La Dee-vina Comedia

Given this is a Joeboy thread, I'm surprised the opening post wasn't simply: Ox - son no gun

This post should be disqualified because it's a four-word analysis. And all you had to do was say "Laser like feet"! (Agree, by the way).

Gawn 5. Petracca 4. Chandler 3. Rivers 2. Melksham 1. Turner Unlucky: Langford, Windsor

If you look at all the AFL training ground upgrades over the last 20 years, I suspect you'll find Government funding is reliant on the facility being multi-purpose. As an example, I recall the Whitten Oval upgrade received Federal and State money because they opened up the ground to allow locals to use it when the Bulldogs weren't, installed one of Victoria University's divisions (sports science maybe?) in one of the buildings and included a public use child care facility.

Tom is still winning this one.

Please keep your hands off the players!

I assume you mean "not purely profit focused". Having said that, I disagree with your points that the AFL has regressed and that the pursuit of profit is compromising the quality of the product. It's a necessarily evil that if we want the best product we need to have the revenues to pay the players, the coaches, the support staff and to have great facilities to attend games.

He was on SEN with Gary Lyon and Tim Watson this morning. I only heard a small part of it. Spoke well, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. One thing worth noting was his comment about the Caulfield Racecourse development. It was in response to a question about his priorities. I can't remember the exact words but he said something like the need to get the training and admin base done at Caulfield or somewhere else. It was clear that he didn't want to be definitive about Caulfield. Perhaps there is still some doubt whether Caulfield Racecourse wants us or, conversely, it's part of some sort of MFC negotiating tactic to play "hard to get".

I love the statement "has him closing in on a spot among the VFL/AFL's all-time leaders for one percenters." All time? How long, exactly, have one percenters been recorded as a statistic? Nevertheless, let's not take away from the fact that he's having a sterling 2025 and has been a long-term reliable servant of this great club.

I fear you are correct. However, on this matter there may be other sources from outside the club who may have been in the know and leaked it. These include his personal referees, his current employer, someone within AFL HQ, someone at the other organisations in which he's involved such as Racing Victoria, and probably others.

My apologies, Rab. I had misunderstood or perhaps misread your post and thought you'd said our proposed Caulfield training base was not near any public transport. I suppose I could have gone back and edited the post, given so many people have now pointed out my error. I added in the Guerra comment because that was relevant to the thread topic.

Apologies to Rab, then. My mistake.

It was something Harpo said...

Pleasantly surprised by this nomination. Not the nomination itself, but the timing of it. I just didn't see last week's game as being worthy of the nomination. It suggests to me that the selection panel wanted to make sure that he got nominated because he may well be the type of player that is worthy of consideration for the annual award while never actually having a single dominant game. What I'm really talking about is a major flaw in the Rising Star award. A player can become nominated by having just one stellar game in the season while consistently good performers without one dominant game could miss out on eligibility.

"Miles away"? Caulfield Racecourse is right next to a train station with the unsurprising name of Caulfield Station. It also has tram lines at both its northern and southern ends. As to Paul Guerra's supposed lack of football experience, why should this matter? Do we expect our hospitals to be run by doctors? Do we expect our courts to be run by lawyers? Do we expect the wholesale fish market to be run by a fisherman? I could go on...

The glory that is Demonland. Two posts in a row. One gives Spargo a minus 1 while the other a vote of +1. My votes: Gawn 5. Bowey 4. Salem 3. Petracca 2. Sparrow 1. Rivers Viney's tackling was superb, but he seems to have forgotten the gameplan once he has the ball. Those long dump kicks don't belong any more. (What's worse, is that perhaps he was trying precision passing and wasn't capable of doing it.)

How to tell someone you're not a member of the MCC without actually saying that you're not a member of the MCC. Am I right?

I imagine we'll try to put Tom Sparrow on Vlastuin.

I know context is everything, but I actually felt a bit uncomfortable reading this. I'm curious...did it also affect others in that way?

I hope your son is OK.

Warwick Capper comes to mind.

I wonder whether the fact that the court was in NSW made any difference? If it had been a Victorian court, there is a stronger argument that the Victorian Premier shouldn't be commenting as it could be construed that the Premier, whatever she said, might have been trying to influence the outcome.

And I suspect someone would have accused her of being "soft on crime" if she didn't speak out. It was really a "no win" situation for her whatever she chose to do.

Really? I could also have added that some people come out of gaol more hardened (as in "hardened criminal") than when they went in. Is that a better argument?