La Dee-vina Comedia

Personally, I think we should just keep the lid on for a little longer. This is a discussion for October.

Have we reverted to the 1990s when the least important players were on the bench and hardly played? Today's game is so different that starting on the bench doesn't make anyone blink. One of our Captains started on the bench on Friday night. If there are no injuries, I suspect no change to the winning formula but if we do that we risk being undersized in the backline. Joel Smith might come in for that reason but there's no obvious person for him to replace. My fear is that we'll be forced to move T Mac to defence and rely on Weideman and occasionally Gawn to be the tall forwards.

I nearly considered putting Melksham in my votes for his performance because he substantially diminished Sicily's influence. I thought he played a super, selfless game. The two goals in the last were icing on the cake (unless you're a channel Seven commentator in which case, it's "cream on the cake".)

I'm not. He spent a lot of the night on Gunston who was probably Hawthorn's best. If I was giving votes just for the first half he and Salem may both have been toward the top. Jetta, on the other hand, destroyed Breust. 6. Viney 5. Oliver 4. Gawn 3. Jetta 2. Harmes 1. Petracca

So, what was it like at Gosch's Paddock in 1918? And was Saty there?

For the media, this week is all about the four teams playing this weekend so stories about Richmond and West Coast are irrelevant. For the Victorian media, GWS doesn't matter, so the only stories to cover are about Melbourne, Hawthorn and Collingwood. To be honest, I'm amazed that there aren't more Collingwood stories but unlike the coverage of most stories in the media, which tend toward the criminal, negative or full blown outrage (Mark Knight's cartoon, for example), sport often sells for the good news rather than the bad. I guess the potential Melbourne fairytale is the story the media wants everyone to buy into (literally).

Surely the word "chaos" whether used as "chaos ball" or "chaos game" wins the prize for the AFL's cliche of the year. Having said that, this is not a bad article (apart from the ridiculous hyperbole of claiming Richmond's success came about "through sheer willpower" and the accidental error of claiming we peppered the Geelong goal in the second quarter).

I'm trying to work out whether your top is a copy of Harmes' sleeve or whether he's tried to copy your top onto his arm.

I find it amusing that 179 cm Rioli has averaged 0.1 hitouts this year. He's played 11 games which means he must have had one hitout. Who on earth was he rucking against? Caleb Daniel?

Are you extending medical advice to all the males suggesting our testicles are red and blue? I know we like talking about bleeding red and blue but I think you've taken it one step too far.

As a matter of interest, does the highly sought-after Demonland Player of the Year Award include votes in finals?

And it would mean we play each final at the MCG rather than having to go to Perth.

It's worth reminding people that there might be more to coincidence than meets the eye. While you might be right, as this chart shows causality doesn't always correlate with outcomes:

This photo has the colouring of a photo taken in the late 1950s. If I'd seen the photo at the time it was taken, I would have said I knew then we were going to win just because of that.

Sorry, but nothing is improved by adding that screeching. (And while I'm at it, it comes from possibly one of the worst movies ever made, too.)

If those stats were presented out of context as those of an unnamed KPF, you might think they belonged to Reiwoldt (either of them), Roughead or Goodes. That's my way of saying he belongs in the big time.

Then I don't have a good footy mind. I didn't put him in my votes...but I thought about it. Yes, he made a few mistakes but he was more creative than I've ever seen him play before with his tap ons, punches as well as the more regular kicks and handballs.

6. Harmes 5. Oliver 4. Weideman 3. Neal-Bullen 2. Salem 1. Brayshaw

Thank goodness. I was worried he would attend training and be photographed not smiling which would have worried us no end.

Added incentive (if any was needed).

If Tyson does not play, I don't see Hannan as his automatic replacement. The Match Committee might want to add a defender to release Fritsch to play further up the ground, effectively replacing Tyson on the wing. If that's the case J Smith or Hunt might be selected ahead of Hannan. That's not to say Hannan might not be selected to replace JKH but if that were to occur that would be three changes (ie, Out Kent, Tyson and JKH) which would be quite a surprise after such a solid victory in Round 23.

I haven't seen any discussion about Austin Bradtke. I assume he's a potential ruckman, should he make it. Does anyone know what his prospects are? Seems relevant to this discussion.

Is that the reason? I thought it was introduced to stop legal action on restraint of trade (if that's the correct term for stopping players from exercising their right to free movement). Perhaps someone with a legal background might know. I guess it could be both.

Another way to look at this is to question why Tom Lynch is going to a club more likely than not to fall from here. Of course, his chances of being in a Premiership team aren't zero, but he'll be joining Richmond after they've peaked rather than beforehand. If he genuinely wants to play in a Premiership he'd be better choosing a team that's still on the way up.

I suspect there's an innocent explanation to all of this. Probably something to do with Gillion mis-hearing and believing he was acting on an application for a priority pick.