La Dee-vina Comedia

Except a scarf and a warmish inner glow.

Here's some media coverage of the AFL's Umpires' Coach discussing the punching ban I expect the AFL will eventually realise that it doesn't go far enough and will also include elbows as well as closed fists.

Do we know why Max Gawn has a bandage on his left elbow (or, perhaps, just below the elbow)? I don't recall reading that he had any post-season surgery. Has he burnt himself on a jaffle machine?

Whatever happens on Friday night I already know what the AFL and its "broadcast partners" (terrible phrase, by the way) will say: "It more than met our expectations" "The crowd (AFL) / viewer numbers (TV) was more than we had planned for" "We're satisfied that AFLX will appeal to new markets" And the biggest lie of all: "We see a long-term future for this concept" (which will be proven to be false within 9 months when the AFL announces a major revamp - or complete cessation - of the dying AFLX).

We'll have to disagree. I'm of the view that no-one (OK, virtually no-one) cares. If we were still hunting for a BOJ sponsor after the beginning of the season, that would arguably be a bad look.

"Is Wagner a human being at all? He contaminates everything he touches" - Nietzsche. Perhaps it wasn't either of our Wagners he was complaining about, though. More relevantly, Neitzsche also said "That which does not kill us makes us stronger". Even though it's now a cliche we've all heard before, knowing it was a phrase originally coined by Neitzsche, it seems appropriate to include it here. Good luck to the young fella.

Serious question. Has the AFL created a mother/daughter or mother/son rule? If so, what are the requirements (apart from the mother actually having a son or daughter, or, in this case, both)? And congratulations to Daisy and her suddenly bigger family.

It was banned in Victoria until a change of Government in 2014.

I can't believe we can argue so much over the merits or otherwise of AFLX. Clearly we need some real football. Thank goodness it's only 5 weeks away.

I imagine he also feels the need for a shower after today's effort.

One of the best rules ever to be introduced was announced earlier this week with no fanfare. I can't even find the story on the AFL's website. But the AFL has announced a zero tolerance approach to punching. A free kick will be paid against the puncher every time. Hopefully the rule will be clear that it also includes elbows (which obviously will immediately replace fists by miscreants intent on niggling). It's a good change for many reasons. It stops taggers from impeding ball players the way they have been doing; it should reduce the "need" for retaliation and most importantly, it sends a message that violence in any form is unacceptable. If anyone can find a link to the official announcement it would be useful to include it in this thread.

I'm struggling to find reasons why this is a bad idea. The only extremely minor points I can think of at first blush are that (1) the ladder during the year will be all over the shop and (2) tradition. Neither of those should be reasons not to proceed with the idea.

And you know this because...?

Further to that, there are some stories which will cover both men's and women's football. For example, it was pointed out (admittedly ad nauseum) during the Collingwood game that Harriet Cordner was the seventh member of that family to play a senior game at Victoria Park. That storyline was worthy of coverage yet doesn't fit neatly solely on the AFLW or the AFL men's boards.

Your view assumes that the club has struggled to find a BOJ sponsor. While that might be true the alternative view might be that Jaguar and potentially other sponsors struggled to meet the club's demands. In other words, the delay might have been because the club was in a strong position and didn't want to sell off the BOJ sponsorship rights at too low a price.

Late starts to training don't seem to have been a problem for perennial finalists such as Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney. Anyone from the club who might want to use that as an excuse (and I'm not saying there will be any) should be asked whether they've looked at how these other clubs manage that same "disadvantage".

Not even to say "Don't call me Shirley"?

Unlikely. I think he's just pointing out that because we played finals, we started our pre-season later than in all those years we didn't play in September.

Demonland. It's to AFLX like Keith Dunstan was to the (former) VFL with his (then) AFL, otherwise known as the Anti-Football League.

I initially read this as "the cost of servicing Range Rover" and thought that the post was something to do with the site's administrators dealing with one of Demonland's posters who seemed to require significant amounts of moderation. (People who have been on Demonland for a while will know what I'm talking about.)

I stress I don't really understand the detail, but wouldn't this arrangement mean that Simon Goodwin is being engaged like most employees from top to bottom in any organisation? If that's correct, it would seem to me the alternative, traditional model of the fixed-term contract might be the model that is out-of-step with modern best practice.

And then Joe Gutnick and Don Scott came along and made sure the two stayed separate. Do I recall correctly?

I wonder how much of Jaguar's decision is about broad exposure to the masses through TV and how much is about access to the MFC database of members to allow for targeted marketing? I suspect in this instance the latter might have been significant in the decision.

Would there be many players (or, indeed any other player) delisted from one club and retired from another within the same off-season as has been done by Tom Bugg?

I support the OP. Essentially, though, it just proves I'm lazy. It's not that hard to go to the AFLW Board, but I don't do it. Having said that, I think having AFLW intermixed with the men's will enhance our women's team by increasing their exposure.