salem Closely followed by Lever. Brayshaw gets the Encouragement Award. His last quarter was vintage and hopefully he can continue on from there.

I expect us to be about 6-8 goals up 10 minutes into the second quarter and to finally scrape through with a 4 point win.

I can't recall if a VFL/AFL team ever went through a whole season without winning a game. GWS and Gold Coast when they first started and Essendon when half its list was suspended won at least one game. As did we in the Neeld years. If our team goes into this game assuming victory is a foregone conclusion they've got rocks in their head. We have to go into this game with the attitude that we are playing a team that is challenging for top position and play accordingly.

Partly because of past performance, but also because he gets to more contests than Jackson. I know stats aren't everything, but while both players had minimal influence last week, T McDonald took 4 marks to Jackson's zero. McDonald also had 5 kicks (Jackson 2) and 1 tackle (Jackson 0). To avoid accusations of bias, McDonald and Jackson both had 2 handballs and Jackson had 4 hitouts to McDonald's zero. As I said, neither had any statistical influence on the game. McDonald's bigger and stronger body also means he's more likely to take contested marks. Is he out of form? Of course. His immediate upside, though, is higher although in the longer term, I would be disappointed if Jackson doesn't reach a higher threshold.

I would have expected Jackson to be out before T McDonald, partly because of the need to manage payers and partly because I have more confidence in T McDonald at the moment, even with his struggles, than I do with Jackson. That Jackson is playing gives me an uncomfortbale feeling that it's some insurance in case Max isn't right.

Actually, I think we're now a stock to buy. The President's public comments which I assume were made after he'd made some private ones to Goodwin and Mahoney have given the club an opportunity to make some bold choices for our next game. I had earlier suggested three changes; I now think there will be five so as to send a message. In: Tomlinson, vandenBerg (if fit), Rivers, Bennell and Jordan. If vandenBerg isn't ready, one of Bedford or Hunt. Out: Pickett, Jackson, Jones, Harmes, Hannan