La Dee-vina Comedia

I have no respect for people who falsely claim they have a "mental health" problem as an excuse for poor behaviour. But I'm also conscious that as a society we need to make sure that we don't assume that a person who claims a mental health problem does not, in fact, have one. Every case needs to be judged on its merits and none of us will ever know which ones are genuine and which ones are not. Only a person trained in that area and actually dealing with (ie, treating) the person involved will know.

Careful with that argument. Gary Hardeman was 187 cm...he'd be too small to play CHB now. You should also make the point that (I presume) you're only picking players you saw play. Otherwise there's a huge group of Premiership players missing from your squad who just might be good enough to get a game.

On a slightly different tack, I wonder if there are any players with genuine mental health problems which have been directly caused from drug use. There is plenty of scientific evidence that marijuana can cause depression and other mental health problems in some people.

Brian Taylor. Transferred to Collingwood because he couldn't get a game at Richmond.

Isn't it time for Demonland to have a weekly vote for AFLW like it does for the men's competition? Or does it exists and I can't find it? I understand that there will likely be far fewer posters contributing but surely there are enough to provide their opinions. For what it's worth, for the NM game I would vote: 6. Mithen 5. Paxman 4. Hore 3. Cunningham 2. Gay 1. Hanks Possibly a bit tough on O'Dea and although I have only seen about half the games the women have played, that was the worst game I've seen from her. But she is so good, even her worst game (that I've seen) still nearly got votes.

I agree strongly with both these points. In particular, the first one. If players can wear whatever they like, not only does it reduce the sponsors' exposure by their branding not being visible, but it will quickly become an opportunity for "ambush marketing" which will make it even harder to get and retain sponsors.

I assume the Jackson is Mark, not Ricky. Didn't the whacko one play senior football somewhere else before he joined us? Need to have a closer look at the rules for selection of this team, too. I'm not sure Hogan should be eligible for selection until he's played a senior game at another club.

The AFL, and professional sport in general, is not like most workplaces. That's why the AFL has an enforceable rule that allows action to be taken against a player or official who may not have even broken a law but "brings the game into disrepute". Not many businesses (or vocations) have the ability to take action for bringing that particular industry (vocation) into "disrepute". Though recent findings of some Royal Commissions perhaps suggest it would be a good idea.

Racists have recently been emboldened by nationalists who happen to have been able to climb the greasy pole to the top (or at least to have a level of influence they don't deserve) in a number of jurisdictions. Not every nationalist is a racist and vice versa, but those that are happen to have very large mouths. I happen to prefer loud mouths who shout in support of their football team, even if it's our opponents. That's a healthy way of expressing one's self and does not offend (I mean in its true meaning, rather than in the playful world of being "offended" by someone supporting another club.)

I think including PEDs in the discussion is unavoidable. There's a fine line between "recreational" and "performance enhancing" at the best of times which becomes even more blurred when you include masking agents.

Tried...and failed. Mind you, it's not that I don't want to believe you, I'm just following Ronald Reagan's policy of "Trust but verify".

Where does the one or two tests per year figure come from? To answer your question, I don't know whether the AFL's efforts are "token" or otherwise. What I do know is that I find any use of performance enhancing drugs or masking agents abhorrent and any use of recreational drugs by professional athletes to be bizarrely stupid behaviour.

Ignoring the moral arguments, I'm amazed that professional athletes who seem to have to pursue highly specific diets and exercise regimens would then participate in taking substances that wouldn't be on any list approved by the club's dietitians or sports scientists.

For a person whose interests are listed as "Apathy", this is one helluva posting!

The AFL conducts the urine tests? I thought it was ASADA that did that.

Agree. While I'd actually like to make it 25 and 50 metre penalties, given 15 metres is a measurement already used by umpires (distance for a kick to travel before a mark can be awarded, maximum distance running with the ball), it's probably better not to introduce an additional measure.

Do you subscribe to the "3 stickers and you're out" rule?

I see you've extended the concept of 2 byes per year to eliminate two full weeks from the calendar.

Of course. Upon re-reading your post, that's now obvious. My mistake.

This just in:

Just commenting on your last few questions, and not specific to this particular case: Yes, offending content should be removed. It's not "protecting the poster" to do so; rather, it's protecting the person who has been vilified. Whether comments are derogatory, racist or defamatory, they should always be removed. As has been stated here many times on Demonland, there is no such thing as unqualified free speech. There are laws against vilification, racism, hate speech and defamation.

I don't think ruckmen have been a constant size. John Nicholls, arguably one of the best ruckman of all time was shorter than Patrick Cripps.

What I hope to see with the 50m rule is a crackdown on obvious delaying tactics by the opposition. Tactics such as holding on to the player with the ball for too long after a mark or free kick has been granted or not returning the ball promptly have been allowed to creep into the game far too much.

I love Demonland for the educational diversions.

Can anyone with young children in their family who watched AFLX report on their level of enthusiasm? In particular did the new format increase or decrease the level of excitement for those who also watched last year? It's clearly a product not aimed at rusted on AFL followers. But if it can't generate interest in the young...surely the AFL will have to start thinking about whether it's worth persevering with.