La Dee-vina Comedia

Why does he have to do the first to achieve the second? Couldn't he do both?

A sparrow that walks like a swan? Doesn't even sound possible.

I anticipate clubs will soon have to employ an actuary just to ensure they calculate points value correctly.

Was it Jack Dyer or perhaps Mike Williamson (or someone else) who kept referring to players making errors "at the psychological moment"? And what does it even mean?

You seem to be channelling a former PM who is not worthy of naming who (in)famously said that Workchoices was "dead, buried and cremated".

That's why I suggested mounting a sentimental campaign rather than one based on common sense or logic. It's amazing the foolish things the human race will do in response to sentimentality. (Next you'll be arguing that anyone associated with Collingwood aren't actually part of the human race. Can't argue with that.)

The better strategy would be to mount a sentimental campaign for Collingwood to relocate to Victoria Park. We could then take over Olympic Park

RG is correct that Governments and Opposition parties will use creative language when necessary to give them subsequent wriggle room should they want to do something (or not do something) which they were to politically scared to support (or oppose) prior to an election. I'm not saying, however, that in this instance that any non-specific response should be presumed to disguise a particular position.

Seems like they've been listening to the ghost of Jack Dyer: "Line up alphabetically by height".

I suspect the lack of foresight wasn't the only problem. I presume we would have had insufficient financial resources to do anything there anyway.

As a matter of interest, and asked with genuine sensitivity, would the AFL have to get some form of legal clearance from the Human Rights Commission (or whatever it's called) whenever they want to hold an indigenous-only event or choose an indigenous-only team? It's clearly a discriminatory practice albeit well-intentioned.

Maybe we weren't asking for enough in the first place. Perhaps we should have added a Formula 1 track to Yarra Park and to raise the railway to a Skyrail to the plans and then agreed to a mediated compromise by removing the F1 component and the Skyrail. Isn't that the way politics is meant to work?

In the 6-6-6 configuration, is there anything stopping one of the 6 "mid" players, such as a nominal wingman, from starting just outside the 50 metre line at a place which could be called CHB, even though it's 55 metres from the opponent's goal. If so, would seem to make a mockery of the rule change.

Now that I've been made aware of the risk, not only will I always place onions under my sausage, but I'm planning a two day training course for all my employees to discuss the topic. (Note: I have no employees)

Could we be talking about the same Frank Anderson? Someone playing in the mid to late-1940s could be 91 years old now.

I'm struggling with the story, particularly as the first sentence states "...due to the [AFL's] strict rules and regulations". Since when did the AFL ever have "strict rules and regulations"? I thought the whole idea was to have a fluid set of rules which could be bent whenever it is deemed necessary by Gil, Hocking and the whole Commission.

In his inimitable style, Titus O'Reilly has commented on the AFL Rule Changes in his summary of the Worst Ideas of AFL Season 2018 (and mentioned a few other things, too).

Agree entirely with your last sentence. However, I might be basing my view on Melbourne games which were generally free-flowing. Perhaps games involving the lesser performing teams which I didn't see became unwatchable due to coaches demanding defensive tactics in an effort to minimise the size of their losses.

I assume once the free kick is paid, the 6-6-6 rule no longer applies, so team b could send its players forward. But your point is valid - team b won't have enough time to get their players forward to overcome the number disadvantage. And even though I substantially agree with your premise, I'm not prepared to say you aren't nuts.

I'm quite surprised to see a player wearing a watch when involved in body contact work. I would have thought if they're doing the body work with any genuine intensity an errant watch might do some damage to someone's face or teeth.

I think you could equally mount an argument that for every home ground advantage they get, they get a disadvantage for having to travel long distances roughly every second week. Whether the disadvantage can be quantified as more or less than the advantage would seem to be difficult to assess, although I suspect Champion Data have tried.

Or State and Federal elections. Ugh. What a thought.

I was hoping for a theory that was far more creative. Nevertheless, your sensible suggestion is noted.

Conspiracy theorists start your engines: The training tops for Neal-Bullen and KK have a huge, blank space on the back with some smaller writing which I can't decipher at the top. The training top for Steven May has iSelect in a prominent location on the back. Is this a sign of anything?

With that name I immediately think of someone aged 91 with short back and sides and loads of California Poppy.