La Dee-vina Comedia

Some recent research has identified a possible therapy which might help KK, Shaun Smith and all the other sufferers of concussion. Essentially, it's making use of "blue light" for 30 minutes in the morning. It's an interesting approach (and a very quick read in plain English). I'm ambivalent about it's value, though, as it seems to me it might provide short-term benefits but do nothing to resolve the long-term damage ie, CTE) caused by concussion. I say I'm ambivalent because while I'd like to see an effective treatment for the symptoms, I wouldn't want footballers returning to the field when they have resolved these symptoms if the underlying damage is still there.

I might me imagining it, but the muscle definition of the players seems much more obvious this year compared with previous. Not for everyone, such as the younger players, but generally speaking the playing group seems to be more muscular than before. I know this doesn't necessarily equate to fitness but it's nevertheless impressive. I remember a few years ago (probably the Bailey era) comparing our squad with some other teams and we looked positively puny. Not any more.

You write as if you know the club doesn't have some sort of termination clause in KK's contract should he not be able to play because of concussion.

I'm still more scared of the effects of being bitten by a Collingwood supporter than getting coronavirus. (Nevertheless, we would be foolish not to take the threat of the coronavirus seriously.)

I missed this in the news. How many weeks did the MRO give Melksham for biting?

My favourite way to nullify the defence attacking from the backline is to have forwards who kick goals. Nothing forces a defender to be more accountable than actually having to defend.

And presumably Salem, too? (although I don't know what a 'sonar' roles is. Did you mean 'similar'?)

If Petracca and Brayshaw are going to play more this year on ball rather than forward and wing respectively, then someone gets pushed out of the midfield group. From the limited game play we've seen (or read about on Demonland), it looks like Sparrow is expected to play midfield minutues, too. However, I seem to recall Harmes playing HBF previously when the club was trying to find his best position. It didn't seem to work then, although Harmes is a much better player now. I hope it works, but if it doesn't I'm happy knowing he can slot straight back into a midfield role.

Do we ignore the Essendon scratch match because it doesn't suit the upbeat narrative?

I don't recall that arrangement, but I don't see why it makes it any less relevant. Mitchell still had to cope with the perception that he had been slighted, even if it was structured in a different way.

I think this thread can now be merged with the "Goodwin: We were the worst team in the history of the game" thread.

Hasn't the AFL changed the system so priors don't count when determining penalty?

In addition, I would be amazed if Essendon doesn't engage a professional media management firm to assist with the both the strategic and the day-to-day management of media issues. No club has needed as much help in that area as has Essendon in the last 8 years.

I assume Daisy is in there somewhere. Far RHS?

I don't even know what this means. Putting the cart before the horse? Or allowing the tail to wag the dog? And who's the tail and who's the dog?

Don't discount the possibility that the club wanted to sign him up for longer but he refused. It would make perfect sense to me that Petracca wanted a shorter-term (ie 2 years) while the club wanted longer (3-4 years) for the same reason - in two years time free agency and better form could significantly increase his asking price.

My recollection is that the "Leadership Group" concept either arose from or was strongly pushed by that consulting company called Leading Teams. I haven't heard anything about Leading Teams in quite a while. Does it still exist? Do other clubs still use it? And have the methods and ideas of Leading Teams fallen out of favour?

I understand your point but my view has always been that the best captains combine the on-field with the off-field to be the full package. I have assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that the captain has more to do off-field than on, such as meeting sponsors, attending club meetings (such as AGMs or Board Meetings as requested) and being the primary conduit from the playing group to the media. The on-field stuff is important, but, unlike cricket, the captain doesn't call the shots but should lead by example. Some of the best captains that I have seen appear to have developed this holistic approach and include Luke Hodge, Nick Reiwoldt and Nick Maxwell.

Whether you like it or not, being the "media darling" and "pr front man for the club" is what captains have to be today. It's that part of the job description that I didn't think Jones or Viney liked or did particularly well. And for those people worrying about how Jack Viney might take the demotion (a concern I share), I hope someone sets him up to have a conversation with Sam Mitchell. Mitchell didn't appear to lose his ability, drive or support for the club after the same thing happened to him. To me, that showed real leadership and class.

For me, it was a badge of honour to be considered to be your esteemed self.

Possibly equal tallest with Jarrod Witts who is also listed as 208 cm.

Agree fully. Abolishing leadership groups and getting rid of co-captaincy strengthens the role of the sole captain. Clear lines of leadership are maintained. Of course, when there hasn't been an obvious candidate capable of showing leadership, perhaps co-captaincy and leadership groups are needed then. But my opinion has always been that if the club can do so, it should have a single captain and a single vice-captain.

I think the opposite. I'm not convinced players can be objective enough in their assessments or necessarily understand the totality of the job.

What is a "non-contested regionalisation"?

You seem ambivalent about whether you want people to turn up or not.