La Dee-vina Comedia

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.

I appreciate all the commenmts from those who saw the game. As a matter of interest, what was the split (if any) of Petracca's time on ball and up forward? And a related question (which may be resolved in the answer to my previous question), did Petracca kick his goals when he was playing midfield or when he was stationed in the forward line?

Unless we're playing amongst ourselves north-south while North Melbourne play east-west.

Re-stating your view and making assumptions is not actually evidence. So, let me ask in another way, what evidence is there that Viney wasn't given the option of standing down? As I haven't seen any evidence, I have no idea whether he was given that chance or not.

Do we know that he wasn't?

This is a ridiculous comment. Cheap suits don't fold. Expensive wool suits do. It needed to be said. (I don't disagree with your point, by the way)

Actually, I think it matters a lot and it's one aspect of the job (ie, fronting the media, etc) that neither Jones or Viney appeared comfortable with.

It's a good question. The conclusion I have come to is that Burgess or Goodwin wanted every uninjured player on the list to have some real match play this weekend so they are all doing same type and level of work.

I love that the only comment on the thrread linking the MFC Strategic Plan to NASA and the moon came from someone calling himself My Favourite Martian. Well done, MFM.

I agree with you. In addition, the players keep asking for shorter game time. One way to do that would be to eliminate the pre-season matches and any other non-intraclub practice matches. If that was done, other options become possible such as starting the season proper a week earlier and adding in an extra bye (as much as I detest them...I can appreciate the need) and have a longer break between the end of one season and the beginning of pre-season training. I'm sure the coaches would complain, but every team would still be starting the season off the same base.

Fair enough. I apologise.

Surely we all now know that "starting on the bench" means nothing. But I agree about managing his time which may be why only one of the Jackson, Pickett or Rivers plays round 1. It might put too much load on the rest of the team if they have to take up the balance of minutes not being played by the newbies

I see the problem when players have irregular timing of payments (ie, front loaded or back loaded, etc). But if the AFL averaged total payments over the length of the contract, irrespective of the payment schedule, would this particular issue go away? On the other hand, would it increase other problems such as limiting club flexibility?

Why?

Does Demonland have a resident mathematician? While those percentage chances are based on actual events, I'm not sure that the cause and effect holds true. In other words, just because the longish term average gives those results, I don't believe it necessarily has to hold true. What is an undeniable mathematical fact is that to play finals team have to have more wins (or sometimes percantage) than the team that finishes ninth. Where those wins and losses come from shouldn't make a difference. A team could win the first 13 games and lose the rest or lose the first nine and win the remaining 13 and end up in exactly the same position on the ladder.

if we're going to have a leadership group, I'm not sure the best model would have three defenders (four if Harmes plays in defence and is chosen to join the group) and no-one forward of centre. That being said, I'm a strong believer in (1) having a single captain, vice-captain and deputy vice captain and that's it and (2) choosing captains for their off-field capabilties as much or even more than their on-field leadership.

Sloppy "journalism". Right now, it's quite correct that our opposition are the favourites, but if we beat WCE in Round 1 and GWS loses their first game to Geelong, we could well start favourites. To write definitively that the opposition "will start as favourites" is just silly and asking to be criticised.

All the best for your big day, Jaded. And good luck with the recovery from your surgery. Your occasional diversions into your private life is my favourite non-Demons part of Demonland.

Explains all this low cloud in Melbourne

I'm not even sure which foot would be under more stress in a kicking action. The one that kicks the ball or the one that's planted firmly in the ground with all the body weight going through it?

I can only assume you accidentally left off Premiership Medal

I understand why you say WTF, but why the exclamation marks? Women's Terrific Footy is a great name without the unnecessary punctuation.

Actually, I think there's nuance to this issue that needs considering. Is AFL (1) the name of the organisation which has Gil as its CEO and that runs all football, including men's, women's and children's competitions? (2) the type of football played which used to be known as Australian Rules Football? (3) The competition played by men? Given the correct answer is "all of the above", I think there is a problem about what 'AFL' means. Personally, I'd be happy with the administrative body being called 'AFL', the game being called 'Australian Rules Football' and the men's competition being AFLM, just as the women's is AFLW.