La Dee-vina Comedia

There's probably been some research done somewhere, but whether it's coaching, being CEO of a company or leading a country (or hosting a daytime TV show. Hello Ellen), I suspect you can get away with authoritarianism while you're successful. For everyone else, it probably doesn't work. And similarly, I suspect it doesn't work once you cease to be successful.

I thought Twitter and the dark web were the home of conspiracies. I was wrong. This thread has them covered.

In the RSN story accessed through the link it includes this line, “Not only did he text Brodie after the game, but he also bought Brody’s partner a bottle of wine and wrote a nice letter.” Just because it's an online story doesn't mean basic checking shouldn't be done. Couldn't they at least find out how to spell his name and do so correctly rather than having a bob each way? And well done to AVB for his actions and Taylor Adams for bringing it to the public's knowledge.

Thanks @Demonised. This is a very interesting article. I can't imagine any political party here proposing such a system because of their fear of the mainstream media owned by wealthy families who, one would expect, would oppose such a scheme. However, the AFL doesn't have to worry about that and could easily introduce something similar with respect to the size of fines it chooses to impose on players whether it's for on-field or off-field indiscretions.

I think J Wagner has a good feel for the game and I don't question his toughness or willingness to get his hands dirty at all. I just think he lacks pace. In the role that he has, he needs to be quicker or the forwards he will be playing on will run rings around him.

It was told to me by a "friend of a friend" of a current AFL player that there are two types of coaches. One who demands players adhere to his expectations. If you don't, you're out. That's the Mick Malthouse style and that of his adherents (Mark Neeld, Scott Watters and perhaps others). The other style is the coach who works to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each player and works to try and eliminate those players' weaknesses. That's the Paul Roos style. I suspect today's players are more suited to the Roos approach.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "aggressive". I abhor any sort of violence on field. I don't even like the unnecessary pushing and shoving and certainly anything more than that, such as punching or hitting should be stopped. The easiest way to stop it is to suspend perpetrators. Fines will have no effect.

Maybe the system has to change again. Why not separate the decision on guilt from the determination of penalty? It would be like a jury deciding whether a person is guilty while the judge imposes the sentence. I sometimes wonder under the current model as to whether the preferred penalty is determined first with the decision which is meant to lead up to the penalty "retrofitted" to suit the preferred outcome. Separating the process of determining guilt from the penalty might overcome any such concern.

An even simpler fix would be to get rid of fines altogether and replace them with suspensions. I would keep fines for umpire contact, melees and perhaps some other categories, though. Just abolish fines as a penalty for any offence involving violence such as punching, kicking, spitting, biting, head butting, etc.

One of the codes (is it the NRL?) fines players a proportion of their pay. In that way, imposing fines is equitable. Mind you inequitable fines is a feature of society. Whether it's a parking fine or failing to wear a mask in Victoria, fines don't vary based on an individual's income. Part of the reason for that will be the difficulty in calculating a person's income without getting into the issues associated with tax returns and privacy. However, given the salary cap, the AFL must know exactly what each player is earning which would make it quite simple to calculate.

I don't like Monday or Thursday nigt games, unless the following day is a public holiday. I would, however, enjoy regular Sunday night football, whether the next day is a public holiday or not.

This may be an urban myth, but I seem to recall it being suggested that he was given the captaincy to keep him at the club after we had previously lost his brother to the Sydney Swans.

Not sure if serious, but I'm interested in what other people think. I am in no doubt the AFL will be considering the merits or otherwise of daily footy as part of a "normal" season. While I understand why it has been necessary this year, I'm dead against it in a "normal" year. Apart from anything else, I'm not interested in attending a match on a working week night, unless the following day is a public holiday. I'm also against it because I believe too much football devalues the product. In addition, apart from public holidays, I find that compacting nine games per round into three days enhances the feel of sporting warfare. The alternative, of single and sometimes double games each day provides a drip-feed approach with no sense of theatre. What does everyone else think?

If I was her, I would be prepared to pay quite a bit, as long as it's played in October. Queensland's State election is being held on 31 October.

Can't believe we didn't win with 6 ins and only 3 outs. Must have been poor coaching.

Really interesting to read through the votes this week. Very little love for defenders other than May, which makes me wonder whether that's because the forwards and the midfielders did their job or because, like umpires with Brownlow voting, we (me included) get seduced by the flashier players? Anyway, I know they're late, but here are my votes: 6. Oliver 5. Langdon 4. Brayshaw 3. May 2. Petracca 1. Hibberd Others in contention for that final vote included Salem, Weideman, VandenBerg and Viney. It's not like I voted alphabetically stopping at P. Salem's stats are somewhat inflated by the dead time kick-to-kick in the last few minutes of the game, but apart from that he provided excellent linking up between defence and the wing; Weideman provided a contest every time the ball got near and gave the midfielders someone to target; vandenBerg provided excellent pressure but again let his game down with some poor disposal and I just couldn't squeeze Viney in.

I'll measure Preuss's performance not so much by his stats, but by how influential Grundy is, or, preferably, is not. If Grundy's name doesn't appear in the coaches' votes, I'll be satisfied.

Given game times are about 20% shorter, he's not actually far off his average.

You need to think more positively. Forget the preseason...have him ready for the 2020 Grand Final!

Too complex for Collingwood players. I would have been concerned about I Spy, too, but being in Queensland means they can keep it simple by saying each time that it starts with XXXX.

I find I learn a lot on Demonland. I now know the meaning of "keeping one's width".

So, rather than my suggestion that "keeping his width" is a meaningless phrase, we now have two meanings for it.

4th option could be to ruck Tomlinson and bring in another defender. My expectation though, assuming Gawn is not available, is that it is either (1) Preuss if he's fit or (2) Mitch Brown to come in with Tom McDonald doing most of the ruckwork with occasional assistance from Weideman

I assume because it is what the TV broadcasters want. Frankly, I agree with them.

He's a Collingwood player. He's more likely to cheat than flunk it.