La Dee-vina Comedia

I don't know one player from another (with a few exceptions, such as Jake Spencer) but note there's a born defender in the list by the name of Philip Backman and a player from WA called Ajang Ajang which, unfortunately for him, is also the name of a known terrorist group in the Philippines. Good luck to them all.

If Smith has OP, I wonder whether this is in any way related to the injury received during the practice match? If not, perhaps all the outrage over him being asked to keep playing may prove to be unwarranted.

Sore loser, perhaps? if he stayed in the seniors he would have been in a winning team.

I'm not convinced that J Wagner is a better option. Seems just as slow as Lewis. So while he gets a game, I suspect so does Lewis. Eventually, both need to be superseded, but, unless injury intervenes, I suspect Wagner will be replaced in the team before Lewis.

Are you saying the Tribunal did not accept that Ablett had an "exemplary record"? If so, given the Dalai Lama doesn't play AFL, who would?

A visual clue for the Tribunal in case they can't read, perhaps?

I need to think a bit more about this line. It's making my brain hurt: "No one externally can see the position he is in except for those on the inside..."

See here, in particular page 7, part (G).

It seems that concussion is the most difficult injury to classify by number of weeks. I imagine it is virtually impossible to put a reliable timeline on it.

The Tribunal has an extra arrow in its quiver not available to the MRO. It can take into consideration a player's exemplary record. That option does not exist for the MRO who can only judge a matter on the criteria available. Whether Ablett used the "exemplary record" option or not, I don't know, but I'm just pointing out that the Tribunal and MRO can come to different results on the same incident. And if Ablett, who has played more than 300 games over 18 years and has won two Brownlow Medals and throughout that time has never been suspended and only once been fined (for accidental contact with an umpire) can't get off on the "exemplary record" criterion, I don't know who could. In other words, Ablett was always going to be cleared to play by the Tribunal.

I think if we're praising Petracca's performance, we're setting a low bar. I expect a lot more from someone with his talent. Yes, it's good to see his ground ball work, but he also needs to be taking marks, kicking goals and just getting the ball more often.

I'm pretty sure he's an avid fan of Julian Burnside.

Or perhaps The Steven May Schooner

Watching him on Saturday, I think the problem might be his back, rather than his legs. He seems either unwilling or unable to bend over which may explain why he goes to ground so often when there is a ground ball to retrieve. He's still willing to stand his ground in marking contests, knows where to position himself and (most times) kicks with precision, but it's not sustainable to keep him in the side for much longer if he can't pick up the ball from the ground. The time will come for him to retire -possibly quite soon - and I hope when it comes it is done in a respectful way.

Saw this today and decided it summed up this thread quite neatly:

Actually, we play seven defenders rotating through the bench, so Salem can remain in the defensive slot. I like the idea of him on the wing, but it frightens me who might be the seventh defender if it's not him.

Couldn't find a spot for Salem?

I'm amazed that Oliver was on the bench for the last minute or so. I recognise that every player, particularly midfielders, need regular breaks but I would have thought our best clearance player should be on the ground at this critical stage of the game.

I like that Demonland allows Melbourne supporters to express their views (apart from extremist, defamatory and derogatory comments). But this thread is the most aggressive I've ever seen. I'm both amazed and dismayed by some of the arguments. Mostly, though, I'm disappointed that anyone can defend a man punching another person. It doesn't matter whether that person was intellectually disabled or not. It doesn't matter that the Hawks supporter caused the attacker to lose his beer. What does matter is that a single punch can kill or maim someone for life. Everyone, do yourselves a favour and have a look at the James Macready-Bryan Foundation. I don't know him or anyone around him, but his story should remind us all of what's really important. And while you're there, think about making a donation.

That's true, but we're not talking about the umpires in this thread. (Actually, I thought the umpiring was reasonable on Saturday apart from two glaring errors. One, when Roughead dropped the ball when tackled in the 3rd(?) quarter and it was called play on and the failure to pay the obvious 50 metre penalty in the last when the Hawks kicked the ball away well after the free kick was paid.)

Is that the name of the sequel to a very well known Monty Python movie?

Do we really want to pursue this? It's a fundamental part of Oliver's game. Why would we want to change that?

You should have gone with "Fake news". Seems to be working for others.

I'm genuinely surprised to see Petracca get votes. I had no difficulty identifying the top 4 in my votes but struggled with the last two, but at no time did I think Petracca's game was vote-worthy. In fact, I wondered after the game whether he might be close to a demotion to Casey. Amazed how we can see things so differently.

Tom McDonald played his second half against the Hawks much more like he played last year with strong overhead marks. Hopefully that's what he needed to be switched on for the rest of the year. What a difference one half of football can make. If he had played the second half of Saturday's game like he had the first, I suspect he would have been playing at Casey next week.