La Dee-vina Comedia

The trouble is, where does one stop? True leaders would donate blood; true leaders would sleep at the G for the homeless; true leaders would pick up rubbish on Clean Up Australia Day. Nevertheless, I concede that as the drugs policy is the AFL's, I think you make a point and if I were an AFL Commissioner I would agree to being drug tested under the same scheme (ie, randomly - which means it wouldn't necessarily be done "before the players")

In the old days - and not that long ago - conservative politics was the opposite of the nanny state.

Up until recently, I would have thought your reference to a "hard conviction over illicit drugs" referred to Tony Mokbel. Witness X has changed all that. The AFL's conviction, as weak as it might be, might still now be stronger than Mokbel's.

I also wonder whether the drop-off on TV viewers is about TV generally and not just AFL. It's well known that TV viewership has dropped, particularly amongst the young, due to alternatives such as streaming, online gaming, etc. However, one would have thought that such a drop off would affect AFL and NRL somewhat equally. Unless of course, the NRL-watching audience fits my prejudice of being neanderthals.

Is the AFL taking an ethical stance? I don't think it's that. I think its a commercial decision and (perhaps, although I'm not 100% convinced), a player welfare decision. With respect to the commercial issue, AFL players caught taking recreational or performance enhancing drugs damages the AFL brand. The player welfare link is not as clear cut. Some (many? most? all?) illegal drugs can be harmful, but I'm not sure the AFL is concerned about the harmful effects of illegal drugs on individual players who voluntarily take them. I suspect that stated position is lip service to make the AFL looks like it cares for something that's arguably not its concern.

I assume you mean Brad Hodge. Because Luke Hodge has all those traits you've ascribed to Viney AND talent. (Otherwise I agree with the rest of your excellent post).

The loss of TV viewers will be a major concern for the AFL. I hope they have conducted a proper review of the reasons why. The quality of the games might be one issue, but I suspect there are others including: reduction over time of the number of games on free-to-air TV the mish-mash of scheduling days and times (TV viewers are creatures of habit. They like their programs to be consistent. I assume consumers of TV sport are similar) as a subset of the above point, is Thursday night football growing or diminishing viewer numbers? are TV viewers finding the presentation stale (by that, I mean would viewers like to see changes to the commentators. Not just new ones, but shuffling them around more - such as swapping some of the Friday night and Saturday night callers (like Ten used to do) so there are different dynamics)? My list above are all TV-related. Consideration also needs to be given to the on-field as well. It seems the AFL has made a serious attempt in this regard with the rule changes for this season.

I expect we would lose to every other equivalent team with the exception of Gold Coast and (maybe) GWS.

What were they thinking? Surely it would have been more appropriate to buy him the collected works of Friedrich Nietzsche. He could start with 'The Birth of Tragedy' and then move on to 'The Case of Wagner'. What could be more appropriate than that?

You make a good point and get into the area of whether executives in any business should be drug tested. Personally, unless it's a privately owned business and is not in an area of public risk, then I think executives do not have the right to say it impinges on their privacy because their actions affect others. So, I would have to say that the AFL is not privately owned and as such I have no problem with AFL executives being drug tested. (IQ testing might be a good idea, too.)

I should add I support a daytime Grand Final. Partly because I'm a traditionalist and partly because if we should ever win one of these things, I think I could really enjoy the afterglow better if I had all night to think about it. If Channel 7 really wanted to extract value from the AFL Grand Final, why don't they invest a few bucks in a night time post-game TV "party"? It would be part replay, part analysis, part attending the post-game winners celebration (and losers wake). Basically, think of it as The Front Bar post Grand Final edition. (The important point is for it to work it has to be hosted by professional entertainers, not football commentators.) I've often wondered why the TV networks seem to think that there's nothing to cover from 6 pm on Grand Final Day until about March the following year. (I blame TV executives who are based in Sydney and don't understand the product.)

I'm afraid to say the commentary format is what it is because it's what the viewers want. Channel 7 have tried the EPL style of commentary (as did the ABC) many years ago only to told by viewers they didn't like it and wanted the traditional AFL call style back. So, like it or not, it's done that way to satisfy the majority.

I'm convinced that somewhere deep within the TV rights contract is a single line that simply says, "Every year until there is a Night Grand Final, the AFL will in March float the idea of transitioning to a Night Grand Final "

If you're still on a vegan diet, try weighing yourself again. I'll bet you've put on 6kg of anger.

While I agree with you that some players might think that it's inconsistent that they're the only ones being tested from within the AFL community, those players are forgetting another inconsistency - they're the ones getting the big money to perform. I think there is an argument that perhaps coaches (including assistant coaches) could be tested, but how the rest of the AFL community performs and whether they're using illicit drugs is not relevant.

I wonder whether we wanted to but he (perhaps on the advice of his manager) wanted to keep it shorter. He may believe his value will increase substantially over the next 2 years, especially as he becomes a free agent* at the end of this contract extension. *Based on Lucifer's Hero's post above which I'm sure will be correct.

Amazing how Garry Lyon is universally supported on this site for his assessment of Oliver but totally vilified for his role in choosing coaches. Apparently he only knows some things about football.

I give Gillon a pass on this one. The AFL needs AFLW to be expanded as quickly as possible to give supporters of all (male) AFL teams something to support. Currently, my friends who support teams such as St Kilda and Essendon have no interest in AFLW, and I can't blame them. Yes, it's a fine line between expanding too quickly and too slowly, and there are good ways and bad ways to progress, but I think the purpose behind his strategy is sound.

OK. Robbo's excused. But someone else at the Hun should probably get a kick up the backside for poor quality control and effectively hanging out their Chief Football Writer to dry.

I notice that Rohan Connolly will be back on 3AW for the footy season. If Mark Robinson continues on 3AW (as he was last year), I fear my ears may be permanently damaged from an overdose of ocker English (using that last word rather loosely). (Note: I actually like Rohan Connolly's commentary. Not so Robbo's.)

Seems to be disarmingly modest...with plenty to be modest about. I think I now understand better why he came to Melbourne. I think it's less about 2019-2021 but more about learning the caper to eventually take over from Max if he's good enough. He'll be Max's current age when Max is 31. He knows he's not there yet and realises that the best chance to learn the craft is to be with the team that has the best ruckman to see that up close.

And he invariably found a player, usually in a better position, with his precision disposal, .

Well said, Ernest. Your last line sums him up. Very few players have that skill and I think it means he's worked out what he's going to do with the ball before he gets it, rather than making the decision afterwards. Not many players have that capability. In fact, you can see many players "spending it before they have it" which shows how hard it can be to do what Oliver does consistently.

Thank goodness the AFL didn't have a relegation system in the period 2008 to 2013.

I like the way Robbo doesn't read anyone else's work. Goodwin has clearly said that they decided not to review the Preliminary Final. And he can't stick to a theme, either. His third paragraph in the section described as "What I Don't Like" clearly reads as something he likes. I give him a D- for Comprehension.